Final Environmental

United States Assessment Department of Agriculture

Forest Canyon Creek Complex Fire Service Salvage Project Malheur National Forest

Blue Mountain Ranger District Grant County, Oregon

July 2016

Final Environmental Assessment

In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident.

Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English.

To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410; (2) fax: (202) 690-7442; or (3) email: [email protected].

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

Page 2 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Final Environmental Assessment Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Malheur National Forest Blue Mountain Ranger District Grant County, Oregon

Lead Agency USDA Forest Service

Responsible Official Dave Halemeier District Ranger 431 Patterson Bridge Road John Day, OR 97845

For Information Contact Sasha Fertig NEPA Planner Malheur National Forest Blue Mountain Ranger District 431 Patterson Bridge Road John Day, OR 97845 (541) 575-3061

Page 3 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

This page intentionally left blank

Page 4 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Contents

Acronyms ...... 10 Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need ...... 11 Changes between the Preliminary and Final Environmental Assessment ...... 11 Introduction ...... 11 Project Planning Area Description ...... 12 Background ...... 12 Planning Framework ...... 14 Relationship to the Malheur Forest Plan ...... 14 Laws and Regulations ...... 16 Decision Framework ...... 16 Purpose and Need for the Proposal ...... 16 Public Involvement and Tribal Consultation ...... 17 Scoping of the Proposal ...... 18 30-day Comment Period on the Preliminary Environmental Assessment ...... 18 Tribal Government Consultation ...... 18 Project Record ...... 18 Issues ...... 19 Key Issues ...... 19 Analysis Issues ...... 19 Issues Eliminated from Detailed Study ...... 20 Chapter 2 – Alternatives ...... 21 Alternative 1 (No-Action Alternative) ...... 21 Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) ...... 21 Modifications to the Proposed Action ...... 21 Proposed Action Suite of Activities ...... 21 Implementation Schedule ...... 31 Project Design Criteria ...... 31 Monitoring ...... 31 Emergency Situation Determination...... 32 Alternatives or Elements Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study ...... 33 Summary Comparison of Alternatives ...... 33 Chapter 3 – Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action and Alternatives ...... 34 Terrestrial Wildlife ...... 39 Affected Environment ...... 40 Environmental Consequences ...... 40 Silviculture ...... 77 Affected Environment ...... 78 Environmental Consequences ...... 81 Economics ...... 84 Affected Environment ...... 84 Environmental Consequences ...... 88 Fire, Fuels, Air Quality ...... 91 Affected Environment ...... 93 Environmental Consequences ...... 94 Soils ...... 96 Affected Environment – Soil Quality ...... 97 Environmental Consequences – Soil Quality ...... 102 Affected Environment – Erosion Potential ...... 106

Page 5 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Environmental Consequences – Erosion Potential ...... 107 Affected Environment – Organic Matter and Nutrients ...... 111 Environmental Consequences - Organic Matter and Nutrients ...... 113 Watershed ...... 116 Affected Environment ...... 116 Environmental Consequences ...... 123 Aquatic Species ...... 131 Affected Environment ...... 132 Environmental Consequences ...... 142 Botany ...... 158 Affected Environment - Documented Sensitive Plant Populations ...... 159 Environmental Consequences ...... 160 Affected Environment – Sensitive and Unique Habitats ...... 163 Environmental Consequences ...... 165 Invasive Plants ...... 167 Affected Environment ...... 168 Environmental Consequences ...... 171 Range ...... 176 Affected Environment ...... 177 Environmental Consequences ...... 179 Roads ...... 181 Affected Environment ...... 182 Environmental Consequences ...... 186 Recreation and Scenic Values ...... 194 Affected Environment - Recreation ...... 195 Environmental Consequences ...... 200 Affected Environment – Scenic Quality and Visual Resources ...... 204 Environmental Consequences ...... 208 Heritage ...... 210 Affected Environment ...... 211 Environmental Consequences ...... 212 Wilderness and Other Undeveloped Lands ...... 215 Affected Environment - Wilderness ...... 216 Environmental Consequences ...... 219 Affected Environment – Other Undeveloped Lands ...... 222 Environmental Consequences ...... 224 Climate Change ...... 226 Affected Environment ...... 226 Environmental Consequences ...... 227 Other Considerations ...... 230 Civil Rights and Environmental Justice ...... 230 Clean Air Act ...... 230 Clean Water Act, Floodplains, and Wetlands ...... 230 Conflicts with Plans, Policies, or Other Jurisdictions ...... 231 Congressionally Designated Areas ...... 231 Ecologically Critical Areas ...... 231 Endangered Species Act ...... 231 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments ...... 231 Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 ...... 232 Multiple-Use Sustained Yield Act of 1960 ...... 232 National Environmental Policy Act ...... 232

Page 6 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

National Forest Management Act ...... 232 National Historic Preservation, Treaty Rights, Executive Order 12875, Executive Order 13287 and American Antiquities Act of 1906 ...... 233 Potential and Unusual Expenditures of Energy ...... 233 Prime Farm Lands, Rangelands, Forest Lands and Parklands ...... 233 Relationship between Short-Term Use and Long-Term Productivity ...... 233 Unavoidable Adverse Effects...... 233 Consideration of Scientific Controversy ...... 233 Chapter 4 – Consultation and Coordination ...... 234 Preparers and Contributors ...... 234 Forest Service Interdisciplinary Team (Malheur National Forest) ...... 234 Forest Service Research Team (Rocky Mountain Research Station) ...... 235 Oregon State University Research Team ...... 235 Consultation and Coordination ...... 235 Federal, State, and Local Agencies ...... 235 Advisory Groups, Boards, and Organizations...... 235 Tribes ...... 235 Businesses ...... 236 Individuals...... 236 References ...... 237

Appendix

Appendix A - Project Maps……………………………...………………………………………………A-1 Appendix B – Project Design Criteria…………………………...………………………………………B-1 Appendix C – Draft Experimental Post-fire Salvage Study………..……………………………………C-1

List of Tables

Table 1. Acres by land status for the Canyon Creek Complex fire perimeter ...... 11 Table 2. Vegetative mortality by management area considered for potential salvage with the Canyon Creek Complex Fire perimeter ...... 14 Table 3. Acres by management area on National Forest System public lands within the project planning area ...... 15 Table 4. Acreage of study units and treated acres ...... 22 Table 5. Proposed snag retention by size class and treatment unit assignment ...... 22 Table 6. Existing open (maintenance level 2 and 3) Forest Service Roads to be utilized for log haul ...... 29 Table 7. Existing closed (maintenance level 1) Forest Service Roads to be re-opened for log haul ...... 29 Table 8. Confirmation of road closures ...... 31 Table 9 Monitoring requirements by resource ...... 32 Table 10. Comparison of alternatives ...... 33 Table 11. Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future activities used for cumulative effects analysis 35 Table 12 Resource indicators for assessing effects to terrestrial wildlife ...... 40 Table 13 Species and habitat occurrence for proposed, endangered, threatened, and Regional Forester's sensitive species ...... 43 Table 14 Species status abbreviations and species habitat occurrence ...... 44 Table 15 Management indicator species identified in the Malheur Forest Plan ...... 48 Table 16 Conservation status of cavity-nesting management indicator species ...... 51

Page 7 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Table 17 Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities for 10 inch and greater diameter at breast height snags in recent post-fire eastside mixed conifer DecAID wildlife habitat type ...... 53 Table 18 Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities for 20 inch and greater diameter at breast height recent post-fire Eastside mixed conifer DecAID wildlife habitat type ...... 54 Table 19 Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities for 10 inches and greater diameter at breast height recent post-fire ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir DecAID wildlife habitat type ...... 54 Table 20 Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities for 20 inch and greater diameter at breast height recent post-fire ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir DecAID wildlife habitat type ...... 54 Table 21 Tolerance levels for woodpeckers occurring in the ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir wildlife habitat type ...... 55 Table 22 Tolerance levels for woodpeckers occurring in the Eastside Mixed Conifer Wildlife Habitat Type ...... 56 Table 23 Wildfires occurring within watersheds affected by the Canyon Creek Complex Fire in the past 50 years ...... 66 Table 24 Dedicated and replacement old growth areas burned ...... 71 Table 25 Bird Conservation Region 10 - Northern Rockies U.S. portion only; Birds of Conservation Concern ...... 75 Table 26 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Birds of Conservation Concern found in the project planning area. Bird Conservation Region 10 - Northern Rocky Mountains of eastern Oregon and Washington ...... 76 Table 27 Resource elements, indicators and measures for assessing effects to forest vegetation ...... 78 Table 28 Resource indicators and measures for assessing effects to Economics ...... 84 Table 29 Economic effects ...... 89 Table 30 Resource elements, indicators and measures for assessing effects to fire and fuels ...... 91 Table 31 Description of condition classes ...... 91 Table 32 Description of activity fuels (Scott 2005, USDA n.d.) ...... 92 Table 33 Resource elements, indicators and measures for assessing effects to soils ...... 97 Table 34 Soil burn severity and slopes by treatment unit ...... 99 Table 35 Scab and ash soils by treatment unit ...... 100 Table 36 Detrimental soil conditions before and after proposed project activities on four assessed treatment units ...... 100 Table 37 Resource elements, indicators and measures for assessing effects to hydrology, stream channels and water quality ...... 116 Table 38 Miles of stream by Riparian Habitat Conservation Area category for each subwatershed ...... 116 Table 39 Acres within soil burn severity classes ...... 118 Table 40 Road attributes within the project planning area ...... 121 Table 41 Resource elements, indicators and measures for assessing effects to the aquatics resource .... 131 Table 42 Existing condition from most recent R6 stream surveys for 6 primary habitat elements used for comparison of alternatives ...... 135 Table 43 Miles of Mid-Columbia River Steelhead critical habitat by stream within the aquatic analysis area ...... 137 Table 44 Miles of haul and road maintenance by road type within riparian habitat conservation areas . 148 Table 45 Summary of project element effects of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project to the primary habitat elements ...... 152 Table 46 TES and MIS aquatic species with effect determinations by alternative ...... 156 Table 47 Threatened and Endangered Species effects determinations abbreviations ...... 156 Table 48 Sensitive Species determinations abbreviations ...... 156 Table 49 Designated Critical Habitat effects determinations abbreviations ...... 156 Table 50 Resource elements, indicators and measures for assessing effects to botanical resources ...... 159 Table 51 Sensitive habitat types and extent within project planning boundary ...... 164 Table 52 Indicators for assessing effects to invasive plants ...... 168

Page 8 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Table 53 Invasive plant species within the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area 169 Table 54 Resource elements, indicators and measures for assessing effects ...... 176 Table 55 Permitted cattle and grazing dates by allotment ...... 177 Table 56 Resource elements, indicators and measures for assessing effects to roads ...... 182 Table 57 Recent road restoration ...... 182 Table 58 Transportation system in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project planning area ..... 183 Table 59 Summary comparison of road activities by alternative ...... 186 Table 60 Existing open (maintenance level 2 and 3) Forest Service roads to be utilized for log haul ..... 188 Table 61 Existing closed (maintenance level 1) Forest Service roads to be re-opened for log haul ...... 190 Table 62 Confirmation of road closures ...... 193 Table 63 Resource elements, indicators and measures for assessing effects to recreation and scenic values ...... 195 Table 64 Scenic integrity levels, visual quality levels, and scenic integrity objectives ...... 206 Table 65 Resource elements, indicators and measures for assessing effects to Heritage resources ...... 211 Table 66 Resource elements, indicators and measures for assessing effects to wilderness and other undeveloped lands ...... 216 Table 67 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area inventory for other undeveloped lands ...... 222 Table 68 Size class and acres of other undeveloped lands in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area ...... 223

Table of Figures

Figure 1 Photo depicts high severity and mortality; 49 percent of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire has a mortality level greater than 50 percent ...... 13 Figure 2 Visual of snag retention levels for the control unit and research treatment units for black-backed, Lewis's, and white-headed woodpeckers ...... 25 Figure 3 Displays a visual of snag retention levels (Level 1) for research study units S2 and S3 within the proposed study areas for focal species Lewis's woodpecker ...... 25 Figure 4 Displays a visual of snag retention levels (Level 3) for research study units S4 and S6 for transition woodpecker species ...... 26 Figure 5 Displays a visual of snag retention levels (Level 3) for research study units S1 and S5 within the proposed study areas for focal species white-headed woodpecker ...... 26 Figure 6 (Left) 6A. and (Right) 6B - Comparison of the historical range of variability to current condition for snag density classes in the ponderosa pine/Douglas fir wildlife habitat type Canyon Creek Complex Salvage Project analysis area (see description that follows) ...... 55 Figure 7 Comparison of the historical range of variability to current condition for snag density classes in the Eastside Mixed Conifer wildlife habitat type portion of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project analysis area...... 56 Figure 8 Soil survey transects in unit T5 ...... 101 Figure 9 Displaced soils present in treatment unit T5 ...... 102 Figure 10 Illustration of soil horizons (Wikipedia 2008) ...... 112 Figure 11 Average monthly precipitation at locations within and around the burned area perimeter (source: Western Regional Climate Center) ...... 117 Figure 12 Streamflow patterns from Canyon Creek (Gage # 14038602) (OWRD) ...... 118

Page 9 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Acronyms

BAER burned area emergency response BARC Burned Area Reflectance Classification system CFR Code of Federal Regulations DBH diameter at breast height DecAID decayed wood advisor DOG dedicated old growth EA environmental assessment EIS environmental impact statement ESD emergency situation determination FOIA Freedom of Information Act GIS geographical information system GNN gradient nearest neighbor LOS late and old structure LWD large wood debris MA management area MCR Mid-Columbia River MIS management indicator species MOU memorandum of understanding NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service PAG plant association group PCE primary cavity excavator PDC project design criteria PWFA pileated woodpecker feeding areas RAVG Rapid Assessment of Vegetation Condition after Wildfire RMO riparian management objectives ROG replacement old growth ROS recreation opportunity spectrum TES threatened, endangered and sensitive (species TMDL total maximum daily load USDA United States Department of Agriculture USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service WEPP Water Erosion Prediction Project WHT wildlife habitat types WUI wildland urban interface

Page 10 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need Changes between the Preliminary and Final Environmental Assessment The following changes were made to the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project Environmental Assessment between the preliminary and final versions:

 Minor editorial changes throughout the document.  Identification of 3 additional miles of maintenance level 2 and 3 (open roads) that would be utilized for log haul.  Documentation of additional soil surveys in treatment units.  Correction that no salvage logging would occur within other undeveloped lands.  Revisions to the resource effects sections in chapter 3 in order to present additional analysis and clarify environmental effects. Introduction The Forest Service has prepared this final environmental assessment in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other relevant Federal and State laws and regulations. This final environmental assessment discloses the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental effects that would result from the alternatives described in this document. During scoping in the preparation of the preliminary environmental assessment, public input was sought and comments received were assessed and considered both individually and collectively. Along with the individual comments, agency responses to these comments are found in the project record. Input from the public assisted the Forest Service in developing the proposed action.

The Canyon Creek Complex Fire began on August 12, 2015, as two lightning caused fires: the Berry Creek Fire and the Mason Springs Fire. The Berry Creek Fire was located within the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness, while the Mason Springs Fire was located in the Starr Ridge area, south of John Day, Oregon. On August 13-14, 2015, a combination of high temperatures, low humidity, and a significant wind event created extreme fire behavior, causing both fires to spread rapidly and combine into a single incident. The fire burned mostly in dry forest, on both cold and warm sites. Vegetation types within the fire area consist of a combination of forested and non-forested habitats between approximately 3,300 and 9,000 feet elevation. The forested vegetation types represented are Douglas-fir, Engelmann spruce, lodgepole pine, ponderosa pine, subalpine conifer, western juniper, and white fir/grand fir. The non-forested habitats include shrub dominated, wetlands, grassland, and meadows. There were approximately 4,000 acres of non-vegetated habitat within the fire area.

The Canyon Creek Complex was declared contained and controlled on November 5, 2015. Approximately 110,300 acres of public and private lands were impacted by the fire, including approximately 47,900 acres within the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness. Table 1 displays acres within the fire perimeter by land status (e.g., public lands, private lands).

Table 1. Acres by land status for the Canyon Creek Complex fire perimeter Land status Approximate acres USDA Forest Service, Malheur National Forest (public lands) 90,600 Bureau of Land Management (public lands) 2,700 Privately owned lands 17,000 Total 110,300

Page 11 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

It should be noted that within the 90,600 acres of Forest Service administered public lands burned eight distinct management areas occur. These are: Big Game Winter Range (8,320 acres); Foreground Visual Corridor (6,645 acres); General Forest Rangeland (9,825 acres); Middleground Visual Corridor (11,127 acres); Old Growth (1,785 acres); Research Natural Areas (443 acres); Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (4,515 acres); and Wilderness (47,940 acres).

Project Planning Area Description The Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project is located on the Blue Mountain Ranger District within the Malheur National Forest. The project planning area is located in Grant County approximately 8 miles south of the city of John Day, Oregon. The Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area encompasses approximately 57,800 acres in the East Fork Canyon Creek, Upper Canyon Creek, and Middle Canyon Creek subwatersheds that drain into the John Day River. Of the approximately 57,800 acres in the project planning area, approximately 53,500 are National Forest System public lands, and the remaining 4,300 acres are private lands. The main roads accessing to the project planning area are U.S. Highway 395 and County Road 65. See appendix A for maps of the project planning area.

The legal description for the project planning area is (township, range, sections): Township 14 South, Range 31 East, sections 32-36; Township 14 South, Range 32 East, sections 25-27 and 33-36; Township 14 South, Range 33 East, sections 31 and 32; Township 15 South, Range 31 East, sections 1-17, 20-27, and 36; Township 15 South, Range 32 East, sections 1-36; Township 15 South, Range 33 East, sections 3- 11, 14-23, and 26-34; Township 16 South, Range 32 East, sections 1-6 and 9-14; and Township 16 South, Range 33 East, sections 3-7, Willamette Meridian.

Background The fire affected forest resources such as soil, riparian areas, and wildlife habitat and resulted in mortality of thousands of trees, which reduced merchantable timber and contributed to hazardous conditions (e.g., danger tree hazards along roads, high fuel loading). Dead trees, however, provide important habitat features for many wildlife species. In particular, standing dead trees (i.e., snags) provide critical nesting and foraging resources for woodpecker species of conservation concern (e.g., black-backed, white-headed and Lewis’s woodpeckers). Nest cavities excavated by woodpeckers in dead and dying trees are subsequently used by a variety of other wildlife species.

Immediately following the fire, the Blue Mountains Forest Partners approached the Forest Service with multiple research proposals to consider in conjunction with a potential salvage project. The Blue Mountains Forest Partners is a local collaborative group that is composed of a diverse group of local and regional stakeholders working together for the health of the Malheur National Forest. The Forest Service interdisciplinary team for the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project used input received during collaborative engagement, recommendations from the Region 6 Rapid Assessment Team, and from discussions with researchers from the Rocky Mountain Research Station to develop the proposed action.

Based on these discussions and recommendations, at the beginning of the project a decision was made to use the following criteria and/or filters to identify areas to consider for salvage treatments:

1. Limit to areas within the John Day River watershed and the Blue Mountain Ranger District 2. Management areas that allow salvage in the Malheur Forest Plan a. General Forest and Rangeland b. Big-Game Winter Range c. Foreground Visual Corridor d. Middle-ground Visual Corridor

Page 12 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

3. Areas with 50 percent or greater stand mortality (basal area) based on RAVG data 4. Areas of less than 35 percent slope and within hydrologic groups A and B for soil stability 5. Areas outside of active timber sales 6. Areas outside of potential wilderness additions identified by outside groups 7. Areas outside of proposed Research Natural Areas that do not allow salvage 8. Areas outside of Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas 9. Areas outside of Dedicated and Replacement Old Growth areas 10. Areas with enough volume per acre to make a commercially viable sale 11. Areas with good existing road access 12. Areas with snag density and size classes needed for the woodpecker research proposal

Based on data obtained from the post-fire Rapid Assessment of Vegetation Condition after Wildfire (RAVG) process, the Canyon Creek Complex burned as a mixed-severity fire (see appendix A, map 2). The RAVG data showed that significant portions of the fire burned at a higher-severity and high level of vegetative mortality (basal area loss greater than 50 percent). Ground-truthing has shown that RAVG data has a high degree of accuracy. Table 2 shows the basal area loss based on the RAVG data within the management areas identified by the Rapid Assessment Team as permitting salvage in the Malheur Forest Plan.

Figure 1 Photo depicts high severity and mortality; 49 percent of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire has a mortality level greater than 50 percent

Page 13 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Table 2. Vegetative mortality by management area considered for potential salvage with the Canyon Creek Complex Fire perimeter Basal area loss Basal area loss Management Area Total Acres 50-75% (acres) 75-100% (acres) General Forest/Rangeland 1,400 3,500 4,900 Big-Game Winter Range 1,300 2,900 4,200 Foreground Visual Corridor 1,100 2,400 3,500 Middle ground Visual Corridor 1,600 5,000 6,600 Total acres 5,400 13,800 19,200 Percent of total acres 15 percent 38 percent

Through continued refinement by the interdisciplinary team and researchers from the Rocky Mountain Research Station, and following review by a Region 6 Rapid Assessment Team on October 22, 2015, the Forest developed a proposed action that includes about 1,210 acres of timber salvage (about 1.3 percent of the Forest Service administered public lands and about 20 percent of the 5,980 acres meeting the outlined criteria). See chapter 2 for more information on the proposed action.

The objectives of this project are to recover the economic value of dead trees and to provide for societal needs for wood products, while allowing research to quantify the range of conditions necessary to maintain ecological integrity of post-fire habitats for woodpecker species and quantify site and landscape- scale changes to fuel structure and future fire behavior. The recovery of the economic value of dead trees is intended to provide revenue for road improvements, reforestation, and watershed/riparian restoration depending on the value and quantities recovered. Additionally, monitoring of woodpecker population relationships with planned treatments would provide critical information necessary for forest managers to offer socioeconomic benefits while maintaining habitat for key woodpecker species of conservation concern (i.e., black-backed, white-headed, and Lewis’s woodpeckers) in post-fire landscapes.

In addition to the proposed Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project, the Forest Service expects to engage in further restoration and rehabilitation activities within the Canyon Creek Complex Fire area. The Forest Service has already authorized the treatment and mitigation of danger trees, including the removal and salvage of select trees, along roadsides and at campgrounds and trailheads to restore worker and public safety. The agency is also evaluating the need to reforest burned areas inside and outside of salvaged areas, and may initiate additional projects to address ecosystem restoration and resilience, and watershed protection. Such actions would help contribute to the recovery and restoration of the area burned by the Canyon Creek Complex Fire. The value and funds created from proposed salvage may fund some of these reforestation and restoration activities. Planning Framework

Relationship to the Malheur Forest Plan This final environmental assessment tiers to and incorporates by reference the Malheur National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) (USDA Forest Service 1990b) and follows the Malheur National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (herein referred to as the Malheur Forest Plan or Forest Plan) (USDA Forest Service 1990a), as amended. Additional management direction is provided by forest plan amendments approved since 1990, some of which include:

 Columbia River Anadromous Fish Management Policy and Implementation Guide (USDA Forest Service 1995; herein referred to as Amendment 29). The amendment included changes to both Management Areas 3A (inland fish habitat) and 3B (anadromous fish habitat).

Page 14 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

 Environmental Assessment and Decision Notice for the Implementation of Interim Strategies for Managing Anadromous Fish-producing Watersheds in Eastern Oregon and Washington, Idaho and Portions of California (USDA Forest Service 1995; herein referred to as PACFISH). This amendment provides riparian goals, management objectives, and standards and guidelines that reduce the risk of loss of populations of anadromous fish and potential negative impacts to aquatic habitat.  The Pacific Northwest Region Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Invasive Plant Program, 2005, herby referred to as the R6 2005 Invasive Plant FEIS. The Region 6 2005 Invasive Plant FEIS culminated in a Record of Decision (ROD) (USDA Forest Service 2005) that amended the Malheur Forest Plan by adding management direction relative to invasive plants and released all National Forests from direction established by the 1988 ROD and Mediated Agreement for invasive plant management. Parts of the 1988 ROD and 1989 Mediated Agreement for unwanted native plants were not affected by the R6 2005 ROD.  “Interim Management Direction Establishing Riparian, Ecosystem and Wildlife Standards for Timber Sales” (USDA Forest Service 1995b; also known as Regional Forester’s Eastside Forest Plan Amendment 2 or Eastside Screens). Please note that salvage sales with incidental green volume located outside of currently mapped old growth are exempt from the interim ecosystem standard. This means that the analysis does not need to characterize the proposed timber sale and its associated watershed for patterns of stand structure by biophysical environment (e.g., plant association group) and compare it to the historical range of variability (e.g., structural stages). Forest plan amendments are those analyses documented in the Region 6 2005 Invasive Plant FEIS and Record of Decision; and Decision Notice for PACFISH (USDA Forest Service 1995), Amendment 29 (USDA Forest Service 1994), and the Eastside Screens (USDA Forest Service 1995b). The project identified in this final environmental assessment is being proposed to meet appropriate forest-wide goals and standards (pages IV–1 to IV–45) and to comply with management area goals and standards (pages IV–46 to IV–139) of the Malheur Forest Plan.

Malheur Forest Plan Management Areas The Malheur Forest Plan (chapter IV) provides overall direction to meet desired conditions by identifying management goals and objectives to reflect conditions on the ground. The Forest Plan management areas are used to guide the type and intensity of management activities that may occur on the forest. The Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area falls within six management areas as described in Table 3. See appendix A, Map 3.

Table 3. Acres by management area on National Forest System public lands within the project planning area Management area Approximate acres General Forest and Rangeland (MA-1 & MA-2) 8,900 Riparian Areas (MA-3) / Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCAs) 3,900 Big Game Winter Range Maintenance (MA-4A) 8,200 Strawberry Mountain Wilderness (MA-6A) 20,100 Old Growth (MA-13) 800 Visual Corridors (MA-14) 11,600 Total 53,500

Page 15 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Laws and Regulations The management of timber and aquatic resources on National Forest System lands is based on several federal laws and regulations, including the Multiple-use Sustained Yield Act of 1960; the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974, as amended by the National Forest Management Act of 1976; the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), including the Council on Environmental Quality regulations for implementing NEPA (40 CFR §§ 1500 1508, July 1, 1986); the Endangered Species Act 1973, as amended; the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act 1976, as amended by the Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-267); Clean Water Act, as amended, 1977, 1982; Clean Air Act, as amended, 1990; National Historic Preservation Act, 1966 as amended, 1976, 1980, 1992; Migratory Bird Treaty Act, 1918 and Executive Order 13186. Decision Framework The District Ranger of the Blue Mountain Ranger District, Malheur National Forest is the responsible official for deciding the type and extent of management activities in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area. The responsible official can decide on several courses of action ranging from no action, to one of the action alternatives, or a combination of treatments. The responsible official will also identify which mitigation measures will apply to project implementation. The responsible official will consider the following factors in making his decision:

 How well does the alternative meet the project’s purpose and need?  How well does the alternative respond to the issues, and have public comments been considered in the analysis?  What are the likely environmental effects of the proposed action, and in particular, the short and long- term effects to habitat of federally-listed threatened species and species of conservation concern? Purpose and Need for the Proposal As mentioned in the Background portion of this document (page 12), Blue Mountain Forest Partners approached the Forest Service to propose a research project involving three species of woodpecker. They also contacted researchers from the USDA Rocky Mountain Research Station that could assist in developing a project. Through their encouragement a purpose and need was developed. The underlying purpose and need for this proposal, including the existing and desired future conditions are:

To promote scientific research to increase knowledge of the post-fire habitat requirements for woodpecker species of concern. Additional science-based knowledge is needed to inform post-fire management plans aimed at meeting habitat objectives of woodpecker species of conservation concern (i.e., black-backed, white-headed, and Lewis’s woodpeckers). The Malheur National Forest is working with scientists from the USDA Rocky Mountain Research Station, the Pacific Northwest Regional Office Staff, and members of the Blue Mountains Forest Partners collaborative group to utilize a fire of this scale and intensity to obtain science-based information for post-fire management decisions. Current data suggest that the nesting habitat of these three woodpecker species includes recently-burned forests (e.g., Saab et al. 2009). However, previous data were collected at a limited number of wildfire locations, precluding comprehensive analyses of species-specific habitat requirements (e.g., Latif et al. 2013). To inform future post-fire management, salvage logging treatments would generate a gradient of snag diameters and densities for retention. Woodpecker population surveys conducted along the gradient would allow researchers to test hypotheses regarding species-specific habitat requirements and quantify limitations and thresholds to species distributions, nesting densities, and reproductive successes.

Page 16 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

To expeditiously recover timber killed by the fire commensurate with available markets, and contribute to societal needs for wood products. Timber species composition in the project planning area is a mix of ponderosa pine, grand fir, western larch, and Douglas-fir. These economically valuable timber species rapidly lose value after a wildfire due to staining, insect infestation, decay, and checking (cracks in the wood that occur as the wood dries and splits) (Hadfield 2006, Lowell et al. 2010). One year following wildfire, nearly all ponderosa pine trees have blue stain in the sapwood and checking will affect approximately 16 percent of the volume (Lowell et al. 2010). In the second year, all ponderosa pine trees have been infested by wood borers, most trees have been fed on by woodpeckers, cracks have developed in over half of the trees, and about 50 percent of the sapwood has been affected by decay fungus. Grand fir and Douglas-fir experience similar rates of decay and infestation, except blue stain is less prevalent. Smaller diameter trees deteriorate faster than large trees, and by the second year after the fire, 47 to 74 percent of the volume of trees smaller than 24 inches in diameter is lost (Lowell et al. 1992). Up to one- third of the total volume of ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir is reduced by three years post-fire (Lowell et. al. 2010).

To maximize timber quality and value, timber sales need to be implemented quickly, and include sufficient timber volume and quality to offset contractor expenses without constraints that make operations overly costly or dangerous to workers. Purchase of these trees could then potentially pay for future restoration treatments in the area, such as road repair, reforestation, treatment of additional fuels, and watershed and aquatic enhancement. Additionally, salvaging some trees from the affected area provides the opportunity to study post-fire habitat requirements of snag-dependent wildlife, to inform habitat management in recently burned forests. This fulfills a goal of the Malheur Forest Plan to provide and utilize wood fiber in the form of sawtimber, fiber, and/or associated wood products in a manner which will minimize losses and maximize outputs in a cost-effective manner, consistent with the various resource objectives and environmental standards (Goal 25, page IV-2).

To balance active management while retaining important post-fire habitat attributes at the landscape scale and within treatment areas that support woodpecker species of conservation concern associated with recently burned forests: Complex early-seral forests with snags and regeneration of understory vegetation created by moderate- and high-severity fire support important ecological processes. In particular, recently burned forests provide valuable habitat for disturbance- associated woodpecker species of conservation concern (i.e., black-backed, white-headed, Lewis’s woodpeckers). Studies suggest that recently burned forests represent source habitats and population persistence for these three woodpecker species (Hollenbeck et al. 2011, Saab et al. 2011, Towler et al. 2012). The Malheur Forest Plan identified 11 woodpecker species as Management Indicator Species of dead and defective habitat (Standard 61, page IV-32). In part, these species indicate the presence of snags and excavate cavities used by a variety of other forest-dependent wildlife species. Maintaining large, well distributed areas with snags and early successional vegetation, such as burned forests, is an important component for the persistence of woodpeckers and other wildlife that benefit from these recently disturbed forests. In addition, within treatment areas, it is also important to retain a sufficient number and distribution of snags, to provide habitat and other important ecological functions without generating excess future fuels and jeopardizing the survival of planted trees and the safety of workers. Public Involvement and Tribal Consultation The Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project has been listed on the Malheur National Forest Schedule of Proposed Actions (SOPA) beginning in January 2016 and in subsequent quarterly SOPAs. This document is mailed to individuals and is available on the internet (http://www.fs.fed.us/sopa/forest- level.php?110604) for those who are interested in activities proposed on the Malheur National Forest.

Page 17 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Scoping of the Proposal A scoping notice was published in the Blue Mountain Eagle (the newspaper of record) on January 6, 2016, initiating a 20-day scoping period. A scoping package was sent to approximately 90 individuals, groups, federal and state agencies at the same time the scoping notice was published. The scoping package was also made available to the public on the Malheur National Forest website and front desk at the Supervisor’s Office. The scoping documents described potential salvage logging activities, the woodpecker research proposal, and request by the Malheur National Forest for an Emergency Situation Determination (ESD) under 36 CFR 218.21. Eleven (11) individuals and organizations expressed interest in the project. The Forest Service response to the letters from the scoping period can be found in the project record at the Blue Mountain Ranger District, John Day, Oregon. The response to scoping letters can also be found on the project website.

30-day Comment Period on the Preliminary Environmental Assessment A 30-day public comment period for the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project Preliminary Environmental Assessment (PEA) began on April 27, 2016, with publication of a legal notice in the Blue Mountain Eagle. The PEA and supporting specialist resource reports were made available on the Malheur National Forest website at http://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=48518. Letters to inform potentially interested members of the public of the comment period were sent to approximately 90 individuals or organizations, including directions to the Forest’s website for more information. The PEA described potential salvage logging activities, the woodpecker research proposal, and request by the Malheur National Forest for an ESD.

Tribal Government Consultation Tribal consultation on a government-to-government basis is ongoing with the Burns Paiute Tribe, the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, and the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs Reservation. This government-to-government consultation is being conducted under the terms of specific agreements with individual tribes and includes regular contact and meetings as appropriate. Individual letters providing details of the proposal were mailed to tribal leaders for each tribe January 6, 2016. No comments were received during the consultation process. Project Record This final environmental assessment hereby incorporates by reference all appendices and the project record. The project record contains specialist reports, biological evaluations, and other technical documentation used to support the analysis and conclusions in this final environmental assessment. Relying on specialist reports and the project record helps implement the Council on Environmental Quality regulations’ provision that agencies should reduce NEPA paperwork (40 CFR 1500.4). The objective is to furnish enough site-specific information to demonstrate a reasoned consideration of the environmental impacts of the proposed action and how these impacts can be mitigated, without repeating detailed analysis and background information available elsewhere. The project record is available for review at the Blue Mountain Ranger District, John Day, Oregon.

The specialist reports that are part of the project record and incorporated by reference are: Aquatic Resources and Biological Evaluation Report; Botanical Report and Biological Evaluation; Economic Report; Fire, Fuels, and Air Quality Report; Heritage Resources Report; Invasive Plants Report; Wilderness and Other Undeveloped Lands Report; Range Report; Recreation Report; Roads Report; Forest Vegetation Report; Soil Report; Wildlife Report and Biological Evaluation Report; Visuals Report; and Watershed Report.

Page 18 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Issues The Forest Service separated the issues into two groups: key issues and non-key issues. Key issues were defined as issues identified during public scoping that suggested an alternative to meeting the purpose and need for action. Non-key issues were identified as those:

 Outside the scope of the proposed action;  Already decided by law, regulation, Forest Plan, or other higher-level decision;  Irrelevant to the decision to be made;  Conjectural and not supported by scientific or factual evidence; or  Routine analysis issues that would be discussed in the effects analysis section of the environmental assessment. A list of scoping comments and their consideration is included in the project record, which is located at the Blue Mountain Ranger District, John Day, Oregon.

Key Issues The Forest Service did not identify any key issues that would drive the development of an additional action alternative.

Analysis Issues Environmental components will be addressed in the effects analysis section of this document as a way to compare alternatives, though they did not result in differing design elements between alternatives. These analysis issues are important for providing the responsible official with complete information about the effects of the project.

Snag Retention, Snag Dependent Wildlife Species Salvage activities may impact snag dependent species by removing dead trees and may adversely affect management indicator species identified in the Malheur Forest Plan, including primary cavity excavators. Species of particular concern are those which rely heavily on post-fire habitats (e.g., Lewis’ woodpeckers, black-backed woodpeckers). Snag density, size, and distribution influence use levels and vary by individual species. Measure: treated acres vs. untreated acres within the fire perimeter and project planning area; percent of habitat for snag-dependent MIS species treated; DECAID snag analysis, including tolerance levels and historical range of variability.

Soils Ground-based salvage of trees could have adverse impacts on detrimentally disturbed soil in fire affected areas. Detrimental soil disturbance from salvage of danger trees could increase soil compaction, decrease site productivity, accelerate erosion, and increase sediment delivery to streams, especially on soils burned with high and moderate severity. Measure: measures used to address project effects include changes in extent of soil disturbance following proposed fire salvage treatments within individual activity areas proposed for mechanical treatments.

Page 19 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Hydrology/Watershed The proposed action has the potential to affect water quality, water yield, peak flows, and hydrologic function and condition by salvaging fire killed trees and constructing temporary roads in the project planning area. Specifically, actions could affect sedimentation, stream temperature, water yield, and waterbody condition. Measure: road miles within 100 and 300 feet of streams and within riparian habitat conservation areas; equivalent harvest acres; and modeled sediment delivered to streams from skid trails, haul routes, and temporary roads.

Aquatic Species Ground disturbing activities such as salvage of trees, construction of temporary roads, and log haul could potentially increase sedimentation and stream turbidity, and the amount and timing of overland flow, which could affect fish habitat, including critical habitat for the federally-listed steelhead. Measure: large and coarse woody debris per mile, pools/mile, width:depth ratio, shade, water temperature, riparian hardwood densities, and bank stability.

Economics Whether proposed activities would provide a variety of wood products and forest management employment opportunities to help maintain community stability and infrastructure. Measure: acreage of treatments for potential sale, volume estimates, and present net value for sale units; direct and indirect employment; direct, indirect, and induced income.

Botany and Invasive Species Noxious weeds and other invasive species may be introduced into the project planning area on disturbed soils by logging equipment and logging traffic used in salvage activities. The fire altered the vegetation creating conditions conducive to the spread of noxious weeds. Proposed activities have the potential to introduce or spread existing populations of invasive plants. Measure: risk of invasive plant spread is estimated by amount (acres) degree of disturbance and proximity to existing invasive plant infestation, and its method of dispersal.

Recreation Some project activities may impact recreation activities in the project planning area. Measure: recreation opportunity spectrum classes, and change to recreation access/use.

Designated Wilderness Project activities adjacent to the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness may impact wilderness character, including solitude. Measure: impacts to wilderness character.

Other Undeveloped Lands Salvage harvest and temporary road construction may impact the undeveloped character of these areas. Measure: Acres of other undeveloped lands that meet the identification criteria after completion of each alternative. Measure: acres of proposed activities within other undeveloped lands.

Issues Eliminated from Detailed Study After reviewing the public comments received during scoping no issues were eliminated from detailed study by the Responsible Official.

Page 20 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Chapter 2 – Alternatives Two alternatives are analyzed in detail in this chapter: a no-action alternative (alternative 1) and the proposed action (alternative 2). Alternatives considered but eliminated from detailed study can be found at the end of chapter 2. The existing condition and environmental consequences of implementing alternatives for the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area can be found in chapter 3. Alternative 1 (No-Action Alternative) The no-action alternative is required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Alternative 1, the no-action alternative, provides a baseline of current, post-fire conditions against which to compare the effects of the proposed action. In the no-action alternative, none of the salvage or research activities associated with the proposed action would take place. The no-action alternative would not meet the purpose and need for action. Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Alternative 2 is the proposed action, which responds to the purpose and need for action and would authorize activities described below. The order in which these activities would be implemented is variable. Maps of the proposed actions can be found in appendix A.

The Forest Service interdisciplinary team for the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project used input received during collaborative engagement, recommendations from the Region 6 Rapid Assessment Team, and from discussions with researchers from the Rocky Mountain Research Station to develop the proposed action. This proposed action was further refined by scoping comments received during the scoping period in January 2016 (see modifications to the proposed action below). Rather than develop additional alternatives, the team elected to modify the proposed action rather than develop an additional action alternative because the scope of proposed activities had already been narrowed and developed based on diverse input from the collaborative, researchers, and members of the public. Further alterations to the proposed action would not fully meet the purpose and need for action or achieve the desired future condition for the project planning area.

Modifications to the Proposed Action When there are no unresolved conflicts concerning alternative uses of available resources (NEPA, section 102(22) (E)), the environmental assessment need only analyze the proposed action and proceed without consideration of additional alternatives (36 CFR 220.7(b)(2)(i)). The modifications to the proposal that was scoped to the public are:

 Further refining of the six study units and location of treatment units  Refinement of the gradient prescriptions (snag retention levels) for the treatment units

Proposed Action Suite of Activities The proposed action described below was developed through a collaborative process involving the Blue Mountains Forest Partners, the USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station, the Pacific Northwest Regional Office, and Malheur National Forest staff. The following sections are a summary of the proposed suite of activities for the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project. The proposed action has several components, including: proposed research by the Rocky Mountain Research Station into the response of three woodpecker species to salvage logging, salvage logging designed to facilitate the proposed research by the Rocky Mountain Research Station, and several types of road activities.

Page 21 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Salvage Treatments Salvage logging would occur on approximately 1,210 acres within six study units under the proposed action. Within each study unit, 1 to 8 treatment units, varying in size from approximately 2 to 127 acres, would be harvested. See Table 4 for acreage of study units, number of treatment units, and acres proposed to be harvested within each study unit. See appendix A, Map 4 for location of study, treatment, and control units.

Table 4. Acreage of study units and treated acres Number of Percent of Study unit Acres Unit name Unit ID treatment units study unit acres treated/harvested within study unit harvested Study unit 1 S1 800 6 250 32 Study unit 2 S2 800 7 240 30 Study unit 3 S3 520 1 110 22 Study unit 4 S4 820 8 220 28 Study unit 5 S5 570 4 150 27 Study unit 6 S6 830 8 240 29 Control unit 1 C1 750 None None N/A Control unit 2 C2 830 None None N/A Totals 5,920 34 1,210 28

Treatment units would be harvested using ground-based logging systems. Fire-killed trees of all species would be felled and removed from treatment units. Incidental live trees may need to be felled for construction of landings, temporary roads or skid trails; however, the number of live trees felled is anticipated to be minimal.

In addition to the study/treatment units, two control units, designated control unit 1 and control unit 2, would provide unmanaged reference data for the research study, particularly for black-backed woodpecker. There would be no salvage harvest or other ground disturbance within either control unit. (Note: additional control units may be established during the course of the study to allow greater research value.)

Snag retention is required for all treatment units. Retention levels would be developed for woodpecker species of conservation concern and their prey base based on the best available science in coordination with researchers from the Rocky Mountain Research Station. Snags would be retained in clumps following previous research demonstrating the value of clumped snags for woodpecker nesting habitat suitability.

See Table 5 for a list of snag retention level prescriptions and treatment unit assignments. Treatment unit prescriptions (retention levels) were randomly assigned to each study/treatment unit.

Table 5. Proposed snag retention by size class and treatment unit assignment Treatment prescription Snag retention level (per acre) Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Control >20 inches diameter at breast height 8 4 2 All 15 to 20 inches diameter at breast height 0 6 10 All 12 to 15 inches diameter at breast height 4 8 17 All 9 to 12 inches diameter at breast height 22 (all) 22 (all) 22 (all) All Treatment Unit Assignments S2, S3 S4, S6 S5, S1 C1, C2

Page 22 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

DecAID (Decayed Wood Advisor) Snag retention guidelines were designed in cooperation between the Malheur National Forest and the Rocky Mountain Research Station in support of this salvage research project. In addition, a DecAID (decayed wood advisor) analysis (Version 2.20) was also utilized to determine snag distribution and tolerance levels across the appropriate analysis area. DecAID is a dead and down wood advisory tool developed to help managers evaluate the impacts of forest conditions (existing conditions or conditions that would result from proposed activities) on wildlife that use snags and down wood. It is a summary, synthesis, and integration of current scientific knowledge about the sizes and amounts of snags and down wood used by wildlife in specific vegetation types.

It is important to note the following, taken directly out of the “under representation of post-fire conditions” section of the “Caveats and Cautions” portion of the DecAID webpage at http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/wildlife/decaid/pages/Caveats-and-Cautions.html#Under-representation of post-fire conditions.

Under-representation of post-fire conditions

The inventory data in most cases do not represent recent post-fire conditions very well because the plots sample conditions arising from a variety of disturbances, including but not limited to fire. The sample plots of older forests might represent at least some post-fire conditions; however, young stands originating after recent wildfire are not well represented because they are an extremely small proportion of the current landscape and often have been salvaged or otherwise treated. Information about disturbance history and stand origin, especially post-fire conditions, is pertinent for interpreting conditions for wildlife species such as Black-backed Woodpecker that use and select for dense clumps of snags in recent post-fire situations.

Post-fire information, such as wildlife data or current conditions in the analysis area, can only be compared to inventory data if the appropriate scale is used for analysis. The analysis area should have the same proportion of the high snag density classes as the percent of area (y-axis) in the DecAID inventory histograms. Large fires can hugely skew the current conditions, even in a 5th field HUCs, to the point that the analysis area is no longer representative of habitat conditions from which the inventory data were collected. See the Considerations of scale: landscape and stand levels section of the Summary Narratives.

What this means for the user:

• Inventory data are not summarized for the post-fire structural condition class.

• Inventory data should not be used to determine "natural" reference conditions for post-fire situations unless the size of the analysis area is large enough to reflect the size and intensity of the disturbance you are assessing.

Therefore, to appropriately implement DecAID as an analysis tool in a post-fire environment, an adequate-sized analysis area had to be determined. In order to compare the relative abundance of high density dead wood habitat with "natural" or "reference conditions" (predicted using the data in DecAID), an appropriately-sized analysis area was needed to incorporate a landscape large enough so that the amount of area exhibiting high snag densities (resulting from the 2015 fire season) would be representative of the relative abundance of such habitat within a reference landscape. According to guidance found in the DecAID Guide (DecAID Implementation: Post-Disturbance Salvage Sales - Determining size of analysis Area for Distribution Analysis of Current Conditions), the area must encompass enough acres within each DecAID habitat type present in the fire area or affected area, to accommodate the scale of disturbance being evaluated as a portion of the total habitat type acres

Page 23 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment commensurate with the reference condition. The DecAID Advisor, provides information on calculating the size of the analysis area http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/wildlife/decaid-guide/salvage-analysis-area.shtml.

Design criteria for snag retention (variable retention) for treated areas are based on the best available science and are intended to build on that science through additional research. The focus on snag retention recommendations within salvage units is based on woodpecker species of concern that utilize stand replacing fire habitats and favor different sizes of snags, and to acquire additional information on their habitat use and their compatibility with varying levels of snag retention.

Snags removed under this project would occur in stand replacement burned areas which could reduce some potential nesting and foraging structure for three species. Snag retention standards are as follows:

 Among the six treatment units where salvage logging would occur, only dead trees at the time of salvage would be removed.  Two treatment units would represent the high and low ends of the treatment gradient, and the remaining four units would equitably represent intermediate levels of this gradient. In addition, all six treatment units and both control units are located in areas with substantial and comparable amounts of pre-salvage suitable habitat for nesting woodpeckers identified with currently-available habitat models.  Although snags greater than 9 inches diameter at breast height and less than 12 inches diameter at breast height are non-merchantable, they are valuable habitat to all woodpecker species and would be retained in all treatment units.  Within selectively-harvested size classes, snags would be retained in clumps utilizing previous research demonstrating the value of clumped snags for woodpecker nesting habitat suitability. Figures 2-5 on the following pages display a visual of snag retention levels for the control unit and research treatment units for the different woodpecker species.

Page 24 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Figure 2 Visual of snag retention levels for the control unit and research treatment units for black-backed, Lewis's, and white-headed woodpeckers

S2 and S3

Figure 3 Displays a visual of snag retention levels (Level 1) for research study units S2 and S3 within the proposed study areas for focal species Lewis's woodpecker

Page 25 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

S4 and S6

Figure 4 Displays a visual of snag retention levels (Level 3) for research study units S4 and S6 for transition woodpecker species

S1 and S5

Figure 5 Displays a visual of snag retention levels (Level 3) for research study units S1 and S5 within the proposed study areas for focal species white-headed woodpecker

Page 26 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

The total timber volume associated with alternative 2 is 3,562 thousand board feet (mbf) (6,231 hundreds of cubic feet [ccf]).

The proposed action does not require any new permanent road construction; however, temporary roads would be required in some locations (see the ‘Forest Road Activities’ section below for more information).

Logging Systems All units are ground based and will require cut to length with forwarder use. Slash should be placed in forwarder trails where practical, so forwarders ride on top of the slash. Skid trails and landing locations up to 1 to 2 acres in size would be determined before logging and are subject to approval by the sale administrator. In landing zones, the vegetation would be cleared for equipment to prepare, deck, and load trees for hauling. No landing zones would be located within riparian habitat conservation areas.

Reforestation Reforestation would occur on about 1,210 acres within the treatment units where salvage logging takes place; reforestation would occur after salvage logging is completed. Tree species mix would reflect the composition of the original stand(s). Site preparation for planting would be limited to a 2-foot square scalp at each tree planting site to clear away debris or vegetation that may interfere with planting a tree, and to reduce competing vegetation immediately adjacent to planted seedlings. Planting of salvage harvest units is required by Regional Forester policy (USDA Forest Service 2002).

Research Proposal: Decision support to inform post-fire management plans to meet habitat objectives for woodpecker species of conservation concern Researchers from the Rocky Mountain Research Station propose to:

 Measure nesting densities of black-backed, white-headed, and Lewis’s woodpeckers associated with specified levels of salvage harvest.  Quantify occupancy and nest survival in relation to a harvest gradient of salvage logging, representing alternative prescriptions.  Characterize nest site selection in relation to burn severity, snag/tree densities and distributions, and percentage ponderosa pine.

Specific research questions from the Experimental Post-fire Salvage Study Plan are:

 How do levels of salvage harvest relate to nesting densities of black-backed, white-headed, and Lewis’s woodpeckers during the first four years after wildfire?  What are the changes in woodpecker occupancy and nest survival in relation to the gradient of salvage logging?  How do burn severity, snag distributions, and ponderosa pine influence nest placement by woodpeckers?

The research will last for approximately 4 years (2016 to 2019). No ground disturbing activities would take place as part of this research proposal. See appendix C - Draft Experimental Post-fire Salvage Study Plan for more details.

Page 27 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Forest Road Activities Roads would be utilized in the project planning area to provide access for treatment activities. Proposed road activities for alternative 2 are as follows (see appendix A, Map 5):

 4 miles of temporary road construction  40 miles of maintenance level 2 and 3 open roads would be utilized for log haul  10 miles of closed roads (maintenance level 1) to be opened for log haul; roads would be re-closed at completion of project  50 miles of road maintenance on haul routes  7 roads, totaling 7.5 miles, in the project planning area are shown as closed (maintenance level 1) in the road system Infra database; they were closed with previous administrative decisions, though a signed decision NEPA document was not found in this project-level research. These roads were discussed by the interdisciplinary team and would remain closed. See Table 6; see FEA appendix A – Maps, Map 5.

Temporary Road Construction Temporary road construction would be necessary to access several salvage harvest units (treatment units 1, 2, 3, 7, 11, 14, 15, 19, 24, 26, and 27). Approximately 4 miles of temporary roads are proposed under alternative 2. All temporary roads would be rehabilitated after log haul is complete. Rehabilitation aims to eliminate drivability and visibility, restore hydrological function, provide adequate drainage and ground cover to prevent erosion, and restore soil productivity. Temporary roads would be restored by some combination of the following:

 Waterbarring as needed to restore natural drainage patterns.  Recontouring slopes (removing cut and fill slopes) and pulling berms from the edge of the road back onto the road.  Subsoiling (loosening) compact soils in a “J” pattern to a depth of approximately 16 inches (unless prevented by bedrock or rock content of soils).  Planting or seeding disturbed areas with native species that naturally occur in the project planning area to achieve a minimum of 35 percent ground cover.  Placing slash, boulders, and logs on the roadbed (where available).  Disguising visible entrances with pieces of cull logs, tops of cut trees, and/or rocks, etc. to prevent vehicle use. Specific methods per road would be determined through consultation with a heritage specialist, hydrologist, fisheries biologist, and/or soil scientist.

There would be no construction of new or temporary roads outside the project planning area.

Open Roads to Be Used for Log Haul Table 6 lists the maintenance level 2 and 3 roads proposed to be utilized for log haul:

Page 28 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Table 6. Existing open (maintenance level 2 and 3) Forest Service Roads to be utilized for log haul Approximate miles to be used for Approximate miles to be used for Forest Service Maintenance log haul within the project log haul outside of the project road number level planning area planning area 1500000 3 3.3 0.2 1500473 2 n/a 0.2 1516000 2 2.0 <0.1 1520000 2 1.4 n/a 1530000 2 3.4 n/a 1530072 2 0.4 n/a 1530499 2 3.0 n/a 1530500 2 0.1 n/a 1530501 2 0.5 n/a 1530732 2 0.3 n/a 1530733 2 1.1 n/a 1530734 2 0.4 n/a 1530737 2 1.3 n/a 1530754 2 0.1 n/a 3925000 2 0.4 1.9 3925047 2 0.1 0.02 3925196 2 0.1 1.6 6500194 2 4.8 n/a 6500336 2 3.3 n/a 6500840 2 1.7 n/a 6510000 2 5.2 n/a 6510812 2 2.8 n/a 6510825 2 1.0 n/a Closed Roads to Be Opened For Log Haul Approximately 10 miles of currently-closed roads (maintenance level 1) would be opened to facilitate management activities for this project, a use which meets the intent of these roads’ designation as maintenance level 1 (see Table 7). Basic custodial maintenance would be performed to allow for future management access, mitigate resource damage, and maintain adequate drainage. Roads would be re- closed at completion of the project when log haul is complete and rehabilitated following project activities. These closures would remain consistent with the intent of the original closure.

Table 7. Existing closed (maintenance level 1) Forest Service Roads to be re-opened for log haul Forest Approximate miles to be used for Approximate miles to be used for log Maintenance Service road log haul in the project planning haul outside of the project planning level number area area 1500475 1 0.4 0.1 1516354 1 0.2 n/a 1516370 1 1.5 n/a 1516371 1 1.0 n/a 3925403 1 0.7 0.2 3925912 1 0.2 0.1 6500842 1 0.5 n/a 6510765 1 0.6 n/a 6510768 1 0.8 n/a 6510813 1 0.1 n/a 6510816 1 0.2 n/a 6510826 1 0.2 n/a 6510827 1 0.4 n/a 6510842 1 1.3 n/a 6510843 1 0.6 n/a 6510844 1 0.4 n/a 6510846 1 0.5 n/a 6510547 1 0.2 n/a

Page 29 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Road Maintenance Road maintenance activities would bring the roads up to a standard needed for commercial haul. Road maintenance activities are proposed on approximately 50 miles of road, commensurate with commercial use. Specific road maintenance activities defined under 36 CFR 212.1 and carried out on haul routes inside and outside the project planning area.

 Blading and shaping road, including existing drain dips and grade sags  Constructing water bars/cross ditches  Roadside brushing  Removing danger trees  Seeding  Spot rocking in wet area of the roadway  Snow removal  Minor realigning of road junctions  Culvert cleaning  Removing excess material from roadway  Placing fill material for major rutting in the roadway  Installation of minor drainage features  Watering roadway for dust abatement Additional roadway construction requirements may include:

 Major realignment  Constructing drain dips  Constructing and installing wood poles or steel gate closure devices

Confirmation of Road Closures The following road activities would occur to update the road system in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area. There are no known RS2477 claims for any roads proposed for access changes in the project planning area.

Seven roads totaling 7.5 miles within the project planning area are shown as closed (maintenance level 1) in the Infra database road system. These roads were administratively closed in the past, but do not have an associated signed NEPA decision regarding their closure. These roads would have their closure confirmed by this project’s decision. These roads would be kept on the system and periodically maintained to stable hydrologic states, but use would be limited to infrequent resource management or other permitted activities. Closure may be by a physical barrier or gate, or by regulation. The seven roads proposed for confirmation of closure under this project are described in Table 8.

Page 30 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Table 8. Confirmation of road closures Forest Maintenance Service road Miles Road notes level number Pole gate was installed under the Dry Timer Sale and Canyon Creek 1500722 1 1.1 Wildland Urban Interface Project closed the road in INFRA in 2002. Road was closed prior to 1992, the last 0.4 miles was closed in 1988. 1530034 1 2.5 No physical barrier to road present. Road was brushed in in 1988. Clearing material was dumped under 1530740 1 1.6 Chamber Timber Sale in 1991. Road was closed prior to 1992. Road was brushed in in 1988. Road was closed prior to 1992. Road 1530741 1 0.4 was naturally closed in 2002 per road log inspection. Road was brushed in and showing no signs of use 1988. Road was 1530743 1 0.3 closed prior to 1992. Road was naturally closed in 2002 per road log inspection. No right-of-way access through private property to Forest Service 6500839 1 1.2 portion of road. No right-of-way access through private property to Forest Service 6510763 1 0.4 portion of road.

Temporary Closure for Cross-Country Travel A temporary forest closure order prohibiting cross-country motor vehicle use within the project study and control units would be implemented between April 1st and August 30th for four years.

Rock Pit Material Sources Some roads may require rock for spot rocking wet areas. Rock pit material sources are located at, but not limited to:

 Crazy Creek (Township 15 South, Range 33 East, Section 33); Forest Service Road 1530733  Starr Ridge (Township 15 South, Range 31 East, Section 20); Forest Service Road 4920464 Implementation Schedule It is anticipated that harvest activities would be completed within six months of a decision. Reforestation within treatment units is anticipated to be implemented within five years following salvage logging activities. Project Design Criteria Project design criteria are an integral part of the proposed action and serve to mitigate impacts of activities on resource areas. In addition to best management practices and legal requirements, these measures would be applied under any action alternative during implementation. See appendix B for the complete list of project design criteria. Monitoring Forest Service personnel would perform monitoring throughout the implementation of this project. The sale administrator would oversee implementation of the commercial harvest portion of the project ensuring adherence to best management practices and project design criteria, as described in appendix B. The sale administrator will communicate with resource specialists if any concerns arise during project implementation. Table 9 displays additional monitoring requirements, listed by resource.

Page 31 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Table 9 Monitoring requirements by resource Resource Monitoring Requirement Silviculture Planted areas will be monitored for seedling survival, growth, and damaging agents. Stocking surveys will occur periodically until planting areas are certified adequately stocked and “free to grow.” Deficient areas will be replanted to at least minimum stocking. Soils When logging activities are complete, a trained individual would inspect units to determine whether Forest Plan Standard 126 has been met. If Forest Plan Standard 126 has not been met, remedial activities would be prescribed to bring the unit into compliance. Such activities include subsoiling in a “J” pattern, scattering slash, building waterbars, and/or other methods approved by a soil scientist or hydrologist (see project design criteria in appendix B). Forest Plan Standard 126 – The total acreage of all detrimental soil conditions shall not exceed 20 percent of the total acreage within any activity area, including landings and system roads. Consider restoration treatments if detrimental conditions are present on 20 percent or more of the activity area. Detrimental soil conditions include compaction, puddling, displacement, severely burned soil, and surface erosion. Watershed Best Management Practices monitoring would occur randomly at a treatment unit within proximity of a waterbody (although no salvage logging is proposed within riparian habitat conservation areas). An interdisciplinary team would evaluate if sediment was observed exiting the treatment unit and if it was entering a waterbody. If this occurs, an investigation would occur to identify the source of the sedimentation to understand if it is occurring from the proposed action. If the proposed action is illustrating water quality issues, corrective measures or adaptive management would be employed. Heritage Treatment units which contain resources of heritage concern and require avoidance, inspection, and or post-implementation monitoring. Discoveries of unevaluated or eligible archaeological resources are Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) exempt from public disclosure, and discussions regarding these resources would be held internally under the discretion of the North Zone Archaeologist and the District Ranger to mitigate potential losses or unauthorized public disclosure. Emergency Situation Determination As part of this project an Emergency Situation Determination under 36 CFR 218 was requested for the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project. Deterioration agents, particularly checking, are expected to reduce the available volume of the salvage sale over time. By October 2016, the value of fire killed timber in the project planning area is estimated to be reduced by 64 percent; the reduction in value would be even greater if the fire killed timber is not harvested until the winter of 2016/2017 or later.

An Emergency Situation Determination would expedite the time period in which this salvage sale could be offered to the public by allowing implementation of the project immediately after a decision on the project has been signed and published. This is expected to be in June of 2016.

On March 27, 2013, a final rule revising 36 CFR Part 218 was published in the Federal Register and became effective on that date. The new rule replaces the previous appeal rules defined in 36 CFR 215. The new rule provides the public an opportunity to comment and express concerns on projects during an objection period before decisions are made rather than after. The 36 CFR 218 objection period, however, does not apply to a project for which an Emergency Situation Determination was requested and granted.

The Emergency Situation Determination was granted by the USDA Forest Service Washington office on the basis that immediate implementation is necessary. With an Emergency Situation Determination the objective is to complete the associated sales during the 2016 normal timber sale operating season. Timber quality and value are maximized in this timeframe. In addition, the salvage would be completed in a timely manner that enhances worker safety for timber fallers and equipment operators in the project planning area. By doing so the value of the dead trees is expected to help fund reforestation and other restoration treatments.

Page 32 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Without an Emergency Situation Determination, the earliest the Forest would likely be able to offer sales would be mid-October 2016. This means the burned trees would go through a summer dry season, increasing the opportunity for bark beetle infestation and subsequent blue stain, as well as the likelihood that checking (cracking) would occur as the wood dries. Alternatives or Elements Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study Federal agencies are required by NEPA to rigorously explore and objectively evaluate all reasonable alternatives and to briefly discuss the reasons for eliminating any alternatives that were not developed in detail (40 CFR 1502.14).

Salvage a greater portion of the project planning area and/or fire perimeter; not limiting salvage to areas of high mortality. While this alternative would accomplish the need for recovering economic value of timber burned in the fire, it would not achieve the balance of sustainability between economic returns and ecological values that is an objective on the Malheur National Forest. Additionally, approximately half of the area burned on National Forest System public lands is within Congressionally-designated Wilderness and/or management areas where the Malheur Forest Plan prohibits salvage. It would also not meet the purpose and need for research into the effects of and response to salvage logging on woodpecker species of concern. Such an alternative would also require a considerable amount of temporary road construction and logging on intensely burned steep slopes, which is not consistent with management objectives for soils and sedimentation into the project planning area’s many streams. This alternative would also require forest plan amendments to allow timber harvest within an Old Growth Management Area, which would not be consistent with Forest Plan objectives. Therefore this alternative was eliminated from further consideration. Summary Comparison of Alternatives Table 10 provides a comparison between the alternatives.

Table 10. Comparison of alternatives Alternative Proposed activities Alternative 2 1 Salvage treatments Snag retention prescription level 1 0 2 study units, 350 acres harvested Snag retention prescription level 2 0 2 study units, 460 acres harvested Snag retention prescription level 3 0 2 study units, 400 acres harvested Timber volume Estimated timber volume 6,231 hundreds of cubic feet (ccf) 0 or 3,562 thousand board feet (mbf) Reforestation Acres reforested 0 1,210 acres Research proposals Proposal #1 No Yes Proposal #2 No Yes Road activities Temporary road constructed 0 4 miles Existing open roads used for log haul 0 40 miles Existing closed roads used for log haul 0 10 miles Road maintenance for log haul 0 50 miles Existing closed roads to have their closure confirmed by this 7.5 miles 0 project

Page 33 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Chapter 3 – Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action and Alternatives Introduction Chapter 3 summarizes the physical, biological, social, and economic environments of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area, the effects of implementing each alternative on these environments, and the scientific and analytical basis for the comparison of effects by alternative. Chapter 3 complies with the implementing regulations of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for analytic and concise environmental documents (40 CFR 1500-1508).

In the development of the environmental analyses that follow, best available science was considered and is documented in the project record for each resource area. Consistency with the Malheur National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, as amended (Malheur Forest Plan) was built into the project design and the analyses. The environmental analyses incorporate issues identified through the scoping process. An environmental effect, impact, or consequence is defined as a modification of or change in the existing environment brought about by the action taken. The NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1508.27) refer to effects that are direct, indirect, or cumulative as short-term or long-term. For this project, short-term is defined as around 1 to 10 years and long-term is defined as around 10 to 20 years, unless otherwise defined in the resource sections of this chapter. Effects can vary in degree, ranging from only a slightly discernible change to a measurable alteration in the environment.

Specialist reports, prepared for this project, are located in the Project Record (40 CFR 1502.21). The project record is available at the Blue Mountain Ranger District office in John Day, Oregon. Consideration of Past, Ongoing, and Reasonably Foreseeable Actions in Effects Analysis

Cumulative Effects A cumulative effect is the impact to the environment resulting from the incremental impact of the action when added to effects from other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions. Other actions are considered regardless of what agency or person undertakes such other actions and regardless of land ownership on which the other actions occur (40 CFR 1508.7). An individual action when considered alone may not have a significant effect, but when its effects are considered in sum with the effects of other actions, the effects may be significant.

Cumulative effects were assessed for this project in terms of how the alternatives would add to the past and present activities (Table 11). Existing conditions described under each resource section reflect the cumulative effects of past and present activities that have occurred in this area. Each resource section identifies specific past and present actions listed in Table 11 with a discernible effect on a particular resource as reflected in the existing condition.

Past Actions – The environmental analysis required under NEPA is forward-looking in that it focuses on the potential impacts of the proposed action that an agency is considering. Thus, review of past actions is required to the extent that this review informs agency decision-making regarding the proposed action (Council on Environmental Quality Memorandum, Guidance on the Consideration of Past Actions in Cumulative Effects Analysis, Forest Service National Environmental Policy Regulations (36 CFR 220.4(f)) (July 24, 2008). Specific past actions considered in the existing condition and cumulative effects analysis are summarized below. The past actions summary is not necessarily exhaustive, as records may not exist for all past activities by project. This is particularly true for those actions that predate the

Page 34 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project passage of the National Environmental Policy Act in 1970. Nonetheless, the effects of such past actions are accounted for in the assessment of the existing condition, as the current condition assessment necessarily reflects any relevant impacts of such actions.

Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Activities – Each resource section describes relevant cumulative effects from the present and reasonably foreseeable future actions listed in this section. The reasonably foreseeable future activities overlap in time and location and may have environmental effects. The incremental effect of the action when added to the proposed activities was analyzed. Detailed descriptions of each present and future action are listed here in Table 11 and are referenced in each resource section. The foreseeable future actions for which the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project proposed activities may have a cumulative effect are those listed on the Malheur National Forest’s Schedule of Proposed Actions (see http://www.fs.fed.us/sopa/forest-level.php?110604).

Table 11 lists the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future activities that will be considered for the cumulative effects analysis.

Table 11. Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future activities used for cumulative effects analysis Activity name Timeframe Location Activity description Historic logging has occurred across the project planning area. Past Project Historical timber Treatments included stand clear-cuts, shelterwood, seed treat, (1860s to planning harvest overstory removals, salvage, commercial thinning, and 1980s) area improvement cut treatments. Wave, Chamber, Crazy, DTM 4A, Dry Gulch, Sloan, Hanscock, Pearson, Can, Dry, Bend, Windfall, and Van Aspen timber sales Ongoing Project (approximately 5,500 acres). Treatment types included, but not Recent timber (1990s to planning limited to, salvage, clearcut, overstory removal, shelterwood, harvest present) area improvement cuts, and single-tree selection. Commercial and precommercial thinning associated with the Starr Project (approximately 6,700 acres). Reduce fire hazard through the use of timber harvest, Canyon Creek precommercial thinning, machine and hand piling, pile burning, Ongoing Project Wildland Urban and prescribed burning on approximately 8,000 acres within the (2006 to planning Interface Fuel 22,000 acre project area. The Canyon Creek Complex Fire present) area Reduction Project burned through the entire project area prior to completion of all activities. In the past century, wildfires were actively suppressed leading to Ongoing Project a buildup of ground fuels and overstocked stands. Because of Fire suppression (1910 to planning current uncharacteristic fire behavior, all fires are being actively present) area suppressed to reduce the chance of other major stand replacement fires. Project Table Mountain Approximately 640 acre fire entirely within the project planning Past (1988) planning Fire area. area Northeast portion of Wildcat Fire Past (1996) the Project Approximately 10,000 acre fire. planning area Project Approximately 25 acre lightning caused fire within the Grindstone Fire Past (2012) planning Strawberry Mountain Wilderness. area Canyon Creek Past (2015) Fire area Approximately 110,300 acre fire. Complex Fire Canyon Creek Wildfire suppression activities include dozer lines, retardant Complex Fire drops, drafting sites, staging areas, safety zones, drop points, Past (2015) Fire area suppression and increased vehicular traffic. These sites were rehabilitated rehabilitation following the fire (see below for more detail).

Page 35 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Activity name Timeframe Location Activity description Canyon Creek Complex Fire Sale of decks created by felling of trees during suppression Past (2015) Fire area suppression activities. decks sale Canyon Creek Ongoing BAER funded activities will occur within the fire perimeter Complex Fire (2015 to Fire area focusing on emergency measures to reduce flooding, erosion, BAER present) and provide for human safety (see below for more detail). Canyon Creek Mitigation of hazard trees, including commercial removal, along Complex Fire Ongoing Project forest roads within the boundary of the Canyon Creek Complex Danger Tree (2015 to planning Fire. Approximately 4,000 acres on approximately 250 miles of Mitigation/Salvage present) area road. Project Hazard tree removal and Ongoing Project Private landowners removing damaged timber from their lands. timber salvage on (2015 to planning For analysis purposes considering all timber removed (see private ground present) area below for more detail). within the project area Planting of approximately 19,924 acres of upland forests and Canyon Creek Ongoing Project riparian areas with ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, western white Fire Reforestation (2016 to planning pine, Engelmann spruce, and western larch to accelerate the Project 2020) area vegetative recovery of the large stand replacement patches within the Canyon Creek Complex. Project Past (1860 The project planning area was grazed primarily by thousands of Historical grazing planning to 1940) sheep during this timeframe. Grazing was generally unregulated. area Past Project Grazing allotments were created by dividing the land with Past grazing (1960s to planning fences; stocking rates, seasons of use, and standards for 1990s) area allowable utilization were created. Grazing standards for allowable utilization were changed with implementation of the Malheur Forest Plan and again following Ongoing Project consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service following Present and (1990s to planning listing of Mid-Columbia River steelhead in 1999 for critical ongoing grazing present) area habitat. Grazing within the area impacted by the Canyon Creek Complex Fire is deferred until plant growth is adequate to support grazing. Project Invasive plant treatments on National Forest System lands have Invasive plant Past and planning been done primarily by hand pulling and grub, but there were treatments ongoing area some biological controls introduced in the 1990s. Malheur National Forest Site- Reasonably Project Treatment of known and newly discovered invasive plants using Specific Invasive foreseeable planning herbicide, manual, mechanical, biological, and/or cultural Plants Treatment future area treatments. Environmental activity Impact Statement Reasonably Aquatic Project foreseeable Forest-wide aquatic restoration strategy that authorizes 17 Restoration planning future categories of restoration across the Malheur National Forest. Decision Notice area activity Cross-country off- Project Cross-country off-highway vehicle use occurs throughout the highway vehicle Ongoing planning project planning area. use area Cross country travel may be prohibited across 1,337,770 acres on the Malheur National Forest where it is not already prohibited Reasonably with the exception of cross-country travel from designated open Project Travel foreseeable routes for the purpose of dispersed camping when resource planning Management Plan future damage caused by motor vehicle use can be avoided and/or for area activity big game retrieval purposes. The distance that cross-country travel may be allowed from open routes to existing dispersed camp sites would vary by alternative considered in the travel

Page 36 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Activity name Timeframe Location Activity description management analysis. Existing dispersed sites in riparian areas may also have a setback distance from the stream where motorized access may be restricted. Project Approximately 62 miles of designated trails are located within Trail maintenance Ongoing planning the project planning area. These trails receive ongoing area maintenance. Use is generally late spring through late fall. Note: there would Project be a restriction on firewood cutting in the Canyon Creek Firewood cutting Ongoing planning Complex Fire Salvage Project’s control and study units during area the duration of the research study. Project Use is generally late spring through late fall. There are Dispersed Ongoing planning approximately 59 known dispersed camping sites within the camping area project planning area. Project Removal Canyon Past (2015) planning The Canyon Meadows Dam was removed Meadows Dam area Project Mushroom picking Ongoing planning Commercial and personal use mushroom picking. area

Fire Suppression, Fire Suppression Rehabilitation, and BAER Activities

Fire Suppression Activities

Fire suppression included the following activities:

 Construction of dozer lines (approximately 178 miles).  Construction of hand lines (approximately 2 miles). Most hand lines were constructed in the Strawberry Wilderness.  Retardant drops - The type 1 Incident Management Team estimated that approximately 389,169 gallons of fire retardant were used on the Canyon Creek Fire complex during their management.  Use of water drafting sites.  Construction of staging areas, safety zones, and drop points.  Increased vehicular traffic on roads.  Cutting of trees and snags during fire suppression activities.

Fire Suppression Rehabilitation

Fire suppression rehabilitation included several actions:

 Approximately 178 miles of dozer line and 2 miles of hand line were rehabilitated. Fire suppression rehabilitation consisted of the following: o Pickup of trash, garbage, and fires suppression equipment. o Seeding areas with ground disturbance caused by heavy machinery. Native seed sources were used to seed dozer lines and safety zones. o Temporary water bars were constructed on all primary hand lines and dozer lines prior to the fall/winter 2015 to prevent erosion from fall storms.

Page 37 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

o Berms on the edges of safety zones, helispots, and firelines were pulled back into the disturbed area and smoothed out. Brush and debris was scattered back into the area. o Stumps from felled trees that were visible for major 3 and 4 digit forest roads, county roads, trail systems, and private property with residences were flush cut. o All gates on roads opened for fire suppression activities were closed. o Drainage structures on roads were reestablished and repaired, including drain dips, water bars, and culverts to pre-fire functional condition. o Road surfaces were returned to their original surface condition. o Berms and barriers were reconstructed on closed roads. o All water sources used for fire suppression were returned to pre-fire condition to the extent possible. o Stream crossings were repaired to restore the pre-fire condition to the extent possible. o Existing recreation trails were rehabilitated by cleaning and installing and drainage features. For trees felled (during fire suppression) that were visible from trails or trailheads, stumps were flush cut.

BAER Activities

The BAER analysis identified actions needed to address immediate threats to public safety, values at risk, and resource damage. The actions implemented on the Forest include the following:

Road Repair  Removal of road fill (areas where culverts have been removed).  Culvert and ditch cleaning.  Installation of road dips and cross drains (water bars).  Replacement of undersized culverts and culvert removal.  Roadside stream bank stabilization.  Gate installation. Stream Recovery  Placement of floodplain spanning log jams to trap floodplain debris and increase bedload movement. Recreation Facilities  Temporary closure of trail and trailhead facilities.  Storm-proofing trails.  Removal of burned toilet and hazardous waste. Hydrology  Hillslope mulching (approximately 329 acres) on the steeper slopes of Berry and Vance Creek. Invasive Plants  Surveys and treatment of invasive plants.

Page 38 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

 Seeding of native grasses to promote native plant community establishment after treatments (50 acres). To increase resiliency and prevent areas from being re-infested by invasive plants. Roadside Danger Tree Removal and Road Maintenance  Felling and/or removal of danger trees with an imminent or likely potential to fall along roads and around campgrounds and trailheads.  Maintenance of roads, including but not limited to, cleaning and reshaping ditches, cleaning culverts, and deepening catch basins.  Replacement of closures as previously decided in applicable NEPA, or to their pre-fire condition. Private Lands  The Canyon Creek fire was 110,300 acres in size; of that, approximately 17,000 acres are owned by nonfederal entities such as private timberland and residence owners. These lands are generally not managed for multiple uses as are the National Forests. In the analysis it is assumed that private lands would not be managed for wildlife and other multiple uses after the fire. Most of the private timber lands were salvage logged post-fire (fall and winter of 2015) and assumed to be consistent with the Oregon Forest Practices Act. Some homes, barns and other outbuildings were also impacted by the fire. Removal of dead tree hazards on residential private lands has been ongoing. Existing Condition and Environmental Consequences Terrestrial Wildlife This section considers impacts to appropriate terrestrial wildlife species discussed in the Malheur National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Malheur Forest Plan) from the Proposed Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project (Project). The Malheur Forest Plan categorizes these terrestrial species into management indicator species (MIS), Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive species (TES), Featured Species and Landbirds. Species among these groups that do not have habitat in the analysis area or that would not be affected by the activities proposed by this project will not be addressed in detail in this document. The management indicator species in the Malheur Forest Plan that will not be discussed in detail in this document due to the lack of habitat in a post-fire environment include American marten, three-toed woodpecker, red-breasted sapsucker, Williamson’s sapsucker and downy woodpecker.

This report includes a biological evaluation documenting potential affects from implementing the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage on threatened and endangered species in order to meet requirements of the Forest Service Manual (FSM) 2630.3, FSM 2670-2671, FSM W.O. Amendments 2600-2005-1, the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) and the Malheur Forest Plan. All of these species may not be addressed in detail, but may be represented in tables that display the species groups.

Due to the amount of post high severity fire habitat in the analysis area, little, if any habitat exists for Featured Species listed in the Malheur Forest Plan. These include blue grouse, sage grouse, pronghorn, upland sandpipers, osprey, and bighorn sheep. These species will not be addressed further in the document.

In 1995 the Regional Forester amended Forest Plans east of the spotted owl range. This amendment is known as the Regional Forester’s Amendment #2, or the Eastside Screens. Although the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project occurs in an area where the Eastside Screens applies, the interim guidance is for management of timber sales in late and old structure forest. The Decision Notice for the Eastside Screens state that the direction does not apply to post-fire salvage with incidental green volume outside of currently mapped old growth, or to sales to protect health and safety (USFS1995). All harvest activities

Page 39 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment proposed in this project are exempt from the Eastside Screens revised interim ecosystem standard. However, the wildlife standards described in the Eastside Screens still apply.

The objectives of this project are to recover the economic value of dead trees and to provide for societal needs for wood products, while allowing research to quantify the range of conditions necessary to maintain ecological integrity of post-fire habitats for woodpecker species. The recovery of the economic value of dead trees is intended to provide revenue for road improvements, reforestation, and watershed and riparian restoration depending on the value and quantities recovered. Additionally, monitoring of woodpecker population relationships with planned treatments would provide critical information necessary for forest managers to offer socioeconomic benefits while maintaining habitat for key woodpecker species of conservation concern, i.e., black-backed, white-headed, and Lewis’s woodpeckers.

Indicators for Assessing Effects

Table 12 Resource indicators for assessing effects to terrestrial wildlife Measure (quantify if Resource element Resource indicator Source possible) Federally Listed, Discussion of effects of fire Endangered Species Act Presence of species or Proposed and Sensitive salvage activities on 2015 Regional Foresters habitat Species individuals or habitat Sensitive Species List Management Indicator Snags and snag habitat Landscape-level snag Malheur Forest Plan Species - Snag Density available and maintained distribution analysis. DecAid analysis and Distribution post salvage. Management Indicator Snags and snag habitat Landscape-level snag Malheur Forest Plan Species – Nesting available and maintained distribution analysis. DecAid analysis Tolerance post salvage. Management Indicator Extent of post-fire habitat Net acres of available post- Malheur Forest Plan Species – Post-Fire available and maintained fire habitat Calculated acres habitat post-salvage. Discussion of effects of Forage Elk salvage activities on cover Malheur Forest Plan Cover and forage availability Salvage impacts to post- Migratory Bird Treaty Act Discussion of impacts to Landbirds fire habitat and associated USFS and USFWS MOU habitats and species. species Partners-In-Flight

Affected Environment Existing condition for each species discussed is presented under the environmental consequences section that follows.

Environmental Consequences

Analysis Methods Effects on wildlife species and habitat were assessed within National Forest System lands in the Canyon Creek Fire Salvage project planning area, focusing on the implementation of actions described within the proposed action and no action alternatives. Some wildlife species require a detailed analysis and discussion to determine potential effects, while other species may either not be impacted or are impacted at a level which does not influence the species or their occurrence.

Effects were analyzed within the context of the project planning area, unless otherwise noted. The cumulative effects analysis area for wildlife species is variable depending on the extent and distribution of species and associated habitat that may be affected by activities proposed in the Project.

Page 40 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Species presence/absence determinations were based on the likelihood of a particular species or species groups occupying, nesting, foraging or otherwise regularly using recent moderate- to high-severity post- fire habitat.

There is a high confidence level that species discussed in this document are currently present in the project planning area due to their documented use of post-fire habitat, however, formal wildlife surveys have not been conducted.

The Regional Forester’s Special Status Species List, July 2015, was used to filter sensitive wildlife species further discussed in this document. Conservation status, trends, and source habitats for these and other species were obtained from the Oregon Biodiversity Information Center “Rare, Threatened and Endangered Species of Oregon” (October 2010), NatureServe Explorer (accessed 2014), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Birds of Conservation Concern (2008a).

Temporal Context for Effects Analysis The duration of effects on the wildlife resource is described generally according to the following terms and definitions unless otherwise noted:

 Immediate – Approximately one growing season or several months or less  Short-term – 0 to 5 years  Mid-term – 5 to 25 years  Long-term – 25+ years

Northern flickers (management indicator species), Lewis's woodpeckers (sensitive), white-headed (sensitive), black-backed woodpeckers (management indicator species) and hairy woodpecker (management indicator species) are identified in the DecAID data as using eastside mixed conifer and/or ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir stand replacement areas (Mellen-McLean et al. 2015). These species are discussed in detail as they are represented in the post-fire data in DecAID as using stand replacement fire areas which are exclusively where salvage is being proposed. The analysis and discussion of these species is intended to represent any other cavity excavating species that may use stand replacement post-fire habitat.

Direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of activities proposed are identified and discussed. Spatial boundaries for effects analysis differ based on the baseline data used for the analysis (i.e. DecAID). Summary of Effects

Direct and indirect effects resulting from treatment activities will be discussed as they are expected to apply. All treatment activities will not be analyzed for every species if there would be no effect or no impact to that species in the short-, mid-, or long-term. It can be assumed that for each activity, each applicable threatened and endangered species, management indicator species, and Featured Species that could occur or in the project planning area could be temporarily displaced or exhibit avoidance behavior in the immediate areas of activity and during times and areas of increased traffic or activity. Displacement and avoidance would be expected to be short-term; throughout implementation and only in areas of direct activity. Otherwise, it is assumed that if a proposed treatment or activity not specifically discussed for a certain species has no effect or no impact. Proposed activities with the potential to have further direct, indirect, or cumulative effects will be discussed by species.

Page 41 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

The following is a summary of this biological evaluation and wildlife report on the potential impacts or effects from the proposed Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project on terrestrial wildlife species.

 Only four threatened, endangered or Region 6 sensitive species have documented suitable or marginal habitat within project planning area and warrant further analysis. These Region 6 sensitive species are pallid bat, fringed myotis, Lewis’s woodpecker and white-headed woodpecker. o The proposed alternatives may impact individual pallid bats or fringed myotis or their habitat (MIIH), but will not likely contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability to the population or species. o Lewis’s woodpecker and white-headed woodpecker are analyzed as management indicator species due to their association with post-fire dead wood habitat. o No adverse effects would be expected to Lewis’s woodpecker or white-headed woodpecker form alternative 1 or alternative 2.  Northern flicker, Lewis’s woodpecker, white-headed woodpecker, black-backed woodpecker and hairy woodpecker were selected as the indicator species analyzed to represent species that utilize high-severity post-fire habitat. o No viability concerns to species or populations of primary cavity excavators from inadequate snag density distribution would be expected on the Forest from implementation of the proposed action. o There would be no viability concerns to populations of Lewis’s woodpecker, black-backed woodpecker, white-headed woodpecker, northern flicker or hairy woodpecker based on tolerance levels from implementation of the proposed action. o Implementation of this project would not cumulatively contribute to a negative change in populations or viability to primary cavity excavator management indicator species on the Malheur National Forest.  The proposed action may affect Rocky Mountain elk individuals due to minor displacement during implementation activities, but would not contribute to a negative trend in viability for Rocky Mountain elk on the Malheur National Forest.  Because no dedicated old growth, replacement old growth, or other late and old structure habitat exists in the project planning area, there would be no direct or indirect effects to old-growth dependent species and therefore no viability concerns to old-growth dependent species from implementation of the proposed action.  The no action alternative or the proposed action would not result in any direct or indirect effects to old-growth or late and old structure habitat, or associated species, there would be no cumulative impact from the implementation of either alternative.  Due to the amount of post high severity fire habitat in the analysis area little, if any habitat exists for Featured Species listed in the Malheur Forest Plan. These include blue grouse, sage grouse, pronghorn, upland sandpipers, osprey, and bighorn sheep. These species will not be addressed further in this document.  Northern goshawk is typically discussed as one of the Featured Species due to management direction in the Eastside Screens (Amendment #2). There is no remaining habitat for northern goshawk in the analysis area and therefore will not be discussed further.

Page 42 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

 Other than temporary displacement from increased disturbance factors, no direct or indirect effects to migratory and resident birds would be expected. Further, no negative trends in populations or habitat would be expected as a result of implementing either alternative.

Proposed, Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive Species Forest Service Manual 2672.4 requires the Forest Service to review all of its planned, funded, executed, or permitted programs and activities for possible effects on proposed, endangered, threatened, and sensitive (PETS) species. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) provided a list of PETS that potentially occur in Grant County for consideration in this analysis (USFWS 2014). There is currently no designated or proposed critical habitat for terrestrial species in the affected subwatersheds associated with the Project.

Nineteen (19) species on the 2015 Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species list occur on the Malheur National Forest (Table 13). Although Canada lynx, as listed in Table 13, may have potential habitat on the Forest, the species is not considered to occupy territory on the Forest. Four species have documented suitable or marginal habitat within the project planning area and warrant further analysis (see Table 13). These species are pallid bat, fringed myotis, Lewis’s woodpecker and white-headed woodpecker.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is currently reviewing one avian species, black-backed woodpecker, with documented habitat within the project planning area, to determine if listing two populations that occur in Oregon as either subspecies or distinct population segments under the Endangered Species Act is warranted (USFWS 2013).

Table 13 Species and habitat occurrence for proposed, endangered, threatened, and Regional Forester's sensitive species Species common name/ Species/habitat Habitat requirements Status scientific name occurrence Canada lynx Primary habitat in sub-alpine fir, T HN/N* (Lynx canadensis) lodgepole forest. No critical habitat mapped in Oregon. Gray wolf Habitat generalist. S HN/N (Canis lupus) Pygmy rabbit Strongly associated with dense tall S HN/N (Brachylagus idahoensis) Big sagebrush and deep friable soils. California wolverine Alpine tundra, subalpine cirque S/C HN/N (Gulo gulo luteus) basins for denning. Scavenger in diverse habitats during dispersal. Pallid bat Desert grasslands and shrub- S HD/S (Antrozous pallidus) steppe with rock outcrops. Uses rock crevices/caves. Townsend’s big-eared bat Desert shrub, juniper, and pine S HN/N (Corynorhinus townsendii) forests. Associated with caves, mines, and buildings. Fringed myotis Most habitat types, forested, S HD/S (Myotis thysanodes) riparian. Roosts in caves, crevices, bridges, mines, and large conifer snags. Wallowa rosy finch Alpine basins above timberline. S HN/N (Leucosticte tephrocotis wallowa)

Page 43 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Species common name/ Species/habitat Habitat requirements Status scientific name occurrence Grasshopper sparrow Grasslands and bunchgrass S HN/N (Ammodramus savannarum) prairies. Upland sandpiper Montane meadows >1,000 acres. S HN/N (Bartramia longicauda) Bufflehead Nests in cavities near high S HN/N (Bucephala albeola) mountain lakes surrounded by open woodlands. Open waters on major rivers and lakes outside of the breeding season. Greater sage grouse Sagebrush obligate. Leks in S HN/N (Centrocercus urophasianus) openings in sagebrush. Needs grasses for nesting. Bobolink Mowed moist meadows, grasses, S HN/N (Dolichonyx oryzivorus) sedges, forbs with mesic shrubs. Irrigated hay fields. American peregrine falcon Nests on cliffs >75 feet high. S, DL HN/N (Falco peregrinus anatum) Bald eagle Large bodies of water. Large S, DL HN/N (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) conifers for nesting. Winter roost present in adjoining watershed. Lewis’ woodpecker Open forests, Ponderosa pine S HD/D (Melanerpes lewis) savannah. Nests in large snags in cavities created by other cavity nesters or in very soft snags. White-headed woodpecker Open ponderosa pine forests with S HD/D (Picoides albolarvatus) large trees and snags in large patches. Johnson’s hairstreak Western dwarf mistletoe in large S HN/N (Callophrys johnsoni) ponderosa pine. Silver-bordered fritillary Open wet meadows and bogs. S HN/N (Boloria selene) *There is no designated or proposed critical habitat for Canada lynx in the affected area. Based upon the National Lynx Survey, the Malheur National Forest falls under the designation of “Unoccupied Mapped Lynx Habitat” (USFWS Memo, 2006). There is no effect (NE) expected to Canada lynx.

Table 14 Species status abbreviations and species habitat occurrence Status Species/habitat occurrence Habitat documented or suspected within the project E Federally Endangered HD planning area or near enough to be impacted by project activities Habitat not within the project planning area or T Federally Threatened HN affected by its activities Species documented in general vicinity of project DL Federally Delisted D activities Species suspected in general vicinity of project S Regional Forester's Sensitive Species List S activities Endangered Species Act Candidate Species not documented and not suspected in C N Species general vicinity of project activities

Page 44 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Pallid Bat and Fringed Myotis

Existing Conditions for Bats

Although there are differences between these bat species, threats in common include loss of roost habitat (snags) and degradation of foraging habitat. Therefore the effects for bat species are combined as one discussion.

Pallid Bat—Habitat for pallid bats in Oregon includes drier shrub/steppe habitat and grasslands, often near rocky outcrops and water. Open ponderosa pine forest with cliff habitat is also used (Ferguson and Azerrad 2004, NatureServe 2012). Roosts include rock crevices, buildings, under bridges, and under rock overhangs. Rock piles, hollow trees, and cavities in ponderosa pine are also used (Verts and Carraway 1998). Pallid bats forage for arthropods and insects off the ground; their diet is composed of beetles, moths, crickets, scorpions, centipedes, and an occasional lizard or small rodent (Verts and Carraway 1998).

Within the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area, roost habitat likely exists (or will in the short-term) in the hollow trees and cavities within ponderosa pine snags created by the fire. It is unlikely that optimum foraging habitat exists within the project planning area occurs except in more open areas with new regrowth and nearby residual juniper woodlands.

Fringed Myotis - Fringed myotis use a fairly broad range of habitats and, in eastern Oregon, appear to prefer forested and riparian areas (Csuti et al. 2001). Roost habitat includes caves, mines, cliffs, buildings, and snags. Suitable tree roosting habitat contains late successional ponderosa pine with high-density clusters of snags in early to medium stages of decay (Keinath 2004). Foraging habitat includes a heterogeneous mix of conifer forest, including ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, and shrubland/grassland, with ample water sources and an abundance of insect prey (Keinath 2004).

Threats include disturbance or destruction of roost sites, loss or degradation of water sources and foraging areas, and exposure to pesticides or other toxic chemicals.

Fringed myotis are documented for the Malheur National Forest. Roost habitat likely exists (or will in the short-term) in the hollow trees and cavities within mixed conifer and ponderosa pine snags created by the fire. As with pallid bats, it is unlikely that optimum foraging habitat exists within the project planning area occurs except in more open areas and/or riparian areas with new regrowth.

Bat Habitat

Potential roost habitat includes large trees with dead tops, cracks or cavities; large hollow trees; and large snags. A multiple watershed-scale analysis of snags was done for the project planning area and can be found in the Management Indicator Species for Cavity Excavating Birds section of this report under Dead and Defective Habitat.

A diversity of foraging habitat is also important for these bat species. Unique habitats such as aspen stands increase the diversity of available forage habitat and attract insects that bats rely on. Healthy riparian vegetation also increases insect diversity and abundance, which is important for bats. Within the project planning area there are few, if any acres considered quality foraging habitat for these bat species.

Since proposed project activities only apply to post-fire salvage operations, and therefore dead trees, only snag roosting habitat will be discussed in detail for pallid bat and fringed myotis.

Page 45 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Effects to Pallid Bat and Fringed Myotis

Alternative 1 – No Action

Direct and Indirect Effects Under the no action alternative, no management activities proposed as part of the Project would occur. In the short- to mid-term, post-fire habitat that currently exists within the project planning area would be maintained in the current condition and provide higher density snag roosting habitat across the fire area – particularly in larger ponderosa pine and mixed conifer snags. In the mid- to long-term, snags would begin to decay and break or fall. As this happens, roosting habitat would decrease at the same rate of large snags falling or breaking. However, as this post-fire landscape becomes reforested, foraging opportunities for these species would likely increase across the project planning area as prey density would be expected to equally increase.

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects Please refer to the multiple watershed-scale analysis of snags in the Management Indicator Species section under Dead and Defective Habitat for Cavity Excavating Birds.

Increased understory and plant vigor from wildfire and subsequent salvage would likely increase insect populations, and therefore provide higher quantities of insects and conceivably provide a more diverse prey base for bats in treated areas across the project planning area.

Alteration of roosting, maternity, and hibernacula habitat for bats (e.g., caves, adits, rock faces, buildings, and bridges) would not be expected through implementation of the proposed salvage.

Cumulative Effects The cumulative analysis area considered for pallid bat and fringed myotis is the extent of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire. Past, ongoing, and reasonably foreseeable future activities listed in Table 11 were considered for potential cumulative effects. Several buildings located on private lands were impacted by the fire which could have impacted habitat for bats. It is assumed that caves, adits, and rock faces were not impacted by salvage logging completed on private lands because of the terrain that these habitats occupy. The net effect of implementing the proposed action would be the retention of the majority (94 percent) of snags created by the Canyon Creek Complex fire, or in excess of 90,000 acres. The fire contributed a high density snag “pulse” that created additional snag roosting habitat as well as enhanced forage areas.

The proposed action would not remove or alter major bat roosting habitat such as maternity colonies or hibernacula. Further, snag retention related to the proposed action will be retained in large enough quantities to continue to provide day-roost habitat to bats within the project planning area.

Ongoing and foreseeable snag reduction from firewood cutting and roadside salvage would not be expected to measurably impact the availability of roosting habitat to bats within the analysis area due to the limited extent of roadside salvage and limited access (wilderness, steep terrain) to the area.

For more detailed discussion of the expected cumulative effects of the proposed action to snag and dead wood habitat, please refer to the cumulative effects section for MIS Cavity Excavators below in this document. Further, project design criteria preventing snags from being targeted would expected to be implemented on future projects within or adjacent to the project planning area.

Page 46 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Since no alteration of roosting, maternity, and hibernacula habitat for bats (e.g., caves, adits, rock faces, buildings, and bridges) would not be impacted through the proposed action, ongoing, or reasonably foreseeable future projects, and a large pulse of snag roosting habitat following the Canyon Creek Complex Fire, no adverse cumulative effects would be expected through the implementation of the proposed action.

Determination With their ability to use a broad range of habitats, it is expected that habitat for bats would be affected through implementation of the proposed action. However, habitat alteration in the project planning area would not necessarily deem that habitat unsuitable; it would likely only change the way the habitat would be used by bats.

The proposed action may impact individuals or habitat (MIIH), but will not likely contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability to the population or species because: there could be a degree of displacement or disturbance for bat species during project implementation; dead with incidental green trees providing habitat may be removed; enhancing foraging areas could benefit these species; and treatment could potentially change how affected habitat would be used by bat species.

Lewis’s Woodpecker and White-headed woodpecker

Lewis’s woodpecker and white-headed woodpecker are discussed under the Management Indicator Species section of this document due to their association with dead and defective wood (including post- fire) habitat.

Management Indicator Species The National Forest Management Act (NFMA) directs the Forest Service to provide habitat to maintain viable populations of existing native and desired non-native vertebrate species. Management indicator species were selected for emphasis in planning, and management indicator species are assessed during forest plan implementation in order to determine the effects of management activities on their populations and the populations of other species with similar habitat needs. The amount and quality of habitat is used as a proxy for determining the effects of projects on management indicator species.

The Malheur Forest Plan provides direction for managing habitat quality for management indicator species by management area. Forest-wide Standard 61 of the Forest Plan (USDA Forest Service 1990, page IV–32) directs land managers to “…provide habitat requirements for its selected management indicator species.”

Table 15 lists the terrestrial species selected as management indicator species in the Malheur Forest Plan. Because of area closures, snow level, accessibility issues and time constraints no wildlife surveys have been conducted in the project planning area since the Canyon Creek Complex fire. Therefore, there are no species listed as “documented” in the project planning area, only “predicted” to use the post-fire habitat associated with the Canyon Creek Complex fire. Further, only species that are regularly or strongly associated with snags and/or post-fire habitats will be considered as having “habitat present in analysis area.”

Page 47 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Table 15 Management indicator species identified in the Malheur Forest Plan Habitat Species Species Representing Habitat description present in present in analysis area analysis area Open, late-seral ponderosa pine Lewis’s Dead and defective forest, post-fire habitat, Yes Predicted woodpecker wood habitat cottonwood Red-naped Dead and defective Riparian habitat with aspen, Yes Predicted sapsucker* wood habitat cottonwood Open, late-seral ponderosa pine Williamson’s Dead and defective and mixed conifer forest, aspen Yes Predicted sapsucker wood habitat and cottonwood Downy Dead and defective Riparian habitat with aspen, Yes Predicted woodpecker wood habitat cottonwood Hairy Dead and defective Coniferous forests from low to Yes Predicted woodpecker wood habitat mid elevation, post-fire habitat Post-fire habitat, beetle killed Black-backed Dead and defective forest, conifer forests from Yes Predicted woodpecker wood habitat subalpine to low elevations Dead and defective Northern flicker Forest habitat generalist Yes Predicted wood habitat Forested mountains and Yes; intermittent Rocky Mountain Species commonly meadows with suitable forage Yes use and forage elk hunted (grasses and forbs) in short-term Old growth; dead and Closed canopy, late-seral Pileated defective wood subalpine, montane and lower Yes Predicted woodpecker habitat montane forests American (pine) Closed canopy, late-seral Old growth No Not suspected marten subalpine and montane forests Unknown; Old growth typically Three-toed lodgepole; dead and Subalpine and montane forests, Yes associated with woodpecker defective wood lodgepole pine, post-fire habitat higher elevation habitat habitat White-headed Dead and defective Open, late-seral forests with Yes Predicted woodpecker wood habitat, OFSS ponderosa pine, post-fire habitat *Current taxonomy – replaces yellow-bellied and red-breasted sapsucker listed in the Malheur Forest Plan.

Primary Cavity Excavators Viability of management indicator species is being assessed using the historical range of variability concept comparing current amounts and distribution of habitat to historical conditions (Wisdom et al. 2000, Suring et al. 2011). Scientists assume that species are more likely to persist into the future under the conditions that remain most similar to the conditions that they persisted in during the past (Landres et al. 1999, Samson et al. 2002). By managing habitat within the historical range of variability, it is assumed that adequate habitat would be provided because species survived at those habitat levels in the past. Thus, if we manage current habitats within the historical range of variability, we are likely to do an adequate job of maintaining population viability for those species that remain, by providing quality habitat. The further current habitat conditions are from the historical range of variability, the more likely it is that population viability would be compromised.

Dead and Defective Habitat Analysis of Dead Wood Habitat for the Canyon Creek Complex Fire

Post-fire habitats offer an opportunity to manage for areas of high snag density, which are generated by disturbance events such as fire, insects or disease, but can be limited spatially and temporally at the landscape scale. Over time fire-killed trees fall and become down wood habitat. The abundance and

Page 48 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project distribution of snag and down wood habitat within fire affected areas can be modified by salvage or woodcutting, or by future fire events.

Typically, the primary cavity excavators are analyzed as a group based on wildlife habitat types used in DecAID, however for analysis of salvage operations, specific species were selected for their strong relationship with post-fire habitat. The purpose of this analysis is to provide comprehensive information on the availability of and effects to primary cavity excavators that utilize post-fire habitat.

Analysis Methods Because Malheur Forest Plan standards and guidelines do not address wildlife species use of habitats at various snag densities, the effects analysis employed a landscape-level snag analysis using Gradient Nearest Neighbor (GNN, Ohmann and Gregory 2002) vegetation data, information from DecAID (Decayed Wood Advisor), as well as post-fire predictions using Rapid Assessment of Vegetation Condition after Wildfire (RAVG). The GNN snag densities were updated to account for the mortality caused from the Canyon Creek Complex fire. This post-fire RAVG data set is the basis of the analysis for Wildlife Species Tolerance Levels. This analysis includes three levels of analysis described in DecAID at three scales: 1) a site specific wildlife habitat analysis for the proposed treatment units within Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project (analysis area), 2) a qualitative assessment (distribution analysis) at a 4-subwatershed landscape scale; and 3) a wildlife tolerance level analysis for the area within the analysis area with RAVG coverage (fire perimeter).

Refer to the website www.fsl.orst.edu/lemma for more information on the GNN data. DecAID is a culmination of the most recent science and data available. The information contained in DecAID is based on published scientific literature, research data, expert judgment, and professional experience. It is primarily a statistical summary of published research data for wildlife presence (mainly cavity-nesting birds) and inventoried forest conditions (Mellen-McLean et al. 2012). DecAID presents information on the range of "natural conditions" (as represented by unharvested plots within the plots sampled), "current conditions" (all plots sampled, including both unharvested and harvested plots), and wildlife use.

DecAID contains two major data sets, which are summarized by wildlife habitat types. The vegetative inventory data is composed of statistical summaries of forest inventory data on snags and down wood in unharvested forests and entire landscapes across Oregon and Washington. The wildlife data is derived from a thorough review of published literature and other available data on wildlife use of snags and down wood, primarily in Oregon and Washington. DecAID provides a statistical synthesis of data showing levels of use by individual wildlife species of snags and down wood. Wildlife use data are not available for all structural condition classes in all wildlife habitat types.

Spatial Context for Primary Cavity Excavators Effects Analysis In order to compare the relative abundance of high density dead wood habitat with "natural" or "reference conditions" (predicted using the data in DecAID), an appropriately-sized analysis area was needed to incorporate a landscape large enough so that the amount of area exhibiting high snag densities (resulting from the 2015 fire season) would be representative of the relative abundance of such habitat within a reference landscape (see chapter 2, page 23 for an excerpt of guiding text). Using guidance found in the DecAID Guide (DecAID Implementation: Post-Disturbance Salvage Sales -Determining size of analysis Area for Distribution Analysis of Current Conditions), the area must encompass enough acres within each DecAID habitat type present in the fire area or affected area, to accommodate the scale of disturbance being evaluated as a portion of the total habitat type acres commensurate with the reference condition. The DecAID Advisor provides information on calculating the size of the analysis area http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/wildlife/decaid-guide/salvage-analysis-area.shtml.

Page 49 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Refer to the RAVG program's website: http://www.fs.fed.us/postfirevegcondition for detailed information on RAVG analysis. Refer to the DecAID website for detailed information about cumulative species curves and tolerance levels: http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/wildlife/decaid/run-decaid.shtml.

Based on the RAVG data, 22,510 acres of the eastside mixed conifer wildlife habitat type burned at high- severity in the Canyon Creek Complex fire. Further, 3,938 acres of ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir wildlife habitat type burned at high-severity. Based on information in the implementation guide, our analysis area would need to be at least 112,500 acres of eastside mixed conifer wildlife habitat type (22,510 acres of eastside mixed conifer wildlife habitat type) to mimic expected historic conditions (only 20 percent of the landscape in high-severity post-fire habitat of wildlife habitat type). The analysis area for ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir would be much smaller (19,690 acres), however for consistent analysis boundaries the subwatersheds needed to satisfy the requirements of the larger of the two analysis areas was selected.

The analysis area selected for conducting the qualitative assessment (distribution analysis) includes 4 sub- watersheds that when combined capture the mortality data for the Canyon Creek Complex area including Bear Creek, Canyon Creek, Grub Creek, and Headwaters Malheur River subwatersheds and totals 123,881 acres of eastside mixed conifer wildlife habitat type and 45,826 acres of ponderosa pine/Douglas- fir wildlife habitat type. Other wildlife habitat types would not be affected by proposed salvage activities and therefore were not included. Snag density distributions were compared to the underlying data on species use of various snag densities provided in DecAID.

Eleven species (all woodpeckers) were selected as indicators for dead and defective tree habitat because they are primary cavity excavators, that is, they create their own nesting holes in dead and defective trees. The holes which they create are in turn used by many other species. By providing habitat for these woodpeckers, we are also providing habitat for the other cavity-dependent species. However, because of their documented use of post-fire habitats only a subset of these species were selected to represent the effects of the proposed salvage activities. These include black-backed woodpecker, northern flicker, hairy woodpecker, Lewis’ woodpecker, and white-headed woodpecker.

Several assumptions were made in this analysis:

1. Areas meeting or exceeding the 80 percent tolerance level for snag density represent snag pulses created by large events like wildfire or insects and disease events (Mellen-McLean et al. 2012). 2. Unharvested inventory plot data (plots with and without measureable snags) from the DecAID data set represent a natural or reference condition that approximates historic distribution and density of snags for the analysis area, the historical range of variability. 3. Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities from Mellen-McLean et al. (2015) contained in the DecAID data set represent how species would use similar habitat within the analysis area. 4. By managing habitat within historical range of variability it is assumed that adequate habitat will be provided because species survived with those levels of habitat in the past to be present today (Mellen- McLean et al. 2012) Because these management indicator species were selected to represent dead and defective wood habitat, this analysis and discussion focuses primarily on that habitat component. Additional information on cavity-excavating bird species’ habitat associations, distribution and life history requirements is summarized in Mellen-McLean (2012a).

A few management indicator species woodpeckers are discussed in more detail due to conservation concerns, association with post-fire habitat, and being subjects of the research. Black-backed woodpecker are ranked as vulnerable (S3) by NatureServe and are discussed in more detail below. Lewis’s

Page 50 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project woodpecker and white-headed woodpecker are listed as USFS Sensitive. The pileated woodpecker and three-toed woodpecker are also management indicator species for old-growth habitats and are not discussed in detail but represented in the Old-Growth Network analysis section of this document.

Table 16 Conservation status of cavity-nesting management indicator species USFS NatureServe Ranks1 Species Sensitive Global OR Black-backed woodpecker Widespread, abundant, secure Vulnerable Downy woodpecker Widespread, abundant, secure Apparently secure Hairy woodpecker Widespread, abundant, secure Apparently secure Lewis’s woodpecker Yes Apparently secure Vulnerable, imperiled Northern flicker Widespread, abundant, secure Widespread, abundant, secure Three-toed woodpecker Widespread, abundant, secure Vulnerable Red-naped sapsucker Widespread, abundant, secure Apparently secure White-headed woodpecker Yes Apparently secure Vulnerable, imperiled Williamson’s sapsucker Widespread, abundant, secure Apparently secure, vulnerable 1 NatureServe 2010 G5 or S5 – Widespread, abundant, secure G4 or S4 – Apparently secure G3 or S3 – Vulnerable G2 or S2 – Imperiled

In general, populations of cavity-nesting birds have declined across the Blue Mountains compared to historical conditions, primarily due to reductions in the numbers of large snags (Wisdom et al. 2000).

Current Malheur Forest Plan direction, as amended by the Eastside Screens, is to maintain snags at 100 percent of biological potential for all woodpecker species that occur on the Forest throughout the stand rotation. This equates to 2.25 snags per acre greater than 12 inches diameter at breast height and 0.14 snags per acre greater than 20 inches diameter at breast height. Snags can be averaged over an area no larger than 40 acres. Snags should be left in a clumped distribution.

Rose et al. (2001) report that results of monitoring indicates that biological potential models are a flawed technique. New information about the ecology, dynamics, and management of decayed wood has been published since the biological potential concept was developed, and the state of the knowledge continues to change. However, until the Malheur Forest Plan is amended to reflect new science, 100 percent biological potential is the minimum number of snags that need to be maintained through the life of the stand rotation.

The latest science is incorporated into this analysis using DecAID Advisor (version 2.2) (Mellen-McLean et al. 2012). DecAID is an internet-based summary, synthesis, and integration (a “meta-analysis”) of the best available science: published scientific literature, research data, wildlife databases, forest inventory databases, and expert judgment and experience. In addition to data showing wildlife use of dead wood, DecAID also contains data showing amounts and sizes of dead wood across the landscape based on vegetation inventory data. The comprehensive wildlife and habitat-related literature synthesized within DecAID are incorporated into this analysis by reference to the DecAID database when discussing the expected effects of the proposed action. More specifically, the database includes extensive literature regarding habitat use and life cycle requirements of the applicable cavity excavators in post-fire environments that was relied on heavily for the distribution and tolerance level analyses. Further, literature reviews or “white papers” (Mellen-McLean 2012a; 2013) were reviewed to help determine any anticipated effects from the proposed action and the severity of those effects. Please review these documents in the project record for more information regarding black-backed woodpeckers and other cavity excavators.

Page 51 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Data from unharvested plots are assessed separately and these data can be used as a reference condition to approximate the historical range of variability of dead wood. There is debate among professionals about the impact fire exclusion has on stands relative to historical range of variability of dead wood. One caveat to using these data, on the eastside in particular, is current levels of dead wood may be elevated above historical conditions due to fire suppression and increased mortality, and may be depleted below historical levels in local areas burned by intense fire or subjected to repeated salvage and firewood cutting (Mellen-McLean et al. 2012). Even with this caveat, these reference condition data are used in this analysis because they are some of the best data available to assess historical range of variability of dead wood, even in eastside dry forests; they are the only available data showing distribution and variation in snag and down wood amounts across the landscape; and the data from unharvested stands are in the range of other published data on historical range of variability of dead wood, even in the drier vegetation types (Mellen-McLean 2011). For a full discussion go to the website: http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/wildlife/decaid-guide/hrv-dead-wood-comparison.shtml.

A distribution analysis (http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/wildlife/decaid-guide/distribution-analysis-green- tree.shtml) was used to determine how close current conditions for dead wood on the landscape match reference conditions. Existing conditions for dead and down wood were derived by using gradient nearest neighbor (GNN) data (LEMMA). GNN produces pixel-based maps with associated snag and down wood data. These maps provide the direct data necessary to construct “current situation” histograms. GNN uses the same data that were used to develop the distribution histograms for DecAID. For more information see Ohmann and Gregory (2002), and go to the website: http://www.fsl.orst.edu/lemma/main.php?project=imap&id=home.

GNN data are based on 2012 imagery and have been updated for fires through 2015 (analysis background and details on file at the Malheur National Forest).

The distribution analysis results were compared to the needs of woodpecker species using tolerance levels and intervals (range between 2 tolerance levels) from DecAID. A tolerance interval is similar to the more commonly used confidence interval but with a key difference: tolerance intervals are estimates of the percentage of all individuals in the population that are within some specified range of values. In comparison, confidence intervals are estimates of sample means from the population of interest. For more information see Marcot et al. (2010) and go to the website: http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/wildlife/decaid/pages/What-is-a-tolerance-level.html.

An applied use of a tolerance level is as follows. If the 50 percent tolerance level for snag density at pileated woodpecker nest sites in a specific wildlife habitat type is 7.8 snags per acre, the interpretation would be that 50 percent of nest sites used by pileated woodpeckers in that habitat have less than 7.8 snags per acre and 50 percent of nest sites used by pileated woodpeckers have more than 7.8 snags per acre.

Existing Condition Distribution Analysis

The ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir and eastside mixed-conifer wildlife habitat types occur in the analysis area in an adequate amount (>12,800 acres) for accurate analysis and are discussed below. Results of the DecAID distribution analysis are displayed in Figure 6 and Figure 7. Tolerance levels for woodpeckers in these wildlife habitat types are displayed in Table 21 and Table 22.

A weighted average between all four subwatersheds was used to calculate current conditions in each wildlife habitat type so that enough acres were included for the most accurate analysis.

Page 52 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir Wildlife Habitat Type

In the Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir Wildlife Habitat Type the landscape is above reference conditions for densities of large snags (>20 inches diameter at breast height) except in the 2-4 snags per acre category which is 25 percent less than reference condition (Figure 6) The current and historical landscape would have been absent of large snag densities greater than 18 inches diameter at breast height. However, density classes from 6-18 large snags per acre are above reference conditions, indicating an adequate amount of large snags across this landscape.

The landscape is substantially above reference condition for snags >10 inches diameter at breast height in density classes above 8 snags per acre (Figure 6). There is currently less area on the landscape with 0 – 8 snags per acre >10 inches diameter at breast height than would have been expected historically and more of the landscape with more than 8 snags per acre >10 inches diameter at breast height. These data suggest that sufficient small snag habitat exists across the landscape in this wildlife habitat type.

Although the ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir wildlife habitat type represents a smaller proportion of the landscape than eastside mixed conifer wildlife habitat type, most woodpecker species using this wildlife habitat type should currently have an adequate amount of snag habitat on the landscape. Large snag habitat needed for species like pileated woodpecker and Williamson’s sapsucker is typically rare in this wildlife habitat type both currently and with reference conditions.

Eastside Mixed-Conifer Wildlife Habitat Type

In the eastside mixed-conifer wildlife habitat type, the landscape in the project planning area is deficit in snag density classes between 2 and 10 snags per acre for large snags (>20 inches diameter at breast height), and at or near reference conditions in higher density classes above 10 snags per acres. Thirty-six percent of the current and historical landscape in eastside mixed conifer wildlife habitat type does not contain any large snags (see Figure 7)(A).

For snags larger than 10 inches diameter at breast height, the landscape is below reference conditions for snag density classes below 24 snags per acre (see Figure 7)(B). However, the proportion of the landscape with high snag densities (>24 snags per acre) is substantially higher than historical conditions. Distribution of snag densities across the Malheur National Forest in the eastside mixed conifer wildlife habitat type is similar to this landscape (USDA Forest Service 2014).

Tolerance Level Analysis

Tables 17-20 that follow are compilations of synthesized data found in DecAID for wildlife use of snags in post-fire conditions of stand replacement fire for management indicator species or threatened and endangered species on the Malheur

Table 17 Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities for 10 inch and greater diameter at breast height snags in recent post-fire eastside mixed conifer DecAID wildlife habitat type 30 percent tolerance 50 percent tolerance 80 percent tolerance Species level snag density level snag density level snag density (#/acre) (#/acre) (#/acre) Black-backed woodpecker 56.1 81.1 117.6 Lewis’ woodpecker 24.8 43.0 71.0 Northern flicker 25.0 48.0 83.1 White-headed woodpecker 0.0 40.0 118.4 Hairy woodpecker 39.2 63.3 100

Page 53 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Table 18 Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities for 20 inch and greater diameter at breast height recent post-fire Eastside mixed conifer DecAID wildlife habitat type 30 percent tolerance 50 percent tolerance 80 percent tolerance Species level snag density level snag density level snag density (#/acre) (#/acre) (#/acre) Lewis’s woodpecker 0.0 6.2 16.1 Northern flicker 2.2 17.4 39.6 Table 19 Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities for 10 inches and greater diameter at breast height recent post-fire ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir DecAID wildlife habitat type 30 percent tolerance 50 percent tolerance 80 percent tolerance Species level snag density level snag density level snag density (#/acre) (#/acre) (#/acre) Black-backed woodpecker 37.4 52.8 76.5 Lewis’ woodpecker 24.7 42.7 70.6 Northern flicker 25.0 44.9 83.1 White-headed woodpecker 22.2 40.9 68.3 Hairy woodpecker 39.2 63.3 100

Table 20 Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities for 20 inch and greater diameter at breast height recent post-fire ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir DecAID wildlife habitat type 30 percent tolerance 50 percent tolerance 80 percent tolerance Species level snag density level snag density level snag density (#/acre) (#/acre) (#/acre) Lewis’s woodpecker 0.0 6.2 16.1 Northern flicker 2.2 17.4 39.6

Page 54 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

A. B.

Figure 6 (Left) 6A. and (Right) 6B - Comparison of the historical range of variability to current condition for snag density classes in the ponderosa pine/Douglas fir wildlife habitat type Canyon Creek Complex Salvage Project analysis area (see description that follows)

Figure 6A displays snags >20 inches diameter at breast height; figure 6B displays snags >10 inches diameter at breast height. 50 percent tolerance levels for wildlife species are displayed on figure 6A. 30, 50, and 80 percent tolerance levels for black-backed woodpeckers are displayed on figure 6B. Historical range of variability reference condition derived from DecAID

Table 21 Tolerance levels for woodpeckers occurring in the ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir wildlife habitat type Snag density/acre for 30, 50, and 80 percent tolerance levels Species Green forests Recent post-fire >10 inches diameter at breast height (dbh) >20 inches dbh >10 inches dbh >20 inches dbh Black-backed woodpecker 2.5, 13.6, 29.2 0.0, 1.4, 5.7 37.4, 52.8, 76.5 Hairy woodpecker 39.2, 63.3, 100.0 Lewis’s woodpecker 24.7, 42.7, 70.6 0.0, 6.2, 16.1 Northern flicker 25.0, 44.9, 83.1 2.2, 17.4, 39.6 White-headed woodpecker 0.0, 3.9, 11.9 0.5, 1.8, 3.8 22.2, 40.9, 68.3 Williamson’s sapsucker 14.0, 28.4, 49.7 3.0, 8.4, 16.3

Page 55 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

A. B.

Figure 7 Comparison of the historical range of variability to current condition for snag density classes in the Eastside Mixed Conifer wildlife habitat type portion of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project analysis area.

Figure 7A displays snags >20 inches diameter at breast height; figure 7B displays snags >10 inches diameter at breast height. 50 percent tolerance levels for wildlife species are displayed on figure 7A. 30, 50, and 80 percent tolerance levels for black-backed woodpeckers are displayed on figure 7B.

Table 22 Tolerance levels for woodpeckers occurring in the Eastside Mixed Conifer Wildlife Habitat Type Snag density/acre for 30, 50, and 80 percent tolerance levels Species Green forests Recent post-fire >10 inches diameter at breast height (dbh) >20 inches dbh >10 inches dbh >20 inches dbh Black-backed woodpecker 2.5, 13.6, 29.2 0.0, 1.4, 5.7 56.1, 81.1, 117.6 Hairy woodpecker 39.2, 63.3, 100 Lewis’s woodpecker 24.8, 43, 71 0.0, 6.2, 16.1 Northern flicker 25, 48, 83.1 2.2, 17.4, 39.6 Pileated woodpecker 14.9, 30.1, 49.3 3.5, 7.8, 18.4 White-headed woodpecker 0.3, 1.5, 3.8 0.0, 1.5, 3.8 0, 40, 118.4 Williamson’s sapsucker 3.3, 8.6, 16.6 3.3, 8.6, 16.6

Page 56 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Alternative 1 - No Action

Direct and Indirect Effects on Dead and Defective Habitat and Post Fire Cavity Excavators Refer to the Silviculture Report for the expected future vegetation conditions under the no action alternative.

Under the no action alternative, existing levels of snags and downed wood would remain fairly constant in the area in the short- to mid-term. Since no management activities would be implemented, there would be no loss of existing snags or downed wood from project implementation activities. In the short- to mid- term, large diameter snags would continue to exist at their current levels, except for snags lost to firewood cutting. In the long-term, a decrease in snag densities would be expected over time. Without treatment, mortality would not be reduced in any stands and continued fire suppression and multi-strata development may increase the chance of insect infestations and disease). Insect and disease infestation could potentially increase mortality, and therefore increase snag densities over time. Downed wood densities would be expected to increase as existing snags fall.

In the short-term, habitat would remain unchanged and the no action alternative would have minimal effects on primary cavity excavators found within the project planning area. Snag habitat within the fire area is serving as intermittent habitat for most cavity excavators (Saab, Dudley and Thompson 2004). Snag numbers would not continually increase over time because the process of tree mortality and snag recruitment are balanced by the processes of snag decay and fall (Everett et al. 1999). Over time, snag habitat would decrease creating a gap in snag density during the time period in which most of the snags would have fallen and there are few green trees of sufficient size to provide recruitment. This is particularly true of stand replacement areas where little snag habitat would exist between the period of large scale snag fall and future tree mortality (snag recruitment). Dahms (1949) found 10 years post-fire, 50 percent of fire killed ponderosa pine snags remained standing but this declined to 22 percent standing after 22 years. Others estimate that about 75 percent of all snags may fall within 20 years (Keen 1929, Dahms 1949, Parks et al. 1999, and Everett et al. 1999). For Douglas-fir and grand fir the fall rate is much faster. The current post-fire landscape is providing an immediate increase in snag habitat and potentially some woodpecker species. However, this habitat would likely be reduced as snags naturally fall in the mid-term. Implementation of this alternative would not alter snag densities across the analysis area.

No reforestation of desired tree species (ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir and western larch) would occur. Areas that experienced stand-replacement and mixed mortality fires would be dependent natural reforestation. Delayed reforestation would likely increase the longevity of shrub dominance or less desirable conifer species. Natural tree regeneration would be expected to consist of grand fir, ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, western larch, lodgepole pine and juniper.

No riparian restoration activities associated with burned areas in the East Fork Canyon Creek, Upper Canyon Creek and Middle Canyon Creek would be implemented. Forgoing these actions would delay establishment of riparian shrubs in riparian zones, facilitate invasion of less desirable species such as juniper, annual grasses and weeds compromising the functionality and integrity of future riparian habitat.

Cumulative Effects In the absence of additional large, stand replacing disturbances on the Forest, the Canyon Creek Complex Fire area and surrounding landscape would likely experience a “snag gap” in the long-term. A snag gap is the amount of time between substantial losses of snags created from the fire from natural falling (i.e., breaking, high winds) and when the regenerated stands begin producing snags at natural rates. This snag

Page 57 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment gap would be expected to last decades. This is not an effect from the project activities, rather an effect of the fire. However, it is important to understand that the pulse in snags on the landscape would not be available or beneficial for primary cavity excavator species in the long-term.

The fire area would experience a snag gap with or without implementing the proposed project activities. Thus, this would not be considered an indirect impact of the project.

Because there are no direct or indirect effects to primary cavity excavator species from implementation of the no action alternative, there would be no cumulative effects.

Conclusion The no action alternative would not affect dead and defective wood habitat and therefore would not contribute to a negative trend in viability for management indicator species dead and defective wood habitat dependent species, such as primary cavity excavators, on the Malheur National Forest.

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects on Dead and Defective Habitat and Post Fire Cavity Excavators Forest structure and avian communities change fairly rapidly after a fire depending on differences in prey availability, and the size, distribution and age of snag habitat. Kotliar et al. (2002) reports in a review of literature associated with effects of fire and post-fire salvage logging that black-backed woodpeckers and three-toed woodpeckers rapidly colonize stand replacement burns within 1 to 2 years and are rare within 5 years due to declines in bark and wood boring beetles. Further, although relative abundance of black- backed woodpeckers are higher in unsalvaged areas, (Cahall 2007), they seem to prefer higher densities of small snags >6 inches diameter at breast height (Forristal 2009). In contrast, Lewis’s woodpeckers have been found to be abundant in both recent (2 to 4 year) and older burns (10 to 25 years) which may be associated with arthropod prey availability and the woodpecker’s preference for low density snag areas. Hairy woodpeckers and northern flickers have shown mixed responses but usually decline within the first 25 years post-fire.

High tree mortality in eastside mixed conifer currently provides a snag pulse, and there are opportunities to provide a variety of snag densities to avian species that utilize post fire habitats. Mixed and underburned fire intensity in ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir types provides habitat for a variety of species that prefer open stands with residual large live trees. Some wildlife species find preferred habitat in stand replacement burns, while others find preferred habitat in unburned stands.

Site Specific (Fire Perimeter) Snag Habitat Analysis

Forty-nine (49) percent of the total burn area on land administered by the USFS (44,396 acres) reached a mortality level greater than 50 percent. Out of those acres, about 28,396 acres were in the eastside mixed conifer wildlife habitat type, and about 5,620 were in the ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir wildlife habitat type. Approximately 1,210 total acres are being proposed for salvage harvest. Of those, 785 acres would apply to eastside mixed conifer wildlife habitat type, and 301 would apply to ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir wildlife habitat type. The remaining acres would a small, intermittent mix of lower mortality areas, lodgepole pine wildlife habitat type, and about 14 acres of montane mixed conifer wildlife habitat type. These wildlife habitat type were not analyzed as they make up a negligible proportion of the treatments areas, and overall landscape.

In the eastside mixed conifer wildlife habitat type that reached over 50 percent mortality, only 2.7 percent is being proposed for treatment. Further, in the ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir wildlife habitat type that reached over 50 percent mortality, only 5.3 percent is being proposed for salvage harvest. Although

Page 58 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project species like black-backed woodpecker prefer un-salvaged areas, the proposed treatments would not remove all snags from treatment areas and habitat within the treatment units would remain suitable for most primary cavity excavator species. All snags between 9 and 15 inches diameter at breast height would be retained in treatment units, providing the snag sizes that nesting black-backed woodpeckers appear to prefer. Altogether, 27,611 acres of post-fire eastside mixed conifer wildlife habitat type and 5,319 acres of ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir wildlife habitat type would remain untreated within the fire perimeter on lands administered by the Forest Service.

Implementation Activities

During project implementation, primary cavity excavator species utilizing the area would likely be displaced by increased traffic and human presence/activities. The salvage operations would be implemented after the nesting season for primary cavity excavator species so no loss of current nests or broods would be expected. However, trees selected for harvest providing forage or cavities for secondary nesters could be lost depending on the density of cavities and selection and retention needs to meet the objectives of the research project.

Road Activities

Other than temporary displacement from increased activities, noise and disturbance during applicable implementation, the proposed road activities would not be expected to have any direct effect on primary cavity excavator species.

Since roadside hazard tree removal is ongoing in the fire area, most snags identified as safety hazards would have already been removed limiting the contribution of further snag loss from road activities proposed in this project. Although, some additional snags be removed along routes identified as temporary construction (4-miles) as well as any additionally identified hazards from delayed mortality. However, the number of snags removed would only be those identified as imminent danger and would likely not be a high number of snags. Further, effectively closing or decommissioning these temporary roads would limit or eliminate the additional loss of snags from firewood cutting. Currently closed roads that would be re-opened for haul would also be reclosed upon salvage completion. Effective closures, especially where closures are currently ineffective, would further limit loss of snags from firewood cutting.

Reforestation

The reforestation efforts would not have immediate impacts on primary cavity excavator species. Regeneration of ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, and larch would eventually move the forest towards a mixed of desired early-seral conifers including Douglas-fir, western larch, and ponderosa pine. Regenerating and managing stands toward more historic conditions of open, early-seral forests may result in growing large diameter trees at a faster rate than natural regeneration. Ultimately, in the long-term, these regenerated stands would begin to provide large trees and large snags, although that would not be expected for decades.

Grand fir would be expected to naturally regenerate regardless of planting more desirable tree species, so it is unlikely that the future foraging substrate (often provided by dead and dying grand-fir) for primary cavity excavator species would be limited by the establishment of ponderosa pine, western larch, and Douglas-fir.

Page 59 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Site Specific Snag Habitat Analysis Conclusion

Even if treatment units were to be considered unsuitable for target primary cavity excavators (which would not meet the needs of the research project), there would still be a substantial net gain of suitable post-fire habitat created from the Canyon Creek Fire Complex.

With the small proportion of the landscape combined with selective snag retention gradients therein being proposed for salvage, extensive suitable post-fire habitat would remain in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire area for primary cavity excavator species utilizing the post-fire environment. Primary cavity excavating individuals may be affected by implementation of the proposed action from displacement and minor loss of foraging and nesting snag habitat. However, because of the recent “pulse” of snags, an extensive amount of suitable habitat created from the Canyon Creek Complex Fire, and the selective, gradient approach to treatments, no viability concerns for primary cavity excavator species would be expected from implementation of the proposed salvage operations. In the short-term, either alternative would likely result in an increase in nesting success and ultimately an increase in populations of primary cavity excavator species.

In the absence of additional large, stand replacing disturbances on the Forest, the Canyon Creek Complex Fire area and surrounding landscape will likely experience a “snag gap” in the long-term. A snag gap is the amount of time between substantial losses of snags created from the fire from natural falling (i.e. breaking, high winds) and when the regenerated stands begin producing snags at natural rates. This snag gap would be expected to last decades. This is not an effect from the project activities, rather an effect of the fire. However, it is important to understand that the pulse in snags on the landscape would not be available or beneficial for primary cavity excavator species in the long-term.

The fire area would experience a snag gap with or without the proposed project activities, although implementing the proposed action would remove additional snags that would otherwise be available in the short-term. This, combined with the extent of post-fire snag habitat created and retained on the landscape, and the proposed treatments designed to retain suitable nesting habitat within the units provides that additional, measurable effects from the proposed salvage activities would not be expected from activities proposed in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project.

Distribution of Snags The density classes and proportion of the landscape therein as discussed in this section coincides with information presented in Figure 6 and Figure 7 above. Please refer to these figures if needed.

Eastside Mixed Conifer Wildlife Habitat Type

Large snag (>20 inches diameter at breast height) habitat in the eastside mixed conifer wildlife habitat type is below reference conditions in density classes between 2 and 10 snags per acre and represents about 34,686 acres (28 percent) of the landscape. However, snag densities between 0 and 2 snags per acre (different category than 0 snags per acre) also exist on about 28 percent of the landscape, which is more than double the proportion of the landscape in this wildlife habitat type what would have historically been in this density class. Further, approximately 44,597 acres (36 percent) of the landscape in this wildlife habitat type have no snags, which is what would have been expected historically. The remaining 8 percent of the landscape, or about 9,910 acres, is providing large snag habitat equal to reference conditions and includes density classes of more than 10 large snags per acre.

When smaller snags (>10 inches diameter at breast height) are considered in the distribution analysis for the eastside mixed conifer wildlife habitat type, the landscape is below reference conditions in snag densities less than 24 snags per acre. However, approximately 30 percent of this wildlife habitat type

Page 60 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project across the distribution analysis area (37,164 acres) contain more than 24 snags per acre and are well above reference conditions. An additional 39 percent (48,313 acres) is expected to have no snags per acre as opposed to 22 percent (27,253 acres) historically. Therefore, 31 percent (38,403 acres) of this wildlife habitat type is below historic densities of small snags.

Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir Wildlife Habitat Type

Large snag habitat in the ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir wildlife habitat type is at or above reference conditions in all density classes except between 2 and 4 snags per acre. The landscape is slightly below reference conditions in this density class and represents about 9 percent (4,124 acres) of the landscape in this wildlife habitat type, as opposed to 12 percent that would have been expected under reference conditions. Further, less of this wildlife habitat type is expected to have no snags than reference conditions (which means more of this wildlife habitat type contains snags). The proportion of the landscape expected have no snags is about 57 percent (26,120 acres) as opposed to 68 percent at reference conditions. Large snag densities less than 2 snags per acre is higher than reference conditions and represents about 28 percent (12,831 acres) of this wildlife habitat type as opposed to 17 percent expected historically (representing higher snag densities than expected). Snag densities between 4 and 18 snags per acre are at or slightly above reference conditions and represent approximately 6 percent (2,749 acres) of this wildlife habitat type. Very little, if any of the current or reference landscape would be expected to have more than 18 snags per acre. Ultimately, about 34 percent of the ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir wildlife habitat type across the landscape is currently providing large snag habitat above what would be expected at reference conditions.

For all snags greater than 10 inches diameter at breast height in the ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir wildlife habitat type, the landscape is below reference condition in snag densities less than 8 snags per acre. However, only about 11 percent of the landscape (5,040 acres) currently has less than 8 snags per acre and an additional 37 percent (16,955 acres) is expected to have no snags. The proportion of the landscape with no snags is substantially less than would have been historically present (again, higher densities across the landscape). Small snag densities higher than 8 snags per acre are well above reference conditions and represent about 51 percent of this wildlife habitat type (23,371 acres).

In the short-term, the activities proposed would not be expected to increase deficits in density classes where deficits exist. Because proposed salvage activities were designed to research the effects of different treatment gradients on post-fire habitat for different excavators that utilize stand-replacing burn areas, the treatment units were targeted due to their higher proportion of high-severity fire. With only dead trees being selectively harvested at prescribed gradient levels to reach the needed levels of snag retention by size class, it would be expected that harvest activities would occur in the highest snag density classes on the landscape. According to DecAID distribution analysis, small and large snag distributions in both the eastside mixed conifer and ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir wildlife habitat types are at or above reference conditions in the higher density classes.

Due to the varying snag and density retention gradients needed for research, the acres affected by harvest activities would not be vacant of snags or snag habitat suitable for nesting, particularly for black-backed woodpeckers. These acres would likely slightly shift from acres in higher density classes to acres in lower density classes in the associated wildlife habitat type and snag size classes. Please refer to Table 5 to review the retention guidelines and how those acres could potentially be re-distributed into different density classes.

Since the distribution analysis is based on a large, multiple subwatershed scale, treatment activities should be examined in context at the same scale. In the distribution analysis area, there are about 123,881 acres of eastside mixed conifer wildlife habitat type, and 45,826 acres of ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir wildlife

Page 61 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment habitat type. Approximately 785 acres of eastside mixed conifer wildlife habitat type is being proposed for some level of salvage, or about 0.6 percent of what exists on the larger landscape. Further, 301 acres of ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir wildlife habitat type are proposed for some level of salvage, or 0.7 percent is what exists in the distribution analysis area. Because of this negligible proportion of the landscape being proposed for salvage activities, it is not expected that the removal of snags within the proposed treatment units would have noticeable effects to snag distribution on the landscape. Further, with the retention guidelines, shifts in density classes in either wildlife habitat type would occur, however the shifts would likely not even be detectable at the scale used for this analysis.

Conclusion for Distribution Analysis The landscape appears to be at or above reference conditions in the higher density classes in both wildlife habitat types for both large and small snags. This is likely a result of a “pulse” of snags created by extensive high-severity, high-mortality fire that occurred in the Canyon Creek Complex. Since treatment units are proposed for areas of high-mortality (high snag density), and treatments were designed to examine the effects of different snag retention gradients (meaning treated acres would need to retain some level of suitable nesting habitat), distribution of large and small snags on the landscape would be slightly affected. The acres of treated units would retain fewer snags per acre, and therefore those acres would shift to lower density classes. The negligible proportion of the landscape that is being proposed for harvest in the salvage project, however, alleviates concerns regarding adequate snag distribution across the landscape.

No viability concerns to species or populations of primary cavity excavators from inadequate snag density distribution would be expected on the Forest from implementation of the proposed action. Since the proposed action would not threaten the viability of these local populations, the proposed action would not be expected to have any effect on the persistence of these species over time.

Tolerance Levels It was not feasible to determine the exact proportion of the landscape specifically at 30 percent, 50 percent or 80 percent tolerance levels where that tolerance level for each species was beyond the highest density category. This was the case for all species associated with small snags (>10 inches diameter at breast height) in each wildlife habitat type except for the white-headed woodpecker, where the 30 percent tolerance level was less than the highest density class categorized by DecAID data. In this case, the highest density classes categorized for small snags is >36 snags per acre in the eastside mixed conifer wildlife habitat type and >24 small snags per acre in the ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir wildlife habitat type.

To clarify, the tolerance levels discussed (30 percent, 50 percent, and 80 percent) are simply benchmark levels for analysis and discussion purposes. When discussing existing tolerance levels as compared to expected reference conditions of associated density classes, the assumption is made that if snag density classes of the higher tolerance levels are at or above reference conditions and lower tolerance level classes are below, more individuals in the population will use the habitat for nesting as opposed to the lower density classes. For example, if current conditions at 50 percent tolerance level for a particular species is below reference conditions, but the landscape is at or above at the 80 percent tolerance level for that species, more individuals of that species would nest in that habitat than at the 50 percent tolerance level. Thus, habitat being below reference conditions at the 50 percent tolerance level is irrelevant to the viability of the species in this example, as habitat is being provided at a higher tolerance level classes. Again, these tolerance levels were selected to be used as benchmark numbers for discussion and analysis.

Page 62 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Eastside Mixed Conifer Wildlife Habitat Type

For Lewis’s woodpecker, the eastside mixed conifer wildlife habitat type across the landscape is currently providing large snag (>20 inches diameter at breast height) habitat at reference conditions at the 30 percent tolerance level (0 snags per acre), below reference conditions at the 50 percent tolerance level (6.2 snags per acre), and at reference conditions at the 80 percent tolerance level (16.1 snags per acre). Further, approximately 44,597 acres (36 percent) of the eastside mixed conifer wildlife habitat type across the landscape are available at the 30 percent tolerance level, 8,671 acres (7 percent) at 50 percent tolerance levels, and 9,910 acres (8 percent) at 80 percent tolerance levels.

Large snag distribution in the eastside mixed conifer wildlife habitat type across the landscape is providing northern flicker habitat near (slightly below) reference conditions at the 30 percent tolerance level (2.2 snags per acre), and at reference conditions at the 50 percent (17.4 snags per acre) and 80 percent (39.6 snags per acre) tolerance levels. Approximately 6,415 acres (14 percent) of the landscape in eastside mixed conifer wildlife habitat type is providing habitat at the 30 percent tolerance level for northern flicker, 7,432 acres (6 percent) at 50 percent tolerance levels, and 2,477 acres (2 percent) at 80 percent tolerance levels.

The eastside mixed conifer wildlife habitat type is providing small snag habitat (>10 inches diameter at breast height) below reference conditions for white-headed woodpecker at the 30 percent tolerance level (22.2 snags per acre). However, the landscape is above reference conditions at 30 percent tolerance levels for black-backed woodpecker, Lewis’s woodpecker, and northern flicker. Further, small snag densities are above reference condition at the 50 percent and 80 percent tolerance level for all of the aforementioned woodpecker species. Approximately 30 percent of this wildlife habitat type across the distribution analysis area (37,164 acres) is providing these small snag densities above reference conditions.

Since salvage activities would only occur in areas of stand replacing fire and to ensure tolerance levels are adequately analyzed, it is assumed that any salvage harvest activities would occur in the highest density classes (where specific proportions of the landscape cannot be determined), or in areas providing habitat at 80 percent tolerance levels for the appropriate species. Therefore, out of the 785 acres being proposed for harvest in the eastside mixed conifer wildlife habitat type, it would be expected that all of those acres are providing large snag densities at 80 percent tolerance levels for the appropriate species and contain more than 36 small snags per acre.

Approximately 8 percent of the landscape (9,910 acres) is providing large snag habitat at the 80 percent tolerance level for Lewis’s woodpecker, and about 2 percent (2,477 acres) at the 80 percent tolerance level for northern flicker. Assuming all proposed harvest activities occurred in these high density habitats, Lewis’s woodpecker habitat at the 80 percent tolerance level would be reduced by about 8 percent (785 acres of 9,910 acres) to about 7 percent of the landscape – a <1 percent reduction. However, the area providing habitat at the 80 percent tolerance level for northern flicker would be reduced by about 32 percent. This equates to about 2 percent of the landscape providing this habitat down to about 1.3 percent, which is slightly below reference conditions specifically for post-fire habitat.

The landscape is substantially above reference conditions in high density, small snag habitat. About 14 percent, or 17,343 acres, of this wildlife habitat type is categorized in the highest snag density class (>36 snags per acre). Assuming all of the proposed salvage harvest would occur in these areas and all snags from 9 to 15 inches diameter at breast height being retained, there would be less than a 1 percent reduction in this density class on the landscape, leaving high density, small snag habitat in the eastside mixed conifer wildlife habitat type well above reference conditions, providing small snag habitat above reference conditions at the 50 percent and 80 percent tolerance levels for black-backed woodpeckers, Lewis’s woodpeckers, northern flicker and white-headed woodpeckers.

Page 63 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Ponderosa/Douglas-fir Wildlife Habitat Type

The ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir wildlife habitat type is providing large snag (>20”) habitat below reference condition at the 30 percent tolerance level (0 snags per acre – less of the wildlife habitat type has no snags per acre than reference conditions) and above reference conditions at 50 percent tolerance level (6.2 snags per acre) and 80 percent tolerance level (16.1 snags per acre) for Lewis’s woodpecker. There is approximately 57 percent (26,120 acres) of the landscape providing large snag habitat at 30 percent tolerance level, and about 2 percent (916 acres) of this wildlife habitat type providing habitat at both 50 percent and 80 percent tolerance levels.

The ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir wildlife habitat type is providing large snag habitat below reference condition at the 30 percent tolerance level (2.2 snags per acre) and above reference conditions at 50 percent tolerance level (17.4 snags per acre) and at reference conditions for 80 percent tolerance level (39.6 snags per acre) for northern flicker. There is approximately 9 percent (4,124 acres) of the landscape providing large snag habitat at 30 percent tolerance level, and about 2 percent (916 acres) of this wildlife habitat type providing habitat at 50 percent tolerance levels and little to none of the landscape providing large snag habitat at 80 percent tolerance levels, which is what would be expected under reference conditions.

The ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir wildlife habitat type is providing small snag (>10”) habitat substantially above reference conditions at the 30 percent, 50 percent and 80 percent tolerance levels for black-backed woodpeckers Lewis’s woodpeckers, northern flickers, white headed woodpeckers and hairy woodpeckers. About 11 percent of the landscape in this wildlife habitat type (5,040 acres) is providing small snag densities at the 30 percent tolerance level for white-headed woodpeckers (22.2 snags per acre) as opposed to 4 percent expected at reference conditions. Further, the proportion of the landscape containing snag densities above 50 percent tolerance levels (including 80 percent tolerance levels) is about 7 percent (3,207 acres) compared to 1 percent expected under reference conditions.

Assuming all proposed harvest activities occurred in these high density habitats, Lewis’s woodpecker habitat at the 80 percent tolerance level would be reduced by about 34 percent (301 acres of 916 acres) to about 1.3 percent of the landscape, which is what would be historically expected

Since none of the landscape is or would be expected to provide large snag habitat at the 80 percent tolerance level for northern flicker, it is assumed that the proposed salvage harvest would occur in the highest available density areas, or between the 50 and 80 percent tolerance level. The 50 percent tolerance level for northern flicker is represented by the same density class as 80 percent tolerance level for Lewis’s woodpecker. Therefore, the area providing habitat at the 50 percent tolerance level for northern flicker would be reduced by about 34 percent (301 acres of 916 acres) to about 1.3 percent of the landscape, which is what would be historically expected.

The amount of small snag habitat providing tolerance levels over 50 percent (including 80 percent tolerance levels) would be reduced by 9 percent (301 of 3,207 acres). However, this would be less than a 1 percent reduction overall and about 6.3 percent of the landscape would continue to provide small snag habitat at tolerance levels above 50 percent for black-backed woodpeckers Lewis’s woodpeckers, northern flickers, white headed woodpeckers and hairy woodpeckers.

Conclusion for Tolerance Level Analysis The landscape is providing post-fire large and small snag habitat at or above reference conditions at the 80 percent tolerance level in both wildlife habitat types for Lewis’s woodpecker, black-backed woodpecker, hairy woodpecker, white-headed woodpecker and northern flicker. Further, large and small snag habitat at the 50 percent tolerance level is being provided at or above reference conditions in both

Page 64 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project wildlife habitat types for all mentioned species except for large snag habitat for Lewis’s woodpecker in the eastside mixed conifer wildlife habitat type.

The proposed salvage project activities are assumed to only affect those acres of high mortality that are currently providing large and small snag habitat at 80 percent tolerance levels in eastside mixed conifer and ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir wildlife habitat type, except large snag habitat in ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir at the 80 percent tolerance level for northern flicker, which would not have been expected to exist under reference conditions.

Implementation of the proposed salvage activities would retain snag densities above reference conditions at the 30 percent, 50 percent and 80 percent tolerance level where they are currently above in each wildlife habitat type except densities of large snags at the 80 percent tolerance level for northern flicker in the eastside mixed conifer wildlife habitat type, which would fall below reference conditions. However, the landscape is at reference condition for large snag densities at the 50 percent tolerance level for northern flicker in the eastside mixed conifer wildlife habitat type and would be expected to remain at reference conditions (assuming all activities would occur in areas providing 80 percent tolerance levels). Further, northern flickers are very abundant on the Malheur National Forest and utilize varying snag species, densities and habitat types (green vs. post-fire) and populations are not likely to be affected by the proposed action. It is not expected that densities at the 30 percent or 50 percent tolerance levels would be affected by salvage operations in any size class or wildlife habitat type except for large snags in the ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir wildlife habitat type. Here, the landscape is absent of snag densities at the 80 percent tolerance level for northern flicker so it is assumed that all proposed treatment would be at the 50 percent tolerance level. Even with this assumption, the landscape would near what would have been expected historically. Therefore, there would be no concern for the viability or persistence of northern flicker from implementing the proposed action.

Ample habitat is being provided at the highest large and small snag density classes in each wildlife habitat type, and only a fractional reduction in each density class across the landscape would be expected under the proposed action. Further, implementation of the proposed action would retain large and small densities across the landscape to provide adequate habitat above the 50 percent and 80 percent tolerance levels for post-fire primary cavity excavator species, except where previously discussed.

There would be no viability concerns to populations of Lewis’s woodpecker, black-backed woodpecker, white-headed woodpecker, northern flicker or hairy woodpecker based on tolerance levels from implementation of the proposed action. Therefore, the persistence of these species over time would not be affected by the proposed action.

Cumulative Effects Past, ongoing, and reasonably foreseeable future activities listed in Table 11 were considered for potential cumulative effects. The cumulative effects analysis includes 4 subwatersheds that when combined capture the mortality data for the Canyon Creek Complex fire area including Bear Creek, Canyon Creek, Grub Creek, and Headwaters Malheur River subwatersheds and totals 123,881 acres of eastside mixed conifer wildlife habitat type and 45,826 acres of ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir wildlife habitat type. Past actions that have affected dead wood dynamics include: fire suppression, Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER), timber harvest and fuel wood harvest, fuels treatment, and the Canyon Creek Complex wildfire. These management activities and disturbances have led to the current dead wood condition. Overall, snag densities would meet or exceed Forest Plan standards, because of the high snag densities created in the Canyon Creek Fires Complex.

Page 65 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Private lands are generally not managed for woodpecker habitat. Therefore, it is assumed that any habitat provided by adjacent parcels is incidental and may not be long-term. Most of the private timber lands were salvaged logged post-fire (fall and winter of 2015). Snags were also felled around private land homes and roads to address safety concerns. It is expected that private lands would not typically provide large diameter snags after these activities are complete.

Fires listed in Table 23, along with insect outbreaks and salvage history, contribute to the existing condition and are incorporated into the snag density distribution data generated by satellite imagery and reported in the GNN data. This data was included, reviewed and considered in the distribution and tolerance level analysis above at the same spatial scale.

The net effect of implementing the proposed action would be the retention of the majority (94 percent) of snags created by the Canyon Creek Complex fire. This would be expected to mitigate snag habitat reduced in both the road side salvage of Parish Cabin (2012) and Canyon Creek Complex. The Canyon Creek Complex fire contributed a high density snag “pulse” to a landscape that experienced a similar snag pulse in both the eastside mixed conifer and ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir habitat types from the Parish Cabin. The Parish Cabin fire burned about 6,000 acres and only approximately 250 acres (4 percent) were salvaged as a result of safety removals. The Canyon Creek Complex fire burned 90,584 acres of US Forest Service managed land. Roadside salvage of the Canyon Creek Complex fire removed an additional 4,000 acres beyond what is being proposed in this project (1,210 acres) to mitigate public health and safety concerns. Although the effects of roadside salvage on snag distribution and primary cavity excavator management indicator species tolerance levels were not evaluated for roadside salvage, habitat in such close proximity to roads would likely not have served as suitable nesting habitat. Therefore, habitat lost along roadways would not have been expected to accurately represent functional habitat discussed in the distribution analysis. Also, habitat in close proximity to roads would likely not fulfill the tolerance levels for any primary cavity excavator species depending on frequency of disturbance along roadways and loss of snags from firewood cutting. Further, the snag densities and distribution assumed a 40 percent reduction in snags along open roads and would have inherently accounted for some of the roadside snags removed. Approximately 6 percent of Canyon Creek Complex fire area would ultimately be salvaged. The proposed Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project would result in a reduction of 5.7 percent of the post-fire snag habitat.

Table 23 Wildfires occurring within watersheds affected by the Canyon Creek Complex Fire in the past 50 years Year Name Acres 1988 Table Mountain Fire 640 1996 Wildcat Fire 10,000 2012 Grindstone Fire 25 2012 Parish Cabin Fire 6,000

As described in the above assessment, current snag distribution and tolerance levels are the cumulative effect of the Canyon Creek Complex and Parish Cabin fires, other small fires, and insect and disease mortality across the landscape.

The Canyon Creek Complex Fire roadside salvage project could have removed snags that had potential to provide habitat for species that use mixed severity or underburned fire areas (not high severity). This removal occurred on a site-specific basis as scattered individual trees or in clumps of danger trees associated with open roads. Because the danger trees were removed from habitat directly adjacent to roads, it is unlikely that many individuals would utilize this area for nesting; rather this habitat may comprise a small percentage of one or more nesting territories. The roadside salvage was completed

Page 66 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project during the fall and winter, outside of the breeding season to mitigate any loss of nesting primary cavity excavators.

Existing habitat quality for these species would remain throughout the remainder the Forest Service managed land within the fire area at least for a period of time before the snags fall naturally due to wind and/or decomposition or they are removed by firewood cutters.

Personal use firewood cutting does occur across the Malheur National Forest. Though legal removal of standing dead trees for firewood is not limited by size or species within 150 feet of an open road (with the exception of western larch that may not be cut between November 1 and April 30). The size of dead trees that can be cut outside of 150 feet of an open road is limited to 20 inches at stump height. Individual dead trees are usually removed by firewood cutters primarily within the road prism of open roads or within 150 feet of open roads. Cutting is fairly widespread and occurs where individual trees, down logs or small groups of dead trees are removed. The roadside salvage likely removed many trees that would have been removed from firewood cutting in the short-term. However, additional snag loss along open roads in the analysis area is expected although terrain (steeper slopes) and areas restricted from firewood cutting (riparian, wilderness) would also help protect snags.

The net effect of implementing this alternative is the removal of interior snags on up to 1,210 acres in the Canyon Creek watershed, 4,000 acres of roadside and the 250 acres in the previous Parish cabin fire would reduce a limited amount of snag habitat in the Canyon Creek watershed. Despite the salvage activity, the Canyon Creek watershed has experienced a net gain of 93,592 un-salvaged acres of snag habitat since 2012 that is expected to provide high-quality nesting and foraging habitat for primary cavity excavator species associated with post-fire habitat.

Conclusion Cumulatively, with the ongoing forest management projects the reduction in overall snag habitat across the landscape would be less than a 5 percent. This reduction, however, would not result in a considerable loss of the extent or abundance of post-fire high-density snag habitat which are important to a number of wildlife species, primarily cavity excavating birds including the black-backed, hairy, white-headed and Lewis’s woodpeckers, and northern flicker. The amount of post-fire habitat in the analysis area would still exceed 90,000 acres, with the majority of those acres in the Canyon Creek Complex fire area. Therefore, implementation of this project would not contribute to a negative change in populations or viability to primary cavity excavator management indicator species on Malheur National Forest.

Rocky Mountain Elk Rocky Mountain elk were selected as a management indicator species for the Malheur National Forest due to their economic and social value, and for their documented response to changes in forest cover, forage quality, and road densities.

Typically, a habitat effectiveness index model (Thomas et al. 1988) would be utilized to evaluate the effects of proposed projects and activities to elk forage and cover. The habitat effectiveness index model estimates elk habitat effectiveness on the landscape. The Malheur Forest Plan establishes minimum standards for habitat effectiveness index for both summer range (USDA Forest Service 1990, pages IV– 27 to IV–29) and winter range (USDA Forest Service 1990, pages IV–69 to IV–73). In addition, the Malheur Forest Plan identifies minimum standards for retention of satisfactory cover, marginal cover, and total cover. The Forest Plan also establishes standards for open road density. However, habitat effectiveness index was not reviewed for this analysis as the proposed project activities occur in areas where high-intensity, high-mortality fire occurred. Therefore, no suitable cover or forage is expected to be affected by the proposed activities. There would be no net change in road densities from the proposed

Page 67 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment project, pending re-closure of utilized roads that are currently closed and rehabilitation of temporary roads.

Existing Condition of Rocky Mountain Elk Habitat The Canyon Creek Complex Fire effectively killed overstory trees and removed understory forage. Due to the current lack of cover and forage, elk would likely spend less time within the high mortality burn areas, while most elk would have moved into adjacent areas that retained suitable cover and forage. However, forage quantity and quality would be expected to recover and improve compared to pre-fire conditions in the short-term although the lack of adequate cover could limit utilization of improved forage. In the meantime, habitat quality within the high severity burn areas will not be optimal to regularly support elk until both hiding cover and forage recovers. Grazing restrictions are also in place to facilitate quicker forage recovery.

Elk Populations

Big game management on the Malheur National Forest is a cooperative effort between the Forest Service and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW). The Forest Service manages habitat while ODFW manages big game populations. The Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area occurs within the Murderer’s Creek Wildlife Management Unit (WMU 46). This unit has been at or slightly above management objectives the last few years.

Although elk population estimates are above management objectives, animals are not always well distributed. The current trend has been a continued movement of animals off of Forest lands and onto private lands. Effects to Rocky Mountain Elk

Alternative 1 - No Action

Direct and Indirect Effects Under the no action alternative, no project activities would be implemented except revegetation planting, which would be authorized under the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Reforestation Decision Memo. Since the existing condition is not providing suitable habitat (cover or forage) for Rocky Mountain elk, it is not expected that salvage activities would directly alter elk habitat.

Elk have been documented within the burn area, and are expected to continue to intermittently travel throughout the fire area utilizing areas where fire severity was likely lower and where forage is recovering and of high value. Human disturbance along roadways and displacement of elk would be less likely under the no action alternative. Although, elk are capable of moving long distances quickly and could move into adjacent areas of less disturbance and higher cover.

Cumulative Effects Because there are no direct or indirect effects, no cumulative effects would occur as a result of the no action alternative.

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects Hiding cover or screening cover does not occur within most of the areas that experienced stand- replacement or moderate- to high-severity fire. Therefore, salvage harvest in these areas would not further

Page 68 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project alter elk habitat. This project was designed to avoid impacts on riparian areas which are the sites most likely to contribute to calving habitat for elk where adequate calving cover remains.

Elk in the project planning area could be temporarily displaced during project implementation due to increased activities and noise levels during salvage operations and temporarily increased road densities, but this anticipated to be a minor impact only occurring as long as operations were ongoing. Elk are capable of moving long distances quickly and would be expected to move into adjacent areas of less disturbance and higher cover during implementation. Any activities authorized in big game winter range would be naturally limited by snow, or subject to timing restrictions consistent with Forest Plan standards.

Regeneration planting would occur under the proposed action. While elk forage would naturally re- establish quickly, forested areas with full crown consumption during the fire would have limited seed supply and future stand establishment would depend on naturally dispersed seeds and elk cover would develop more slowly than with reforestation actions. Similarly, without planting of riparian vegetation along stream corridors, the establishment of preferred forage species and cover in riparian areas may be slower than would be expected under natural conditions. In addition, manual replanting of native species would conceivably help to restrict the spread of non-native invasive plants into the project planning area.

Cumulative Effects - Alternatives 1 and 2 The area considered for cumulative effects to Rocky Mountain elk is the Canyon Creek subwatershed. Past, ongoing, and reasonably foreseeable future activities listed in Table 11 were considered for potential cumulative effects.

Implementation of the no action alternative would have no direct or indirect effects to elk or elk habitat, and therefore no cumulative effects would be expected.

Cover has been reduced extensively across the project planning area by the Canyon Creek Complex Fire. Hiding cover does not occur in the salvage project planning areas (i.e., treatment units) as they are in areas of high fire mortality. Any cover that is retained following the Canyon Creek Complex Fire would be of inherently lower value than other available cover in lower intensity areas. Over time, cover should increase both in quantity and quality. Dead trees would still provide minimal amounts of cover until the majority of dead trees have fallen. Elk could eventually utilize down logs as hiding cover, when they are accessible. Under conditions of extreme accumulations of down wood, animals may not use this cover where they cannot easily travel through it.

On adjacent private lands, about 17,000 acres burned in the Canyon Creek Complex fire. Most private timber land acres have already been salvaged. Salvage logging targeted trees killed by the fire and therefore, had little to no effects on big game cover. Reforestation is required where commercial timber harvest has occurred and the land is left under-stocked.

Regeneration of trees to provide cover, which is defined as 40 feet tall providing at least 40 percent crown closure, is expected to take 40 years or more depending on site capability. Reforestation (i.e., planting of seedlings) under both this project and the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Reforestation Decision Memo should improve the rate of recovery compared to natural regeneration and would have a beneficial impact to recovery of hiding cover.

Summer forage values are expected to increase both in the short-, mid- and long-term. Removal of forest canopies through wildfire stimulates understory vegetation and provides nutrient rich forage to ungulates. Forage values are expected to remain until crowns of regenerating conifers start reaching 40 percent crown closure in about 40 to 60 years.

Page 69 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Road densities would not increase as a result of implementing the proposed action pending re-closure of currently closed road and rehabilitation of temporary roads.

Implementation of the proposed action would not be expected to cumulatively increase disturbance or displacement from other ongoing and foreseeable use (i.e. hikers, campers, mushroom pickers) as project planning area and treatment units could be closed during operations.

Livestock grazing will be deferred until vegetation has recovered. When livestock grazing is re-initiated, grazing would be managed to meet Forest Plan standards. Grazing standards have been established at levels to provide sufficient forage to support both wildlife and domestic livestock use.

Because suitable forage and cover currently do not exist in or around treatment units, elk habitat would not be altered. Regeneration would occur naturally if not replanted, although replanting efforts would accelerate the recovery of cover. Road densities would not further fragment elk habitat nor lend to increased activity in the mid- to long-term. Therefore, no cumulative impacts to elk or elk habitat from the implementation of the proposed action would be expected.

Conclusion for Elk The proposed action is consistent with Malheur Forest Plan standards and guidelines pertaining to Rocky Mountain elk. The proposed action may affect individuals due to temporary displacement during implementation activities, but would not contribute to a negative trend in viability for Rocky Mountain elk on the Malheur National Forest.

Facilitation of Hunting Heritage and Wildlife Conservation (Executive Order 13443) – This order was signed by President Bush on August 13, 2007 and is intended to enhance hunting opportunities on federal public lands. The stated purpose of the Executive Order is to “…direct federal agencies that have programs and activities that have a measurable effect on public land management, outdoor recreation, and wildlife management, including the Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture, to facilitate the expansion and enhancement of hunting opportunities and the management of game species and their habitats.” Section 2 of Executive Order 13443 proposes guidelines federal agencies should implement as “consistent with agency missions.” Section 5 of this same order states: This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right, benefit, trust responsibility, or privilege, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, instrumentalities, or entities, its officers or employees, or any other person.

However, the guidelines set forth the Malheur Forest Plan, already meet or exceed the intent of this executive order as it pertains to managing wildlife habitats on public lands in a manner that maintains, expands, or enhances hunting opportunities.

Old Growth Network The Malheur Forest Plan identifies three management indicator species for old growth (primarily old forest multi strata structured stands): pileated woodpecker, pine marten, and three-toed woodpecker. By providing old growth habitat for these species, it is assumed that habitat for other old growth obligate species would be provided as well.

To provide for pileated woodpecker and pine marten habitat viability, the Malheur Forest Plan Management Area 13 (MA-13) provides for the management of old growth habitat through a system of dedicated old growth areas and replacement old growth areas. Dedicated old growth was delineated forest-wide to provide an even distribution of habitat; one dedicated old growth for roughly every 12,000 acres, or approximately 5 miles apart. Replacement old growths are established to counter possible

Page 70 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project catastrophic damage or deterioration. Although replacement areas may not have all the characteristics of old growth, they are managed to achieve old-forest structure over time. Thus, when a dedicated old growth no longer meets the needed habitat requirements, the associated has already been established to replace it.

Old Growth Forest within the Project Planning Area

Six (6) dedicated old growth areas, 2 replacement old growth areas, and 1 pileated woodpecker feeding area (PWFA) are located within the area burned by the Canyon Creek Complex Fire. Prior to the fire, dedicated old growth 240, 241, 304, and 308 contributed towards pileated woodpecker management requirements and dedicated old growth 236 and 309 contributed to pine marten management requirements.

The Canyon Creek Complex fire burned through all of the old growth areas in the project planning area. Table 24 identifies the dedicated old growth and replacement old growth within the project planning area, total acres, and total acres burned. Based on data obtained from the post-fire Rapid Assessment of Vegetation Condition after Wildfire (RAVG) process, the Canyon Creek Complex burned as a mixed- severity fire. The RAVG data showed that significant portions of the fire burned at a higher-severity and high level of vegetative mortality (basal area loss greater than 50 percent), and ground-truthing has shown that RAVG data has a high degree of accuracy. Table 24 identifies the dedicated old growth, replacement old growth, and pileated woodpecker feeding areas within the project planning area, total acres of each, and the total acres burned with greater than 50 percent basal area loss. RAVG data shows that while the majority the dedicated old growth, replacement old growth, and pileated woodpecker feeding areas in the project planning area where impacted by the fire, approximately 40 percent of the areas burned at a higher severity with greater than 50 percent basal area loss.

Table 24 Dedicated and replacement old growth areas burned Basal area loss >50 Old growth area Total acres percent (acres) DOG 01236 (236) Pine Marten (MM) 315 561 Replacement Area (MMRO) 279 DOG 01240 (240) Pileated Woodpecker (PW) 89 89 DOG 01241 (241) Pileated Woodpecker (PW) 308 Feeding Area (PWFA) 161 173 Replacement Area (PWRO) 142 DOG 01304 (304) Pileated Woodpecker (PW) 272 90 DOG 01308 (308) Pileated Woodpecker (PW) 845 254 DOG 01309 (309) Pine Marten (MM) 674 58 dedicated old growth: Totals in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project 2,503 1,225 Planning Area: ROGs: 421 PWFAs: 161

Post-fire, there is essentially no mature or old growth habitat remaining that meets pileated woodpecker, pine marten, or three-toed woodpecker habitat requirements based on the current Forest Plan guidelines within the Canyon Creek Complex Fire area. The dedicated old growth and replacement old growth areas are no longer functioning as old growth. Stands have been converted to understory re-initiation (UR) and stand initiation (SI) structural stages. Canopy cover has been reduced below 20 percent and in many places eliminated altogether. Snags resulting from the fire will likely provide nesting and foraging habitat for many post-fire obligate species.

No salvage activities are proposed in existing dedicated or replacement old growth areas, or areas that are functioning as such. No new dedicated old growth, replacement old growth or pileated woodpecker

Page 71 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment feeding areas (PWFAs) would be designated under the proposed action as no suitable habitat remains in the project planning area for designation into the MA-13 network.

Old Growth Connectivity

Connectivity refers to habitat between old growth areas that allows species to move between these areas. Regional Forester’s Eastside Forest Plan Amendment 2 (USDA Forest Service 1994) requires that connectivity corridors be established between late and old structure stands. Stands should commonly have medium diameter or larger trees (≥9 inches diameter at breast height), and canopy closure should be within the top 1/3 of site potential. Corridors should be at least 400 feet wide. If appropriate stands are not available, then the next best stands would have to provide connectivity, and should be managed to improve connectivity. Generally, connectivity corridors are maintained or managed at higher tree densities and canopy cover than adjacent areas to provide more security for dispersal or movement.

Post-fire connectivity habitat is best evaluated by viewing the basal area mortality (Rapid Assessment of Vegetation Condition after Wildfire [RAVG]) appendix A, Map 2. Although light mortality or underburn areas and non-burn areas (0 to 25 percent basal area loss; 17 percent of the planning area) and moderate tree mortality areas (25 to 5 percent basal area loss; 30 percent of the planning area) could conceivably provide marginal connectivity, much of this habitat was not LOS prior to the fire and is highly fragmented due to the mosaic nature of the burn. Higher tree mortality areas (≥50 percent basal area loss) do not provide connectivity. Functional connectivity between old growth and late and old structure stands adjacent to or outside of the fire area does not exist. Further, areas being proposed for salvage are not LOS stands or within the MA-13 network, and would not have provided functional connectivity.

Old Growth and Late and Old Structure Network

Alternative 1 (No Action) – Direct and Indirect Effects The fire has essentially eliminated old growth from the burned area. Habitat effectiveness for old growth species would remain as described in the existing condition. The no action alternative would have no immediate effects on pine marten, pileated woodpeckers, or their habitats. Research has shown that martens are unlikely to be present in burned areas for 20 or more years post-fire (Strickland and Douglas 1987). Pileated woodpeckers are not strongly associated with post-fire habitats; although individuals may use a burned area for foraging, but are not expected to nest there (Bull and Holthausen 1993).

The no action alternative would maintain connectivity as described in the existing condition. Although dead tree boles might provide a small amount of cover, the use of burn areas for connectivity is very limited. In moderately and severely burned areas, connectivity habitat for species that rely on ground cover such as pine marten, could be reestablished once snags have fallen and live trees have been reestablished.

Because no functional old-growth or late and old structure habitat, or connectivity exists within the Canyon Creek Complex Fire area, implementation of the no action alternative would have no effect on old-growth dependent species.

Alternative 2 – Direct and Indirect Effects Under alternative 2 none of the currently designated (although non-functional) dedicated old growth, replacement old growth, or PWFAs would be entered for treatment. Salvage harvest would not affect mature or old growth habitat in the short- or long-term. Burned areas are no longer functioning as old growth habitat and are not likely to be used by pileated woodpecker for nesting or by pine marten for

Page 72 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project denning before forest cover and some level of structure is reestablished. These species may use dead wood habitats for foraging substrate, but neither has a strong association with post-burn habitats.

Planting proposed under this alternative would not affect old growth habitat or associated species, although it would establish new stands and potentially future old growth.

Because no dedicated old growth, replacement old growth, or other late and old structure habitat exists in the project planning area post-fire, there would be no direct or indirect effects to old-growth dependent species and therefore no viability concerns to old-growth dependent species from implementation of the proposed action.

Cumulative Effects Neither the no action alternative nor the proposed action would result in any direct or indirect effects to old-growth associated species, there would be no cumulative impacts from implementation of either alternative. The alternatives would not contribute to a cumulative loss of late and old structure habitat or connectivity because stands proposed for salvage no longer function as LOS or connectivity. Both alternatives meet the wildlife standard in Reginal Forester’s Eastside Forest Plan Amendment #2. Light burn severity or underburned areas are currently providing the best connectivity and LOS habitat, and these areas are not proposed for salvage.

Featured Species Due to the amount of post high severity fire habitat in the analysis area, little, if any habitat exists for Featured Species listed in the Malheur Forest Plan. These include blue grouse, sage grouse, pronghorn, upland sandpipers, osprey, and bighorn sheep. These species will not be addressed further in the document.

Northern goshawk is typically discussed as one of the Featured Species due to management direction in the Eastside Screens (Amendment #2). There is no remaining nesting and PFA habitat for northern goshawk in the analysis area and therefore will not be discussed further. If an active nest is identified during haul, then the operating schedule can be modified to accommodate the nesting period in accordance with standard B provisions of a timber sale or stewardship contract.

Migratory and Resident Birds Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management Authorities Related to Bird Management.

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (MBTA)

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act implements various treaties and conventions between the United States, Canada, Japan, Mexico, and the former Soviet Union for the protection of migratory birds. Under the act, it is unlawful to pursue, hunt, take, capture (or kill) a migratory bird except as permitted by regulation (16 U.S.C. 703-704). The regulations at 50 CFR 21.11 prohibit the take, possession, import, export, transport, sale, purchase, barter, or offering of these activities, or possessing migratory birds, including nests and eggs, except under a valid permit or as permitted in the implementing regulations (Director's Order No. 131). A migratory bird is any species or family of birds that live, reproduce, or migrate within or across international borders at some point during their annual life cycle.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) is the lead federal agency for managing and conserving migratory birds in the United States; however, under Executive Order 13186 all other federal agencies are charged with the conservation and protection of migratory birds and the habitats on which they depend. In response to this order, the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management have implemented

Page 73 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment management guidelines that direct migratory birds to be addressed in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process when actions have the potential to negatively or positively affect migratory bird species of concern.

Executive Order 13186 (66 Fed. Reg. 3853, January 17, 2001) “Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds”

This Executive Order directs federal agencies to avoid or minimize the negative impact of their actions on migratory birds, and to take active steps to protect birds and their habitat. This Executive Order also requires federal agencies to develop Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to conserve birds, including taking steps to restore and enhance habitat, prevent or abate pollution affecting birds, and incorporating migratory bird conservation into agency planning processes whenever possible. The Bureau of Land Management and Forest Service have both completed, and are currently implementing, their respective MOUs with the USFWS.

Forest Service and USFWS Memorandum of Understanding (MOU):

The purpose of this MOU is, “to strengthen migratory bird conservation by identifying and implementing strategies that promote conservation and avoid or minimize adverse impacts on migratory birds through enhanced collaboration between the Parties, in coordination with State, Tribal, and local governments.”

Under the MOU the Forest Service shall:

Address the conservation of migratory bird habitat and populations when developing, amending, or revising management plans for national forests and grasslands, consistent with National Forest Management Act, Endangered Species Act, and other authorities listed above. When developing the list of species to be considered in the planning process, consult the current (updated every 5 years) USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern, 2008 (BCC), State lists, and comprehensive planning efforts for migratory birds. Within the NEPA process, evaluate the effects of agency actions on migratory birds, focusing first on species of management concern along with their priority habitats and key risk factors.

The Birds of Conservation Concern 2008 In December 2008, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service released The Birds of Conservation Concern Report that identifies species, subspecies, and populations of migratory and resident birds not already designated as federally threatened or endangered that represent the highest conservation priorities and are in need of additional conservation actions. The goal is to prevent or remove the need for additional Endangered Species Act bird listings by implementing proactive management and conservation actions. It is recommended that these lists be consulted in accordance with Executive Order 13186, “Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds.” In the Forest Service and USFWS MOU, both parties shall: Work collaboratively to identify and address issues that affect species of concern, such as migratory bird species listed in the Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) and USFWS’s Focal Species initiative.

BCC 2008 is intended to stimulate coordinated and collaborative proactive conservation actions among Federal, State, Tribal, and private partners. The hope is that, by focusing attention on these highest- priority species, this report will promote greater study and protection of the habitats and ecological communities upon which these species depend, thereby contributing to healthy avian populations and communities.

Page 74 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Partners-In-Flight Bird Conservation Regions Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) are ecologically distinct regions in North America with similar bird communities, habitats, and resource management issues. Bird Conservation Regions are a hierarchical framework of nested ecological units delineated by the Commission for Environmental Cooperation.

The overall goal of these Bird Conservation Regions are to list and identify the migratory and resident bird species (beyond those already designated as federally threatened or endangered) that represent our highest conservation priorities.

The Malheur National Forest is included in Bird Conservation Region 10 (Northern Rockies). BCR lists are updated every five years by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Table 25 Bird Conservation Region 10 - Northern Rockies U.S. portion only; Birds of Conservation Concern Bald Eagle (b) Williamson's Sapsucker Swainson's Hawk White-headed Woodpecker Ferruginous Hawk Olive-sided Flycatcher Peregrine Falcon (b) Willow Flycatcher (c) Upland Sandpiper Loggerhead Shrike Long-billed Curlew Sage Thrasher Yellow-billed Cuckoo (w. U.S. DPS) (a) Brewer's Sparrow Flammulated Owl Sage Sparrow Black Swift McCown’s Longspur Calliope Hummingbird Black Rosy-Finch Lewis’s Woodpecker Cassin's Finch (a) ESA candidate, (b) ESA delisted, (c) non-listed subspecies or population of threatened or endangered species.

Avian Conservation Planning (Migratory and Resident Birds): Migratory birds are those that breed in the United States and winter south of the border in Central and South America. Many of our well-known passerine songbirds, flycatchers, vireos, swallows, thrushes, warblers, and hummingbirds fall in this category. Most others are included in the resident category. Birds are a vital element of every terrestrial habitat in North America. Conserving habitat for birds would therefore contribute to meeting the needs of other wildlife and entire ecosystems (Partners-In-Flight Continental Plan). Continent wide declines in population trends for many avian species have developed into an international concern and led to the creation of the North American Bird Conservation Initiative. Under this initiative, plans have been developed for the conservation of waterbirds, shorebirds, seabirds and landbirds. The landbird initiative known as Partners-In-Flight (PIF) has developed a series of bird conservation plans for every state. Partners-In-Flight has gained wide recognition as a leader in the landbird conservation arena.

The Oregon and Washington Chapter of PIF, formed in 1992, has developed a series of publications aimed at assisting private, state, tribal and federal agencies in managing for landbird populations. The most recent and applicable publications for the two state area have been conservation plans for landbirds.

Partners-In-Flight Bird Conservation Plans:

Five conservation plans have been developed by PIF covering the various geographic regions found in Oregon and Washington. These documents have been prepared to stimulate and support a proactive approach to the conservation of landbirds throughout Oregon and Washington. They represent the collective efforts of multiple agencies and organizations within Oregon and Washington. Participants included biologists from federal and state agencies, industry, private consulting firms, environmental

Page 75 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment organizations, and academia in order to ensure a full range of ideas and practicalities were addressed by the plans.

Recommendations included in the documents are intended to inform planning efforts and actions of land managers, and stimulate monitoring and research to support landbird conservation. The recommendations are also expected to serve as a foundation for developing detailed conservation strategies at multiple geographic scales to ensure functional ecosystems with healthy populations of landbirds.

The plans can be found on the Oregon Washington Partners in Flight website at www.orwapif.org. The plan applicable to this planning effort is the Conservation Strategy for Landbirds in the Northern Rocky Mountains of Eastern Oregon and Washington.

The overall goal of PIF bird conservation planning is to ensure long-term maintenance of healthy populations of native landbirds. These documents are intended to facilitate that goal by identifying conditions and habitat attributes important to the landbird community, describing the desired landscape based on habitat relationships of a select group of species, providing interim management targets (i.e., biological objectives) to achieve desired conditions, and recommending management actions (i.e., conservation options) that can be implemented by various entities at multiple scales to achieve the biological objectives.

Implementation of parts or all of the conservation strategy should help prevent reactionary approaches typically needed to address listed species issues. When these ecosystem-driven conservation strategies are fully implemented at large geographic scales, the aggregated effect would be the creation of landscapes that should function to conserve landbird communities.

The strategy for achieving functioning ecosystems for landbirds is described through the habitat requirements of “focal species.” By managing for a group of species representative of important components in a functioning coniferous forest ecosystem, many other species and elements of biodiversity also would be conserved. Executive Order 13186 and the MOUs signed by the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service require agencies to incorporate migratory bird conservation into agency planning processes whenever practicable. The PIF plans assist federal agencies in achieving this direction.

The appropriate bird conservation plan and Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) species list for the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area was reviewed. Those species and habitats that are within the project planning area are incorporated and effects disclosed in this analysis. Table 26 displays a list of Birds of Conservation Concern in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area that are known or likely to be present and could be affected by the proposed actions.

Table 26 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Birds of Conservation Concern found in the project planning area. Bird Conservation Region 10 - Northern Rocky Mountains of eastern Oregon and Washington

General habitat Impacts to habitat Species requirements No action Alternative 2

Lewis's woodpecker Ponderosa Pine, Cottonwood See Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Sensitive riparian or Oak habitats with Species section for analysis. an open canopy, brushy understory, dead and down material, available perches and abundant insects. White-headed Open conifer forests (<40 See Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Sensitive woodpecker percent canopy cover) and Species section for analysis.

Page 76 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

General habitat Impacts to habitat Species requirements No action Alternative 2 edge habitats where standing snags and scattered tall trees remain after a disturbance. Olive-sided Open conifer forests (<40 Suitable habitat would continue to exist along the edge flycatcher percent canopy cover) and of the fire area, or in areas or patches where fire (Contopus cooperi) edge habitats where standing severity and mortality was lower. Activities in Alternative snags and scattered tall trees 2 would not be expected to affect individuals or alter remain after a disturbance. habitat as only high-severity areas would be salvaged. *Non-listed subspecies or population of threatened or endangered species.

Silviculture This section provides the potential effects of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project on forest vegetation.

Management direction for forest vegetation within the project planning area comes from a number of sources including the National Forest Management Act (NFMA), the Malheur Forest Plan and its amendments, and Regional direction for salvage.

National Forest Management Act (and Regional Forester’s Letter of November 19, 2002)

In 2002, the Regional Office provided the following direction for salvage. Salvage on deforested Suitable lands (and other capable and available lands where salvage is permitted by a forest plan) that is driven all or in part by an objective to capture volume should comply with the NFMA five-year regeneration requirement (to stocking levels consistent with management objectives). This is specific direction adhering to the NFMA regulations at 36CFR219.27(c)(3), including its amendments to the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-378) requiring “when trees are cut to achieve timber production objectives, the cuttings shall be made in such a way as to assure that the technology and knowledge exists to adequately restock the lands within 5 years after final harvest.”

The NFMA at Sec. 3 (d)(1) It is the policy of the Congress that all forested lands in the National Forest System be maintained in appropriate forest cover with species of trees, degree of stocking, rate of growth, and conditions of stand designed to secure the maximum benefits of multiple use sustained yield management in accordance with land management plans.”

The Regional Forester’s Letter also states where no salvage is done, deforested capable lands should be reforested as quickly as practicable. Plans to reforest non-capable lands should be made after careful consideration of land management objectives and the likelihood of success.

Malheur Forest Plan

The Malheur National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Malheur Forest Plan) (USDA Forest Service 1990) includes direction to provide a sustainable flow of timber and associated wood products at a level that will contribute to economic stability and provide an economic return to the public. Wood material in the form of sawlogs and fiber will be utilized in a cost effective manner, consistent with the various resource objectives environmental standards.

Treatment units fall within the following management areas; General Forest (310 acres), Visual Corridor Foreground (105 acres) and Middleground (530 acres), and Big Game Winter Range (265 acres). Land

Page 77 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment within these management areas is identified as suitable for timber management under the Forest Plan. Direction for each of these management areas includes schedule timber harvest to meet other resource objectives.

Other standards related to reforestation include

 While favoring high quality natural regeneration, consider the effectiveness of various regeneration methods and prescribe the best site-specific method. Satisfactory stocking of any regenerated stand will be expected to occur within 5 years after harvest.  Use seed collected from phenotypically superior trees from the same seed zone and elevation band for growing planting stock.  Manage to maintain or re-establish ponderosa pine on sites where ponderosa pine is subclimax.  Maintain stand vigor through the uses of integrated pest management such as stocking level control and species composition in order to minimize losses due to insects and diseases. Regional Forester’s Forest Plan Amendment #2

The Regional Foresters Forest Plan Amendment #2 requires timber sales to incorporate the interim riparian, ecosystem, and wildlife standards detailed in the amendment. Salvage, with incidental green volume, located outside currently mapped old growth is not subject to the ecosystem standard (an HRV analysis) but still must apply the riparian and wildlife standards. Applicable wildlife standards include maintaining all late and old live trees greater than 21 inches diameter at breast height, manipulate vegetation structure in a manner that moves it towards late and old structure, and maintain open park-like stands where this condition occurred historically.

Indicators for Assessing Effects

Table 27 Resource elements, indicators and measures for assessing effects to forest vegetation Measure Source (LRMP S/G; law or Resource element Resource indicator (quantify if possible) policy, BMPs, etc.) Reforestation / seedling Fully stocked within 5 2002 Regional Direction for Stand stocking establishment years Salvage Salvage suitability Management area direction Forest Plan Direction/NFMA

Affected Environment In determining post-fire existing conditions, data provided by the Rapid Assessment of Vegetation Condition after Wildfire (RAVG) program were used. RAVG produces data describing post-fire vegetation conditions and is considered an initial assessment, which describes initial vegetation mortality (typically 30 days post-fire containment). In the context of RAVG analysis, basal area loss measures the percent change in basal area or tree cover (relative number of live trees on the site) from the pre-fire condition. Basal area loss is reported as four classes of percent change in tree cover and is expressed in square feet.

Data Analyzer was used to run the Forest Vegetation Simulation (FVS) model, with the Blue Mountain variant, to estimate stand density and volumes due to fire caused mortality. These density and volume estimates were used to determine treatment prescription levels and were one factor used to assign treatment prescription levels.

It is recognized that salvage logging after a fire can have a negative effect on natural regeneration. The Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project is proposing salvage in areas where basal area loss is high

Page 78 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project and some of the area having a greater than the recommended distance from a live seed source (see discussion under Existing Condition). Natural regeneration is not being considered in the treatment units under this project.

Existing Condition Specific plant species tend to be found together in a characteristic set of ecological conditions. The unit of classification based on the probable, or projected, climax plant community type is termed the plant association, and may be used to describe and classify sets of ecological conditions. The plant associations found within the Canyon Creek Complex project planning area are documented in Plant Associations of the Blue and Ochoco Mountains (Johnson and Clausnitzer 1992). For purposes of classification and analysis, plant associations may be grouped into areas with like temperature/moisture and fire disturbance regimes called plant association groups (PAGs).

The mid-elevations (4,500 to 5,500 feet) on south slopes and north and east facing slopes at lower elevations generally contain plant associations grouped in the Warm Dry PAG. Eighty-five percent of the forested project planning area falls within this PAG. There are stands of pure ponderosa pine to mixed conifer stands of Douglas-fir, western larch, grand fir, and ponderosa pine. Of the approximate 1,200 acres of harvest, 93 percent is represented by the Warm Dry PAG and 99 percent of the 1,200 acres are Warm Dry or Hot Dry PAGs.

Within the project planning area, 50 percent of the area burned with high severity and tree mortality. The stand structure for these areas is now stand initiation. Within the study units, approximately 75 percent burned with high severity resulting in 75 percent or greater basal area loss (68 percent being 90 percent basal area loss or greater) and 88 percent of the study units burned with over 50 percent basal area loss. Within the study units, the treatment units comprise the areas of highest basal area loss. Almost 90 percent of the treatment unit acres have approximately 90 percent basal area loss. All acres within the treatment units are in the stand initiation stage as a result of the fire.

Desired Condition Based on Forest Plan direction, the National Forest Management Act, the Pacific Northwest Regional Forester’s Letter of Direction on Reforestation following Salvage, and other sources, the desired condition for forest vegetation includes, areas deforested by the Canyon Creek Complex Fire will have appropriate forest cover established as soon as is practicable. Areas where salvage occurs would be satisfactorily stocked within 5 years. Seedlings would be appropriate to the site and ponderosa pine would be well represented. In 10 to 20 years stands would be growing into the stem exclusion stage from the stand initiation stage.

Common to Both Alternatives – Natural Regeneration Natural reforestation would occur in some of the area burned by the Canyon Creek Complex fire and depends on many factors. These include: existing seed “banked” in the soil and duff layer, seed dispersal from nearby trees, cone serotiny, seed viability, germination, and seedling survival and growth. All these factors are greatly affected by fire. Buried seeds remain in the soil for a short time. Most reach conditions suitable for germination the spring after dispersal or are soon eaten by animals. In areas with high tree mortality and where the entire duff layer was consumed, any seed in the soil would have been killed. It is possible that some very limited protected areas could contain viable seed, but in very small quantities.

Seed dispersal depends on location and distribution of seed sources (live trees, buried seed, or serotinous cones), seed production of those sources, and dispersal by gravity and wind.

Page 79 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Seed production of the remaining live trees would affect natural regeneration. Some seed is produced nearly every year on nearly every site, but small seed crops have low viability and very high predation by animals and insects. Large seed crops are needed for significant levels of natural regeneration. These occur periodically, depending on tree species, climatic conditions, and unknown factors. Partial girdling of the bole can increase seed production. For this reason, there may be an increase in cone production of live trees in the project planning area that had partial bole scorch.

Minimum seed-bearing age of conifer species in the project planning area is 12 to 20 years, there are 2 to 10 years between large seed crops, and seed dispersal distance varies by species as described under the Existing Condition. All these factors influence the rate of natural reforestation.

Germination depends on qualities of the seed, as well as microclimatic conditions of the seedbed. The quality of the seedbed is a primary factor in natural regeneration. Mineral soil is the best seedbed for most species. Moist, shaded conditions and coarse textured soil or small depressions improve germination by retaining moisture. In the project planning area, seedbed conditions are expected to be good to excellent for the next 2 to 3 years, as burning of seedbeds generally improves germination. However, hot, dry conditions may limit germination and seedling survival. Within five years, grass, forbs, and shrubs are expected to have occupied the non-forested areas to the point that mineral soil contact would be limited. Seed must survive the great likelihood of consumption by animals, insects, and fungi to germinate.

To determine areas that should be planted or could be left to regenerate naturally after the Canyon Creek Complex fire, Dr. Kerry Kemp, a forest ecologist with The Nature Conservancy working with the Malheur National Forest, ran a modeling program she developed to determine the proximity of burned areas to green seed sources. Dr. Kemp’s analysis of the Canyon Creek Complex supported the RAVG data and helped identify the highest priority areas for planting based on distance from viable seed sources.

According to Dr. Kemp’s research, burned areas 95 meters from green seed sources are beyond the threshold for seedling regeneration in dry mixed-conifer forests (Kemp et al. 2015). Beyond 95 meters from the nearest live seed source, the probability of seedling establishment was low. Across all the fires that were studied, 75 percent of the burned area with high tree mortality was within this 95-meter threshold, suggesting the presence of live seed trees to facilitate natural regeneration.

Distance to a live seed source was the most significant variable influencing the presence of Douglas-fir and ponderosa pine seedlings. Seed source distance was marginally significant for grand fir. Ponderosa pine seedlings were most likely to be present within 60 meters of a live seed tree. Similarly, Douglas-fir was most likely to be present within roughly 75 meters of a live seed source. Grand fir presence was probable as far as 165 meters from a live seed tree (Kemp et al. 2015).

Ponderosa pine seed is not easily disseminated over a large area due to its large size and heavy weight. Most ponderosa pine seed falls within about 100 feet of the source and does not remain viable long after the initial year of dispersal (Agee 1996). Due to the early establishment of competing grasses and shrubs, even if a seed is disseminated across stand replacement areas in years following the fire, tree seedlings will be at a competitive disadvantage.

Burned areas without nearby residual live seed trees had few or no conifer seedlings 5 to 13 years after fire, regardless of the severity with which the patch burned (Kemp et al. 2015).

With the Canyon Creek Reforestation decision as described in the Cumulative Effects table, the areas identified for natural regeneration are smaller areas of high mortality that are surrounded by seed sources in close proximity.

Page 80 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Environmental Consequences

Methodology Methodology is same information as described under the affected environment.

Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis The scale of analysis for forest vegetation is the study units within the project planning area. The spatial context for this analysis are the locations of the treatment units within the larger study unit. The scale of analysis for the cumulative effects is the project planning area. For the temporal context, short-term is defined as 1 to 10 years and long-term is defined as 10 to 20 years.

Past, Present, and Foreseeable Activities Relevant to Cumulative Effects Analysis Table 11 was reviewed for potential past, present, and reasonable foreseeable actions that might have a bearing on cumulative effects. Past management including timber harvest and grazing may have contributed to the Canyon Creek Complex fire intensity and severity but the fire resulted in these activities becoming not relevant to forest vegetation and this analysis.

Salvage under the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Hazard Tree Mitigation Project Decision Memo would have a slight beneficial effect on reducing insect population buildups and spread into the remaining live trees in and near the fire. This project is not relevant to reforestation under this analysis.

The Canyon Creek Fire Reforestation Project is ongoing and covers reforestation within the fire, including within the treatment and study units.

Alternative 1 – No Action

Direct and Indirect Effects Under alternative 1, there would be no salvage logging and associated management activities or research in the forest vegetation analysis area. There would be no direct or indirect effects from the no action alternative.

Although there are no direct or indirect effects as a result of Additional mortality of fire-injured trees and some uninjured trees is likely in the areas affected by the 2015 fires. Trees badly injured by the fires will continue to fade for a few years. White fir/grand fir and lodgepole pine with lethal fire injuries may take up to 4 or 5 years to turn red without additional damage from beetles. Additional mortality will likely occur to damaged trees and undamaged trees from attack by bark beetles. Douglas-fir beetles in Douglas- fir, mountain pine beetles and Ips engraver beetles in pines are the most likely to move into green trees. Where mountain pine beetles were high prior to the fires, those high populations are likely to take advantage of any damaged trees that have suitable cambium when adult beetles attack in 2016. Where significant numbers of large Douglas-firs with fire damage exist, elevated mortality is likely for a year or two. The amount of additional mortality will depend on the specific makeup of stands damaged and the severity of fire injury.

Cumulative Effects The past, ongoing, and foreseeable actions listed in chapter 3, Table 11, were considered for their cumulative effects on forest vegetation and reforestation. Many past and ongoing actions were negated by the Canyon Creek Complex fire including timber harvest, and livestock grazing. Because no actions would be implemented under alternative 1, there would be no additional effects to the existing cumulative

Page 81 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment effects from the other actions listed in Table 11, chapter 3. These cumulative effects establish a baseline from which action items will be evaluated under alternative 2.

The Canyon Creek Complex Reforestation Decision Memo approved planting on approximately 19,924 acres on the Blue Mountain Ranger District to accelerate the vegetative recovery of the large stand replacement patches of the fire, including the study units and control units.

Although the no action alternative would have no direct, indirect, or cumulative effects, reforestation would still occurs under this previous decision including within the treatment units and study units. The treatment units would still be planted within the next 5 years. Based on past planting on the Blue Mountain Ranger District, including planting previous large fires such as Summit, Indian Rock, Flagtail, Thorn, and Parish Cabin fires, planting would achieve desired stocking levels.

Rapid salvage of fire killed or damaged trees on private lands and salvage of imminent or likely danger trees along Forest roads (Canyon Creek Complex Fire Danger Tree Mitigation/Salvage Project Decision Memo) may have a very slight benefit on reducing insect population buildups and spread into the remaining live trees in and near the fire. These trees were mostly removed during the winter of 2015 and into spring of 2016 before any movement of insects would happen later this spring and summer. The total beneficial benefit is very slight.

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects The design of the study is to evaluate the levels of post fire salvage that would maintain and potentially create nesting habitat for 3 focal species: white-headed, Lewis’s, and black-backed woodpeckers. Six units were identified for salvage.

All acres proposed for salvage would be reforested by planting with ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, and western larch where appropriate. Planting would occur at a spacing of 14 by 14 to 16 by 16. This spacing is designed to allow the trees room to grow without needing precommercial thinning to maintain adequate growth rates. This may also allow for more natural ground and shrub vegetation to become established. The desired stocking levels in 10 years is 150 to 180 trees per acre. Non-reforested areas up to 1 acre in size are permissible, to provide diversity and wildlife forage.

In the severely burned areas, shade has been reduced to between 5 and 20 percent. Salvage logging would reduce the shade another approximately 1 to 10 percent varying slightly between treatment units. This would increase the amount of solar radiation reaching the ground; the resulting higher temperatures would change the microclimate for plants. Vegetation that is well adapted to warmer temperatures and full sunlight would benefit compared to vegetation that grows in shade and desiccates rapidly. This would favor ponderosa pine and western larch establishment. In addition, the amount of ground vegetation and shrubs would increase compared to that which existed under the closed forest conditions prior to the fire.

The shade that crosses the forest floor as the shadows of trees follow the position of the sun through the day cover a much greater portion of the ground than the numbers shown above. This transient shade has been shown to be adequate to reduce drought stress in tree seedlings. Planting sites are located where the shade of stumps, snags, or any other material would provide some level of protection.

Seedling mortality on the District is primarily due to drought stress, or competing vegetation that exacerbates drought stress. Seedling survival averages 65 percent for the Malheur National Forest. Planting spacing takes this into account in order to achieve fully stocked stands into the future. Failure of planted areas on the Blue Mountain Ranger District is less than 5 percent.

Page 82 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Reforestation survival is highest if planting is completed within the next 3 to 4 years before competing vegetation becomes a concern to seedling success.

Cumulative Effects The past, ongoing, and foreseeable actions listed in chapter 3, Table 11, were considered for their cumulative effects on forest vegetation and reforestation. Upon reviewing the project planning area, it is not anticipated additional cumulative effects would occur to forest vegetation and reforestation as a result of this alternative.

As there is a previous decision to plant the acres proposed in this analysis, the planting of treatment units under the proposed action combined with the planting occurring under the Canyon Creek Complex Reforestation Project would have a positive effect on forest vegetation. Reforestation with appropriate species and at stocking levels meeting objectives of the management areas will occur across the project planning area over the next six years. The treatment units would be planted within the next 5 years. Based on past planting on the Blue Mountain Ranger District, including planting previous large fires such as Summit, Indian Rock, Flagtail, Thorn, and Parish Cabin fires, planting would achieve desired stocking levels.

Compliance with Forest Plan and Other Relevant Laws, Regulations, and Policies National Forest Management Act - (and Regional Forester’s Letter of November 19, 2002). Requirements of 36 CFR 219.28, which are part of the NFMA regulations, will be met. This act requires harvest only occur on suitable timberlands. The proposed action includes salvage on Management Areas 1, 4A, and 14, all of which are identified in our Forest Plan as suitable lands for timber management. No action is also in compliance with the NFMA as related to salvage as this act doesn’t require salvage.

The objective of tree planting is to adequately restock the salvage units with appropriate species and thereby reestablish appropriate forest cover for these activity areas. Acres salvaged under the proposed action will be reforested within 5 years, complying with requirements of the Act.

Malheur Forest Plan /- Regional Foresters Forest Plan Amendment #2 The no action alternative would meet the Malheur Forest Plan direction to establish ponderosa pine (and other early seral species) in appropriate sites because planting would occur under the Canyon Creek Fire Reforestation Project.

The proposed action meets the direction to establish ponderosa pine within 5 years after harvest as planting would occur after the salvage operations are complete. Planted trees will be grown from seed collected from superior trees within the applicable seed zone and elevation band for the area to be planted. Planting would be of early seral species as appropriate to minimize future losses to insect and disease and planting spacing would be appropriate for the management area objectives.

All alternatives would meet the direction to not decrease old forest structural stages, since live trees would not be harvested (except for incidental trees cut for road and landing construction and for safety). Stands being salvaged were set to the stand initiation stage as a result of the fire. Because the Canyon Creek Complex Reforestation Decision Memo would also reforest the area, there would not be a discernable difference between any alternative in stands reaching old forest structure.

Other Relevant Mandatory Disclosures There are no anticipated long-term irreversible commitments of the forest vegetation since it is renewable as long as the soil productivity is maintained. There may be short-term losses of growth related to soil

Page 83 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment compaction, but compaction is to be kept below 20 percent of the forest area. See soils section for more information. Economics Individuals and communities over a wide geographic area use national forest resources; however, the residents and businesses of counties near the Forest depend most heavily on the availability of the resources. Consequently, the effects of forest management on social and economic factors are strongest within these areas. For this reason, the Malheur National Forest primary zone of influence for economic impact is defined as Grant and Harney counties in Oregon.

Indicators for Assessing Effects

Table 28 Resource indicators and measures for assessing effects to Economics Indicator Measure Viability of harvest Commercial harvest acreage and volume estimates; and assumed costs of commercial sale Employment and Direct and indirect employment; and direct, indirect, and induced income income Economic efficiency Present net value

Affected Environment

Existing Condition

Viability of Harvest The viability of harvest is dependent upon market prices for dead fire killed timber and the ability to remove the rapidly deteriorating timber in the summer of 2016. In ponderosa pine nearly “all trees have blue stain in sapwood, affecting 25 to 50 percent of volume, and 10 percent have patch fungus by the end of year one, By the end of year two, 50 percent of burned Ponderosa Pine have conks, and all trees show insect stain, weather checking, decay and volume loss” (Lowell et al. 1992). Local sawmills that could bid on the timber from this project are located in Prairie City and John Day. In addition to the local sawmill, three to four large logging contractors usually bid on local timber sales, and if successful, could sell the sawtimber to the local sawmills. Mills outside Grant and Harney counties that may benefit from the timber on this project include those in La Grande and Pilot Rock. This could have an impact on the economies of these communities as well.

Currently the Malheur National Forest is in the third year of a 10-year stewardship contract. The stewardship contract was designed to help keep jobs and forest products in the local economy. Approximately 80 percent of the Malheur National Forest’s fiscal year harvest volume target is to be included in the stewardship contract and the remaining 20 percent is to be included in regular timber sale contracts. This ensures that forest products and the associated jobs will not only be available to the local economy, but would also be available to potential outside bidders or mills that may be interested.

Employment and Income Job estimates are based on the assumption of a direct relationship between changes in harvest volumes and manufactured output. In other words, a percentage change in harvest volume would result in a corresponding change in manufactured output and employment. Job estimates included temporary, permanent full time, and part-time employment. Employment effects from recreation and domestic- livestock grazing activities were not analyzed because only minor or no changes were expected in the level of use for these activities. The estimates provided by this analysis also did not include unpaid family

Page 84 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project workers or sole proprietors. Estimates apply to communities and counties in the regional economic impact zone and not necessarily to any one county.

Levels of harvest volume by alternative would affect employment and income in several ways:

 Directly – employment associated with harvesting, logging, mills, and processing plants for sawtimber, pulp, chips, veneer and plywood  Indirectly – industries that supply materials, equipment, and services to these businesses  Induced – personal spending by the business owners, employees, and related industries Several factors would influence the ability of any one county or community to experience the largest extent of the harvest-related employment and income effects. The financial viability of the timber sale proposals would influence whether potential purchasers closest to the project planning area could compete with other purchasers to acquire the majority of the supply. Changes to bid rates would likely occur during appraisal, depending on actual market conditions at that time. Employment projections would depend on other factors such as market conditions, quality and quantity of the volume offered for sale, timing of the offerings, and financial conditions of local firms.

Agriculture, manufacturing (particularly wood products), and food processing are important sources of employment and income in this region. Reliance on timber and forage from federal lands is moderate to high in several counties in the zone of influence (Haynes et al. 1997). Many communities in the economic impact zone are closely tied to the forest in both work activities and recreation. Cattle production and forest products provide the core employment for Grant and Harney counties. The forest products industry includes 2 major lumber mills and several logging companies. Forest products employment totaled approximately 347 direct jobs (i.e., mill workers and loggers) and 62 indirect jobs, approximately 8 percent of the total non-farm employment in Grant and Harney counties (average annual in 2013). Local government, retail trade, and services employ the most people in Grant and Harney counties (Oregon Employment Department 2015).

The area surrounding the project planning area is rural and has a disproportionately high unemployment rate compared with the Oregon state average and the National average. Currently (as of February 2016), Harney County is at 6.6 percent and Grant County is at 8.0 percent unemployment, compared to the Oregon state average of 4.8 percent and the National average of 4.9 percent (Oregon Employment Department 2016).

Environmental Justice

The population of the area is predominately white, followed by American Indian. The region is sparsely populated and contains low populations of other minority groups (3.1 percent of Grant County, 4.2 percent of Baker County, and 5.7 percent of Harney County) (United States Census Bureau 2014). The primary American Indian tribes represented are the Burns Paiute Tribe, Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Reservation, and Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs. With the exception of the Burns Paiute Tribe, other minority groups are scattered throughout the three counties.

Data regarding minorities or people with disabilities employed in the region’s timber, mining, ranching, road construction, forestry services, and recreation sectors is unavailable. Some federal contracts are reserved for award to minority businesses under the USDA Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization and the Small Business Administration.

Page 85 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Economic Efficiency Economic efficiency is a term used to describe how inputs are used to achieve outputs when all inputs (activities) and all outputs (including market and non-market) are identified and valued. All costs and all benefits to society are included; amounts of each output are not pre-established but are produced in amounts that maximize net public benefits (FSH 1909.17, §11.1).

Due to unavailable information, the non-wood outputs from this project could not be valued. Therefore, the economic efficiency of this project was measured by cost effectiveness, as recommended by FSH 1909.17. Cost effectiveness analyses attempt to determine the least costly alternative to produce the desired result. The objective of the cost effectiveness analysis was to show a relative measure of difference between alternatives. Where harvest viability was analyzed for only the commercial units, cost effectiveness was analyzed for all units together. The analysis focused on identifiable and quantifiable ecosystem benefits and costs for each alternative in terms of the present net value to assess which alternative came nearest to achieving the purpose and need over the largest land area at the least cost. All dollar values were discounted in terms of the present net value (2016 dollars). The real (exclusive of inflation) discount rate used was 4 percent.

The measurement of economic efficiency differs from the measurement of harvest viability in that economic efficiency attempts to put values on the full range of inputs and outputs (both market and non- market) associated with the project, while harvest viability is more like an accounting procedure that only considers the costs and revenues of the project as expressed in timber markets.

Volumes, costs, and revenues from the commercial units were analyzed for cost effectiveness. The derivation of the commercial unit data is described in the harvest viability section of this report.

Desired Condition The desired condition is to maintain the existing lumber and forest products infrastructure and support local employment, providing for community stability. The Malheur Forest Plan includes direction to provide a sustainable flow of timber and associated wood products at a level that would contribute to economic stability and provide an economic return to the public (USDA Forest Service 1990, page IV–2, Forest Goals 24–26). Implementation of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project would provide this.

The desired condition is also to “[c]ontribute to the social and economic health of communities which are significantly affected by National Forest management” (USDA Forest Service 1990, page IV–3, Forest Goal 42). Implementation of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project would provide local employment opportunities through vegetation, fuels, and aquatic restoration activities.

Methodology The social and economic effects of the proposed management alternative were assessed in terms of viability of harvestable timber, employment supported, and income provided. The following sections describe each of these criteria in detail.

Viability of Harvest Only the viability of commercial harvest was analyzed for those units that have a commercial component.

The computer program, TEA_ECON, was used to estimate the sale revenues based upon the estimated tentative advertised bid rates per hundred cubic feet ($/ccf) for the commercial acres of alternative 2. These bid rates indicated the economic viability of harvesting timber. The estimates of these bid rates were based on the most current estimates of the following:

Page 86 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

 Estimated volumes of sawtimber are shown in Table 29.  Estimated post-fire value and volume reductions.  Estimated volume per acre — estimated from local knowledge of stands. All volume is in hundreds of cubic feet (ccf).  Estimated harvest taking place in summer of 2016 since the Malheur National Forest received the Emergency Situation Determination for this project. TEA_ECON is an economic analysis tool that allows the user to perform timber sale accounting at the planning or sale layout level. The program uses price and cost data and the quarterly updated regional record of timber sale transactions to generate gross timber values, estimated advertised rates, and cash flow estimates.

In this project, cost effectiveness was measured in terms of present net value (PNV) per acre or: PNV/acre = present net costs/acre – present net revenues/acre.

Measurable costs and benefits on commercial units were based on costs and revenue from timber volume proposed for harvest and described under the assumptions for harvest viability.

Preliminary Value of Timber Removed: Based on a weighted average for all sales actually sold within Appraisal Zone 3 (primarily Blue Mountain forests) within the last 12 months.

Costs: Logging systems, log haul, road maintenance, contractual, brush disposal, erosion control, and other development. These costs are shown in Table 29 and are discounted to present net values at a rate of 4 percent.

An initial tentative advertised sawtimber bid rate ($/ccf) was determined by subtracting the costs associated with logging from the base period prices adjusted for the quality of the material and current market conditions. This rate was reduced by 10 percent per current appraisal methods.

The transaction evidence appraisal method accounts for competition between bidders. It is important to note that advertised bid rates have fluctuated over the last few years reflecting the volatility of the timber market. Prices would likely change in the future (e.g., when the actual sale appraisal occurs), depending on market conditions at that time. Therefore, these estimates should only be considered rough approximations of future conditions. As a result, calculated bid rates were rounded to the nearest dollar. Timber sale revenues were also discounted to present values at a rate of 4 percent.

Base Period Price: The volume-weighted average bid price of competitively sold timber sales in the previous 4 quarters. This value is updated quarterly.

Alternative 1- No Action

Direct and Indirect Effects - Viability of Harvest The no action alternative would not harvest timber, and therefore would not affect harvest viability.

Direct and Indirect Effects - Employment and Income This alternative would not harvest timber and therefore, would not support direct, indirect, and induced employment, or increased income to local economies. Lack of timber supply available for the local mills to purchase would adversely affect employment in local communities in Grant and Harney counties (e.g., Burns, Long Creek, Canyon City, John Day, Mt Vernon, and Prairie City). Lack of timber supply

Page 87 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment available for purchase by regional mills from outside the economic impact area would potentially affect employment in surrounding counties (e.g., Baker, Ochoco, Union, and Umatilla).

Recent trends of increasing timber harvest from National Forest lands in the area would likely continue in the future and contribute to increases in wood products industry employment. Changes in the economic base and wood products infrastructure for the economic impact zone would continue to be influenced by fluctuations in market prices, international market conditions, changes in technology, and industry restructuring.

Environmental Consequences Alternative 1 – No Action Direct and Indirect Effects - Economic Efficiency With the no action alternative, the public would incur no costs, nor realize any benefits of salvage timber harvest in this area. No action would yield a present net value of zero due to the data limitations (described in the Methodology section) for quantifying economic benefits and costs beyond those identified at the project level. This value ignores the road improvements, reforestation, watershed and riparian restoration that would result without implementation of this project, and the resulting losses in timber values and non-market benefits. Data limitations do not allow for the quantification of this risk; however, this risk would negatively affect present net value.

Cumulative Effects Because of the competitiveness of the market, and its global nature, the no action alternative would not cumulatively affect prices, costs, or harvest viability of other present or future timber sales in the economic impact zone, unless there was no other timber offered on the Malheur National Forest.

The selection of the no action alternative would not contribute to the recent increase in timber-related employment in the rural communities of Grant and Harney counties, but may reduce employment in the short-term.

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects - Viability of Harvest The TEA_ECON program was run for harvest viability. The effects of the action alternative on harvest viability is shown in Table 29

As shown in Table 29, alternative 2 would produce revenue, estimated at $262,965.00, and a cost of $179,113.00. This would produce an estimated present net value of $83,853.00.

Direct and Indirect Effects - Employment and Income In general, the primary effect on timber harvest-related employment would occur from harvesting fire killed trees associated with the action alternative over the next year. Financially viable sales would be necessary to provide opportunities for timber harvest-related employment.

The distribution of economic impacts would depend on the location of the timber purchaser who was awarded the contracts at the time of the sale, the availability of equipment and skills in the economic impact zone, and the location and availability of wood processing facilities and related infrastructure. Processors outside of northeastern Oregon could potentially bid on the sales and distribute the jobs and income beyond the region.

Page 88 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

As Table 29 below shows, alternative 2 would generate $828,000.00 in direct, indirect, and induced local income. Based upon the commercial volume harvested, alternative 2 would support approximately 30 jobs (both direct and indirect) over a 1 year period.

Direct and Indirect Effects - Economic Efficiency Market benefits that could occur as a result of the proposed activities include recovering the economic value of dead fire burned trees, which in turn would provide revenue for reforestation, road improvements and riparian restoration. Externalized costs such as those resulting from damage to soils, losses in wildlife habitat, and mobilized sediment in local streams are not well defined or measurable at the project level in terms that provide comparison of assigned dollar values. Refer to discussion of environmental consequences in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project Environmental Assessment (EA) for more detailed analysis of whether these external effects would occur. Other sections of the EA also discuss the non-economic benefits to human and environmental resources for a relative comparison between alternatives.

Table 29 shows the action alternative 2 would have a present net value of $83,853.00, and a net value per acre $70.00. This economic analysis assessed the action alternatives in terms of harvest viability, local employment and income, and economic efficiency as measured by cost effectiveness. Table 29 summarizes the results of the analysis.

Table 29 Economic effects Measure Alternative 2 Timber volume (ccf / mbf) 6,231 / 3,562 Acres by harvest method Ground based 1203 Total present value benefits Average bid price ($/ccf) 42.33 Discounted revenues ($) $262,965.00 Discounted cost ($) $179,113.00 Present net value ($) $83,853.00 Present net value/acre ($) $69.70 Total present value costs FS prep and administration ($/ccf) 26.00 Stump to truck ($) 70.00 Log haul ($) 30.00 Brush disposal (ccf) 2.25 Road maintenance/Erosion control (ccf) 1.50 Temporary roads (miles) 4.0 Employment Direct jobs 19 Indirect jobs 11 Total jobs 30 Income Direct ($) $517,125.00 Indirect and induced ($) $310,472.00 Total ($) $827,597.00

Page 89 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Cumulative Effects Estimates for tentative advertised bid rates for the action is within the range of rates experienced by the three Blue Mountain forests (Malheur, Umatilla, and Wallowa-Whitman) within the last two years. There are also residual effects from past timber sales within the subwatershed which would not have a detrimental effect on the viability of harvest of alternative 2.

Alternative 2 could produce revenues that assist with resource protection and restoration. While it cannot be determined exactly how much revenue will be generated until after a sale is sold, the economic value of the timber could be utilized to pay for items such as restoration, road maintenance, road improvements, and watershed and aquatic enhancement projects.

Alternative 2 would provide some potential short-term economic relief by utilizing fire burned logs. This material would potentially be used to support the sawmill operating in John Day. The amount of local economic activity would be determined by whether the purchaser is local or distant, which mill(s) local or distant get the lumber, and the price for the lumber. These cumulative economic effects could cause beneficial “quality of life” social effects, especially when combined with other ongoing Forest Service timber sales within Grant and Harney counties that are providing employment and income.

There are projects in the two counties in various stages of planning that will add to the Forest’s annual timber offerings for 2016, such as an ongoing roadside danger tree removal project, current stewardship and timber sales that are currently being implemented (Wolf, Galena, Soda Bear, and Starr), and 2 projects (Elk 16 and Big Mosquito) that have signed decisions and will be implemented this year, as well as several projects in the planning stages that will be offered in the coming years. These ongoing and foreseeable projects are expected to add cumulatively to the employment and income of Grant and Harney counties during the life of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project.

It is foreseeable that the Malheur National Forest will offer approximately 75 million board feet this year, with this project included. This means that the economic efficiency of past, ongoing, or foreseeable future activities would not affect, or be affected by any effects that have not already been described.

Compliance with Forest Plan and Other Relevant Laws, Regulations, Policies and Plans Alternative 2 is consistent with the following Malheur Forest Plan objectives and standards:

 Provide a sustained flow of timber for lumber, fiber, and/or associated wood products at a level that will contribute to economic stability, while providing for regional and national needs (USDA Forest Service 1990, Forest Goal 24, page IV-2).  Provide and utilize wood fiber in the form of sawtimber, fiber, and/or associated wood products in a manner which will minimize losses and maximize outputs in a cost-effective manner, consistent with the various resource objectives and environmental standards (USDA Forest Service 1990, Forest Goal 25, page IV-2).  Provide an economic return to the public (USDA Forest Service 1990, Forest Goal 26, page IV-2).  Forest-wide Standard 103 (USDA Forest Service 1990, page IV-38): Timber harvest is prohibited on lands classified as unsuitable for timber management except when necessary to accomplish multiple- use objectives other than timber production. All lands proposed for commercial timber harvest in the action alternatives are suitable for timber management.

The no action alternative would not meet the Malheur Forest Plan goals and standards described above because this alternative would not produce any timber or associated wood products or provide an economic return to the public.

Page 90 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Fire, Fuels, Air Quality This analysis utilizes the broad concepts of fire regimes and condition class to describe this project from a fire and fuels perspective. By comparing the current stand structure, composition, and function to historic vegetative compositions and disturbance regimes, it is possible to compare current conditions to desired conditions. This is a dry forest system that is resilient to historic and projected disturbance regimes.

Indicators for Assessing Effects

Table 30 Resource elements, indicators and measures for assessing effects to fire and fuels Resource element Resource indicator Measure Source Fire behavior fuel modeling Fuel bed depth averaging 2 (Behave plus) to ensure flame Hazardous fuels Fuel loading feet or less across treatment lengths within Engine or areas. handcrew capabilities. Within historical range of variability as measured in Percentage of historical range of Forest structure Condition class terms of condition class as variability described above

Fire regimes are the classification of the historic combined conditions for fire severity, intensity, and frequency for a particular environment (Agee 1993; Hann 2004; Heyerdahl 2001; Sugihara 2006). They are a cornerstone for describing the natural range of variability within a system. In the broad definition, the regimes found on the Malheur National Forest are characterized as follows:

 Fire Regime 1 (dry upland forest): 0 to 35 year frequency, low-mixed severity (less than 75 percent of dominant overstory vegetation replaced).  Fire Regime 2 (dry herbland): 0 to 35 year frequency, high severity (greater than 75 percent of dominant overstory vegetation replaced).  Fire Regime 3 (moist upland forest): 35 to 200+ year frequency, mixed severity (25 to 75 percent of overstory vegetation replaced.  Fire Regime 4 (cold upland forest): 35 to 100+ year frequency, high severity (greater than 75 percent of dominant overstory vegetation replaced). Condition classes describe departure from the historical range of variability and are the metric to identify desired conditions (Powell 1998 and 2001). Condition classes, numbered from 1 to 3, are generally equivalent to low, moderate, and high departure from the historical range of variability. Condition classes also represent increasing levels of risk from uncharacteristic wildland fire behavior and effects (Hann 2004). A more intensive description of condition classes can be found in Table 31.

Table 31 Description of condition classes Condition Attributes Example management options class Live Fuels Fire regimes are within or near an historical range. Condition The risk of losing key ecosystem components is low. Where appropriate, these areas can Class 1 Fire frequencies have departed from historical be maintained within the historic fire frequencies (either increased or decreased) by no regime by treatment such as more than one return interval). prescribed fire or management of Vegetation attributes (species composition and unplanned ignitions to meet Forest structure) are intact and functioning within an historical Plan objectives. range. Fire regimes have been moderately altered from their Where appropriate, these areas may historical range. need moderate levels of restoration

Page 91 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Condition Attributes Example management options class Live Fuels The risk of losing key ecosystem components has treatments, such as prescribed fire, Condition increased to moderate. hand or mechanical treatments, or Class 2 Fire frequencies have departed from historic managing unplanned ignitions under frequencies by more than one return interval. This the appropriate conditions to restore change results in moderate changes to one or more of historic composition and structure and the following: fire size, frequency, intensity, severity, or fire regimes (particularly fire regime I). landscape pattern. Vegetation attributes have been moderately altered from their historical ranges. Live Fuels Fire regimes have been considerably altered from their Condition historical range. Where appropriate, these areas need Class 3 The risk of losing key ecosystem components is high. intensive degrees of restoration Fire frequencies have departed by multiple return treatments, such as multiple entries of intervals. This change results in dramatic changes to prescribed burning and hand or one or more of the following: fire size, frequency, mechanical treatments. intensity, severity, or landscape pattern.

In addition to fire regimes and condition class as a way to articulate departure from the historical range of variability, the author uses fuel bed depth and fuel loading metrics to describe projected short and long- term activity impacts (Anderson 1982; Riccardi 2007; Scott 2005). These inform fire behavior models.

Table 32 Description of activity fuels (Scott 2005, USDA n.d.) Fuel model Description Photo example SB1 (201) The primary carrier of fire in SB1 is light dead and Low Load Activity down activity fuel. Fine fuel load is 10 to 20 tons/acre, Fuel weighted toward fuels 1 to 3 inches diameter class, depth is less than 1 foot. Spread rate moderate; flame length low.

SB2 (202) The primary carrier of fire in SB2 is moderate dead and Moderate Load down activity fuel or light blowdown fine fuel load is 7 to Activity Fuel or 12 tons/acre, evenly distributed across 0 to 0.25, 0.25 Low Load to 1, and 1 to 3 inch diameter classes, depth is about 1 Blowdown foot. Spread rate moderate; flame length moderate

SB3 (203) The primary carrier of fire in SB3 is heavy dead and High Load Activity down activity fuel or moderate blowdown. Fine fuel Fuel or Moderate load is 7 to 12 tons/acre, weighted toward 0 to 0.25 Load Blowdown inch diameter class, depth is more than 1 foot. Spread rate high; flame length high.

Page 92 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Affected Environment

Methodology The effects analysis that follows is synthesized from studies occurring on the Malheur National Forest as referenced to determine current and reference conditions in the analysis area. These reference conditions were compared with the post-fire Rapid Assessment of Vegetation Condition after fire (RAVG, Miller 2007) to determine percentage of overstory canopy that was killed during the fire based on estimated basal area loss (Miller 2007). Areas that were characterized as Fire Regime 1 and had less than 75 percent of dominant overstory vegetation loss are considered within historical range of variability and characterized as Condition Class 1. Areas that were characterized as Fire Regime 1 and had more than 75 percent of dominant overstory vegetation replaced are departed from the historical range of variability and are best characterized as Condition Class 3: “This change results in dramatic changes to one or more of the following: fire size, frequency, intensity, severity, or landscape pattern.”

Estimates of fuel profiles and likely fuel profiles are based on observations gathered by the author from similar treatments within the Canyon Creek Fire Complex perimeter which have taken place in the winter of 2015-2016.

Existing Condition Throughout the Malheur National Forest, wildland fire processes have been altered due to fire exclusion, timber harvest, climate change, and grazing. As a result, fires are now larger and more severe than historic levels, especially in the dry forest types (Campbell 2004; Hessberg 2015; Peterson 2005). Forest structure has been altered. Studies have specifically shown changes in dry forest types throughout the Blue Mountains (Agee 1993; Campbell 2004; Heyerdahl 1996; Olson 2001). Many of these areas succeeded into dense stands of fir where shade intolerant species may be absent or in decline (Liquori and Jackson 2001). Ultimately, these changes have created a set of systems that are less resilient in the wake of disturbances, such as periodic native insect infestations or recurring wildfires.

Ninety-six (96) percent of the National Forest System lands within the proposed treatment units are classified as Fire Regime 1 (USDA 2014). This includes the dry forest types, and as described in Resource Indicators above, is characterized as:

 0 to 35 year frequency, low-mixed severity (less than 75 percent of dominant overstory vegetation replaced). When compared with the RAVG map severity classifications, 87 percent of the treatment units are classified as having lost 75 to 100 percent of pre-fire basal area. This gives us the closest approximation of data to compare departure from historical range of variability and description of condition class. The areas classified as Fire Regime 1 had a severity of more than 75 percent basal area loss are therefore outside of historical range of variability.

Only 4 percent of the Malheur National Forest System lands within the treatment area are categorized as condition class 1 post-fire (USDA 2014).

Desired Condition All zones managed by the Malheur National Forest would be in and maintained in condition class 1. Fire behavior, effects, and other associated disturbances are similar to those that occurred prior to fire exclusion (suppression) and mimic the natural fire regime. Composition and structure of vegetation and fuels characteristics are similar to the conditions that existed under the historical fire regime. Risk of loss of key ecosystem components is reduced.

Page 93 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

When in visual corridors (Forest Management Areas 14), residues in middleground and background distance zones meet visual resource objectives which are compatible with reforestation and wildlife objectives. Residues in foreground areas meet conditions described in the Malheur Forest Plan.

Methodology As outlined in the purpose and need, the project is focused on specific areas meeting a narrow set of criterion to provide data to inform future management. This criterion focuses on areas of higher severity and mortality which would be ideal for both woodpecker habitat as well as commercial timber harvest. By using remotely sensed data through the Rapid Assessment of Vegetation Condition after Wildfire (RAVG) map, the author identifies the amount of land to be affected by the proposed actions and applies current research to estimate the post action effects.

Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis The proposed action would occur within the treatment areas; this analysis is limited to those areas. The overall arrangement and size of these treatment areas is unlikely to have effects on fire behavior and spread at a larger scale. The treatment units are the spatial context for the direct effects analysis. The Canyon Creek Complex fire boundary is the spatial context for the indirect and cumulative effects.

Based on research comparing fuel loading profiles in treated and untreated stands post fire (Brown 2003; Dunn 2012, 2015; Peterson 2014), the short-term timeframe is within the next 5 years and the long-term time frame is 20 years. These time frames are based on the earliest average threshold for when surface fuel loadings begin to hit equilibrium between unlogged and logged stands and when post-fire fuel loading effects tend to diminish regardless of treatments (Peterson 2014).

Past, Present, and Foreseeable Activities Relevant to Cumulative Effects Analysis Management actions that occurred in this area including fire suppression, grazing, and timber management activities have contributed to the fuel loading and departure from historic conditions. The impact of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire itself has been the event with the most impact relevant to this project and is likely to remain so in the near term. These treatment areas reflect only 1.1 percent of the overall fire area, and 2 percent of the high severity patches within the fire. The impact of this treatment in the treated areas would result in reduced coarse woody debris but increased fine fuels (Dunn 2015; Peterson 2014). Within these treated areas, we can expect higher flame lengths and rates of spread during future wildfire events under the proposed action. The greater fire area surrounding the project planning area reduces continuity in fuels and overall fire danger, mitigating the potential for significant fire spread from these treatment units. From a fire and fuels standpoint the changes in fuels continuity on the landscape due to this project is therefore negligible in the context of the broader event.

Environmental Consequences

Alternative 1 – No Action

Direct and Indirect Effects Fire and fuels management are often discussed as a concern in post-fire environments because of the changes in fuel loading, composition, and continuity after wildfire. Recent research (Donato 2013; Dunn 2012 and 2015; McGinnis 2010; Monsanto and Agee 2006; Richie 2013) does not consistently validate this concern.

Page 94 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

The density of large, dead, over story trees can provide a safety concern for firefighters, resulting in limiting the strategies available during fire suppression operations. This is likely to be reduced over time as these trees fall.

Just over 42 percent, or 47,605 acres, within the fire perimeter are classified as having 75 percent or more basal area loss. Of this, only 1,058 acres or 2 percent of this high severity area is considered for treatment. Because the patch sizes under consideration are small and within larger patches of high basal area loss, the lack of treatment in these specific patches is unlikely to contribute to success or failure of fire suppression activities.

Cumulative Effects Because there are no direct or indirect effects, no cumulative effects would occur.

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects Fuel loading would increase within the treatment units with the majority of fuel accumulation in the finer fuels as coarser fuels would be removed during harvest operations. Based on studies in similar fuel types, this accumulated fuel is likely to take several decades to decompose (Brown 2003; Dunn 2012 and 2015) without further treatment.

Activity fuels would increase in all treatment areas in the near term. Research on fuel loading (Scott 2005) describes increased rates of spread and flame lengths based on the fuel model changes resulting from treatment. This would vary based on ambient conditions (weather and fuel moistures). This would make suppressing fires more challenging, however the project design criteria limit concentrations of fuels, ensuring the flame lengths are such as to allow for firefighters to suppress these fires with engines and hand crews.

During the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Hazard Tree Mitigation Project, which is occurring post-fire in the Canyon Creek Fire area, the author has tested the proposed project design criteria (see chapter 2). It was observed that an average fuel bed depth of 2 feet across the unit, as measured immediately upon unit completion by contract inspectors, meets the fuel loadings of Fuel Models SB2 and SB3 in areas of activity, and were often much less when averaged across the treatment unit. Within two weeks post treatment, the fuels had become compacted and are more represented by Fuel Model SB2. Based on these observations, the project design criteria allowing for an average fuel bed depth of 2 feet across the unit meet the desired loading resulting in modeled flame lengths within initial attack capability by engines and handcrews (NWCG 2004).

Removing standing dead trees within these patches would mitigate safety concerns for firefighters in these areas, allowing them to use the full range of suppression tactics available. As stated in the no action alternative, while this does not alter firefighting opportunities in the broader area affected by the 2015 Canyon Creek Complex Fire, it mitigates the issues raised by the initial increase of activity fuels.

In all, the effects of this treatment in terms of potential fire behavior is minimal due to the small acreage of treatments relative to the larger areas of high severity in the Canyon Creek Fire footprint.

Cumulative Effects Fuel loading in both treated and untreated areas would accumulate post-fire, beginning to decline as early as 20 years post-fire (Peterson 2014; Ritchie 2013). Since the proposed treatment areas account for only 2 percent of the high severity footprint of the Canyon Creek Complex fire, and many of these high severity

Page 95 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment areas are in the immediate vicinity of treatment, these treatments would have little effect on fire management activities. Minor cumulative effects from this project combined with the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Danger Tree Mitigation/Salvage Project include increased activity fuels in the treated areas (less than 6.5 percent of the Canyon Creek Complex fire area, the cumulative effects analysis area). All of these treatments occur in high severity areas which further mitigates impacts of activity fuel loading.

It is not anticipated that this action would create a cumulative impact that would alter fuel loadings. Fuels generated would be utilized for other resource needs (e.g., erosion control), thereby minimizing a fuels cumulative effect.

Compliance with Forest Plan and Other Relevant Laws, Regulations, and Policies Both the no action and proposed action alternatives meet the Malheur Forest Plan direction to 1) initiate preliminary management action that provides for the most reasonable probability of minimizing fire suppression costs and resource damage, consistent with probable fire behavior, resource impacts, safety, and smoke management and 2) identify, develop, and maintain fuel profiles that contribute to the most cost-efficient fire protection program consistent with management direction (USDA Forest Service 1990, page IV-4) in differing ways.

The no action alternative does not result in a short-term increase in activity fuel loading and this meets both Malheur Forest Plan goals for fire management.

The proposed action does not allow for fuel accumulation beyond the capabilities of initial attack firefighting resources and provides increased access to the treated areas by reducing snag density, which mitigates for firefighter safety. This also meets both Malheur Forest Plan goals for fire management.

The Malheur Forest Plan, in Forest Wide Standards (page IV-45), states:

 Use all methods of fuel treatment as prescribed by site-specific analysis to achieve resource management objectives. Encourage utilization of wood residue as a priority treatment, consistent with long-term site productivity and wildlife habitat needs. The no action alternative does not address the need to achieve these objectives by not managing to restore the landscape, which is out of the historical range of variability (VRH) because of the high severity of the fire in these patches. The proposed action does, both on the small scale and by studying the effects of these treatments to inform future management.

There would be no prescribed or pile burning as part of this project, and so there would be no emissions from burning associated with this project to comply with air quality regulations.

Soils The purpose of this section is to disclose the potential effects of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project on soils. The various project alternatives are evaluated to determine whether legal and regulatory requirements for soil conservation would be met. To achieve this, resource elements and their associated indicators and measures are analyzed for each alternative to determine if effects are maintained within the limits of the forest plan standards of the Malheur National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (USDA Forest Service 1990).

Page 96 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Indicators for Assessing Effects Resource indicators and measures are used in the resource analysis to measure and disclose effects. Resource elements, indicators, and measures for assessing effects of the alternatives are presented in Table 33.

Table 33 Resource elements, indicators and measures for assessing effects to soils Resource Resource Measure Source Element Indicator (Quantify if possible) Detrimental soil Malheur Forest Plan Forest-wide Soil quality Areal percent conditions Standard 126 Malheur Forest Plan Forest-wide Erosion potential Erodibility Slope and soil type Standards 126 & 127 Amount of litter and large organic Organic matter Condition of Analysis issue generated from a debris relative to historical range of and nutrients forest floor public concern variability

Affected Environment – Soil Quality

Methodology Field soil assessments involve the collection of semi-quantitative information within a project planning area to determine the areal extent of detrimental soil conditions existing as a consequence of past management activities. Soil assessments provide the most accurate picture of soil quality within proposed treatment units. Soil assessments were performed on treatment units T1, T2, T3, and T5 from May 27 to June 3, 2016. Due to the expedited nature of the proposed project, field visits to perform soil assessments were not feasible for units T4 and T6. The four units that were assessed were chosen because they appeared to be the units most sensitive to harvest impacts based on abundance of ash soil, steep slopes, and past history of harvest, as shown in GIS. It is possible, however, that there are moderate impacts in T4 and T6. T4 and T6 appear to have less existing impacts and sensitivity to impacts (moderate sensitivity) based on past harvest history, slope, and soil type. Therefore, existing impacts for these units are based on the assessment results for the more sensitive areas (T1, T2, T3, and T5), and past monitoring of areas with similar soil conditions and past harvest.

Existing Condition According to the USDA Forest Service Manual, soil quality is “the capacity of a specific kind of soil to function, within natural or managed ecosystem boundaries, to sustain plant and animal productivity, maintain or enhance water and air quality, and support human health and habitation and ecosystem health” (FSM 2010). Considering the Malheur Forest Plan objective for the soil resource (see Land and Resource Management Plan section above), a forest with good soil quality will support sustained levels of productivity and water infiltration over time if managed properly. However, soil quality can be diminished if forest management activities lead to detrimental soil conditions, which include compaction, displacement, puddling, and detrimental soil burning.

Compaction is the simultaneous decrease in porosity and increase in bulk density that occurs when mechanical force is applied to the soil (Napper et al. 2009). Compaction can cause a decrease in the rate of water infiltration and percolation and an overall decrease in soil water holding capacity, consequently increasing the potential for erosion. Compaction may also decrease soil aeration and impede the ability of roots to penetrate the soil. Oftentimes increased resistance to mechanical penetration or the presence of massive (structureless) or platy soil structure are signs of compaction.

Puddling is the obliteration of structure and pores in the soil surface horizons due to the application of a combination of compacting and shear forces (Napper et al. 2009). Puddled soil is effectively smeared and,

Page 97 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment as a result, water infiltration is prevented (Page-Dumroese et al. 2009), which can cause increased overland flow and an elevated risk of erosion.

Displacement occurs when surface soil horizons and associated nutrients and organic matter are physically moved or removed (Page-Dumroese et al. 2000). Displacement exposes lower soil horizons, which are oftentimes more susceptible to erosion than surface horizons, and can reduce site productivity (Napper et al. 2009).

Detrimental soil burning occurs when soils are subjected to extreme temperatures during a fire, resulting in the obliteration of the organic layer and oxidation of the top portion of the mineral soil. The oxidized portion of the soil will exhibit a reddish coloring and the layer immediately below this will be charred (blackened) by heat conducted through the overlying oxidized layer. To be considered detrimental soil burning, this effect must be observed on an area at least 5 feet wide and a total of 100 square feet (FSM 2010).

Compaction, puddling, and displacement are often consequences of ground-based logging activities. Activities associated with fire suppression, grazing, and off-highway vehicle travel are likely to have caused some compaction, puddling, and displacement within treatment units, although probably to minimal extent. The effects of these detrimental soil conditions on forest productivity can be long-lived; depending on the soil type, among other factors, detrimental conditions can be observed up to several decades following the activity by which they were caused (Najafi et al. 2014).

Geology and Slopes

Uplands in this project planning area are approximately 40 percent underlain with basaltic andesite of the Strawberry Volcanics, with the majority of this area lying north of Canyon Creek in the east and central portions of the project planning area. Approximately 50 percent of the project planning area – mostly west and south of Canyon Creek – is underlain with sedimentary rocks, including greywacke, siltstone, shale, mudstone, and water laid tuff. Inclusions of Clarno Formation, alluvium, and sedimentary, volcanic, and metamorphic rocks underlie the remaining 10 percent of the project planning area.

Study and treatment units within the project planning area are primarily underlain with Strawberry Volcanics (T1, T2, T4, T6, and a small portion of T5) or sedimentary (T3 and the majority of T5) parent materials. Basalt and andesite tend to weather to loam and clay loam. Sedimentary rocks weather to a variety of soil textures depending on the particle size distribution of the original minerals composing the rock. In the project planning area sedimentary rock tends to weather to loams and sandy loams. Sand content of these soils depends on the abundance of greywacke and tuff.

Slopes within the project planning area range from 0 percent to greater than 100 percent, with most (approximately 60 percent) falling within the range of 35 to 60 percent. Slopes greater than 100 percent are sparsely scattered throughout the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness north of Canyon Creek and west of U.S. Highway 395 in the vicinity of Vance Creek. Project activities have been limited to slopes less than 35 percent, so study and treatment areas were selected in portions of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area containing large amounts of ground with slopes falling below this threshold.

Table 34 below provides more details regarding slopes and the burn severity by treatment units within the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area.

Page 98 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Table 34 Soil burn severity and slopes by treatment unit Percent Percent high Percent low Percent Area Percent Area moderate Treatment units severity soil severity soil with slopes with slopes 25- severity soil burning burning >35 percent 35 percent burning T1 56 35 10 3 33 T2 13 78 10 6 19 T3 9 73 18 24 40 T4 2 79 18 7 18 T5 1 66 31 14 27 T6 52 36 12 5 13 Average percent 17 5 22 18 23 over treatment units

Soil Types of Interest

The eruption of Mount Mazama approximately 7,700 years ago deposited a mantle of volcanic ash over existing soils throughout the Pacific Northwest region and beyond (Bacon 1983; Zdanowicz et al. 1999). Such soils are called volcanic ash cap soils. The presence of a volcanic ash cap causes important differences in soils. Most soils in the Blue Mountains are influenced by ash, but soils with a distinct cap of ash differ from soils where ash has been partially eroded away or mixed with the residual soil (mixed ash soils) because ash cap soils tend to have more total ash than partially eroded or mixed ash soils. In comparison to other soil types in the region, ash cap soils have the potential to supply more water to plants because: 1) ash cap soils have a high infiltration rate resulting from a characteristic high porosity and low proportion of clay-size particles, 2) the combination of high porosity and lower clay content allow ash cap soils to retain a relatively high amount of plant available water, 3) ash cap soils usually have less coarse fragments in the upper horizons (Geist and Cochran 1999), and 4) ash cap soils are generally deeper (Carlson 1974). Thus, ash cap soils are typically more productive than mixed ash soils (Geist and Cochran 1999). Ash cap soils tend to support mixed conifers, including true fir. Mixed ash soils predominantly support ponderosa pine and, to a lesser degree, Douglas-fir. Ash cap soil is more easily displaced and compacted than mixed ash soil, however rocky ash cap soils tend to be more resistant to compaction (Carlson 1974). Ash cap soils often occur on north and east facing slopes. Ash cap soils are scattered throughout the project planning area with the highest concentrations occurring on north-facing slopes to the south and west of Canyon Creek on the west side of the project planning area, throughout the hills in the south-central portion of the project planning area, and in the vicinity of the upper reaches of Middle Fork Canyon Creek. Ash-containing soils are distributed to a lesser degree throughout the area north of East Fork Canyon Creek within the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness.

A particularly sensitive soil type within the project planning area are shallow, rocky soils supporting low amounts of ground cover, primarily in juniper woodlands and non-forested areas. Such soils are referred to as scab soils. Because of their shallow, rocky nature, scab soils cannot absorb much water and often produce overland flow. These soils tend to be erodible and are not generally included in timber harvest units, but can be adjacent to units. Scab soils are particularly vulnerable to erosion after fires because they can receive runoff from areas upslope from them that that do not normally produce runoff. Burned areas immediately downslope of scab soils are also at an increased risk of erosion because they are less capable of absorbing the runoff leaving the scab areas than they were prior to the occurrence of fire. Scab soils are sparsely scattered through most of the project planning area, but predominantly occur on the south-facing slopes and ridgetops to the south and west of Canyon Creek on the west side of the project planning area, in the hills of the south-central portion of the project planning area, and in the area northeast of Canyon Creek between Fawn and Lower Gap Creeks. Scab soils also occur to a lesser extent scattered throughout the area south of the upper reaches of Middle Fork Canyon Creek and north of East Fork Canyon Creek within the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness.

Page 99 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Table 35 displays the percent of scab and ash soil types found within the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area.

Table 35 Scab and ash soils by treatment unit Treatment units Percent scab soils Percent ash soils T1 0 32 T2 8 4 T3 3 3 T4 1 18 T5 3 31 T6 2 0 Average Percent over treatment units 3 14

Forest GIS records reveal past timber sales and fuel treatments have occurred within all proposed study units, but not within all treatment units. However, these records only extend back to the late-1970s and it is likely all treatment unit areas have been harvested at some point in the past. The extent to which timber harvesting activities contribute to existing detrimental soil conditions depends on the distribution of previous logging activities within the proposed treatment units, volume removed, number of entries, soil type, slope, condition of the soil at the time of logging (e.g., moist, frozen, snow covered), incentives and skills of the operators, equipment used, and amount of time since the activities occurred, among other factors. For most areas that have undergone previous treatments, decades have passed since activities took place and soils have probably at least partially recovered from the detrimental conditions caused by those activities. Alternatively, some areas may never have been heavily impacted because they were logged under winter or dry conditions.

Areas of burned soil exhibiting the characteristics described above (consumed organic layer and oxidation of the upper portion of the mineral soil with charring below this layer) do occur within the treatment units, but most do not meet the spatial requirement to be considered detrimental soil burning (minimum of 5 feet wide and 100 square feet). Locations where the spatial requirements have been met appear to be slash piles that were burned as part previous timber harvesting activities. Such areas tend to be adequately spaced and probably contribute to far less than 1 percent of overall detrimental soil conditions within the treatment units. See Erosion section below for more on soil burning.

Results of field soil assessments performed from May 27 to June 3, 2016 revealed the extent of detrimental soil conditions on four of the six treatment units are shown in Table 36 below.

Table 36 Detrimental soil conditions before and after proposed project activities on four assessed treatment units Existing detrimental soil conditions Estimated post-activity detrimental soil conditions Unit (percent of unit) (percent of unit) T1 5 percent 10 percent T2 4 percent 9 percent T3 9 percent 14 percent T5 28 percent 28 percent* See the discussion on T5 existing condition below and in “Alternative 2 – Proposed Action” section

As shown in Table 36, T5 clearly exceeds the 20 percent limit by area for detrimental soil conditions. Field assessment of unit T5 revealed higher impacts (primarily compaction and displacement) from past harvest activities within the proposed treatment areas. According to GIS records, these activities took

Page 100 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project place in 1969/1970 (unnamed harvest, subunits 20 and 21), 1983 (Glade, subunit 19), 1990 (Dry Gulch, subunit 18), and 1995 (Dry, subunit 21). Figure 8 shows a map of T5 with subunits labeled 18, 19, 20, and 21; of these subunits, all but subunit 20 were directly assessed (subunit 20 was assumed to have detrimental impacts similar to subunit 21). Figure 9 shows displaced ash-cap soil in the northern portion of subunit 18. Soils that appear the most disturbed within T5 are ash-cap soils, which are the most productive soil types on the forest. Therefore, it is likely that productivity has been compromised to some extent as a result of this disturbance. Based on GIS analysis, T4 and T6 are expected to have existing detrimental soil conditions within the range of T1, T2, and T3.

Figure 8 Soil survey transects in unit T5

Page 101 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Figure 9 Displaced soils present in treatment unit T5

Desired Condition Soil quality should be maintained to the extent possible by limiting detrimental soil impacts to a practical minimum. In compliance with Malheur Forest Plan Standards and the Forest Service Manual, the area of detrimental soil impacts within each unit either shall not exceed 17 percent (20 percent minus 3 percent for roads) if currently less than 17 percent, or shall not exceed existing conditions after rehabilitation if currently 17 percent or higher.

Environmental Consequences – Soil Quality

Methodology Effects of proposed actions on soil quality are analyzed by the project soil scientist using best professional judgement and information gathered from past monitoring on similar areas within the forest.

Assessments / Process Field soil assessments are the most reliable means of estimating the extent of existing detrimental soil conditions within a project planning area. Due to the expedited nature of this project field soil assessments were completed on T1, T2 and T3 and extrapolated to T4 and T6. Based on soil type, past harvest information, and assessment information collected on T1, T2, and T3 it is estimated that these units fall within the intermediate range of detrimental impacts established by soil assessments on units T1, T2, and T3 (4 to 9 percent). Soil assessments provide an estimate of detrimental soil impacts with some expected deviation or error because of the sampling methods used. Additionally, effects of management depend on the combination of a variety of factors, including weather, implementation details, and small- scale variations in soil types across the landscape. To address this uncertainty, post-treatment monitoring

Page 102 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project and remediation are proposed to ensure detrimental impacts are limited to less than 17 percent, per Malheur Forest Plan Standards (see Monitoring section below).

Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis The spatial boundaries for analyzing the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects to soil are treatment unit boundaries because Malheur Forest Plan Forest-wide Standard 126 applies to units and because soil is a stationary resource.

Unless otherwise stated, the temporal boundary for analyzing the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects is the time period immediately following the proposed actions because that is when effects are the greatest.

Past, Present, and Foreseeable Activities Relevant to Cumulative Effects Analysis The activities relevant to the cumulative effects analysis for soil quality are historical and recent timber harvests, fire suppression, historical grazing, and off-highway vehicle use.

Alternative 1 – No Action

Direct and Indirect Effects Taking no action would cause no direct or indirect impacts to soil quality. Bioturbation from root action and the activities of soil organisms (e.g., insects, burrowing mammals, etc.), as well as physical loosening from freeze-thaw action, would lead to the gradual recovery of existing compacted and puddled soils. Complete recovery from compaction and puddling may take decades. Existing displaced soils would continue to settle and stabilize as they regain vegetative cover in the post-fire environment. On areas from which soil has been displaced, topsoil would reform over the course of many decades or a few centuries as vegetation adds organic matter.

Cumulative Effects Upon reviewing the actions in Table 11, chapter 3, it is not anticipated that cumulative effects to soil will occur under this alternative.

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects Calculations for green tree thinning on the north end of the Malheur National Forest indicate ground based logging systems can increase detrimental soil conditions by up to 7 percent. However, the one unit monitored for the Flagtail Fire Salvage Project had an increase of 7 percent for compaction and 6 percent for displacement, for a total of 13 percent increase in detrimental soil conditions (McNeil 2005a). This relatively high level of impact may be the result of several factors, some of which are related to the salvage nature of the logging and some of which are not. Factors that indicate salvage may impact more soil than green thinning include a relatively high volume per acre removed, moist soil (because trees are no longer transpiring), decreased root strength as roots rot, less support from down wood and forest floor, and possibly less care exercised during logging because of the need to remove the wood before it deteriorates further. These factors indicate that salvage may impact more soil than green tree thinning. On the other hand, on the Summit Fire Salvage Project the increase in compaction averaged 3 percent on monitored units (detrimental displacement was not measured) (McIver and McNeil 2006). Contributing factors to the difference between the Flagtail and Summit projects results may include the following: 1) Flagtail was logged in June whereas most of the Summit logging was from August through February; 2) feller bunchers were not used on Summit; 3) in Summit, the loggers knew the units would be monitored;

Page 103 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment and 4) topography. The Flagtail and Summit project scenarios appear to exemplify opposite ends of the range of effects imposed upon salvage treatment units, which makes it difficult to estimate what the actual increase in detrimental impacts is likely to be. In contrast to the Flagtail and Summit salvage projects, the proposed project would probably involve the removal of less volume per acre because of the gradient prescription, which should reduce the overall amount of detrimental impacts to soil within the activity area. Additionally, Canyon Creek Salvage logging would take place from mid-July through September when soil moistures are lower, probably making the impacts more similar to the Summit project than the Flagtail project.

As a precautionary measure against higher impacts that may potentially arise during salvage logging, a design criterion for this project would require forwarder logging over slash, which is has been observed to increase detrimental soil conditions by approximately 5 percent within a unit for green timber sales (compared to an increase of approximately 7 percent with skidder logging). The predicted increase in detrimental soil conditions caused by forwarder logging in salvage units has not been confirmed on the ground, but it is expected to be lower than if skidder logging were used; forwarder logging causes less impact than skidder logging because forwarders have lower ground pressure, travel over slash, and usually do not require landings. Compaction is expected to occur on forwarder trails, but the presence of slash should allow machine weight to be distributed and compaction should be minimized. Minimizing direct contact between the forwarder tracks and the soil by operating over slash should keep puddling to a minimum. Water bars would also be installed in the event that applied slash is insufficient to prevent erosion. Water bar construction can cause soil displacement, but this is typically only moderate displacement over small areas of soil, so construction of water bars is acceptable.

Fuel control measures associated with this project may lead to additional increases in compaction, puddling, and displacement. Proposed fuel control measures involve distributing slash in excess of what is needed for controlling erosion on forwarder trails to the surrounding landscape to achieve slash depths of no more than 2 feet. This would require the use of heavy machinery off forwarder trails; however, the need for slash treatment is expected to be minimal and not needed on all acres. Because burning of slash piles is not a proposed fuel control action, detrimental soil burning is not expected to increase within the treatment units.

Fuel control measures associated with this project may lead to additional increases in compaction, puddling, and displacement. Proposed fuel control measures involve distributing slash in excess of what is needed for controlling erosion on forwarder trails to the surrounding landscape to achieve slash depths of no more than 2 feet. This would require the use of heavy machinery off forwarder trails; however, the need for slash treatment is expected to be minimal and not needed on all acres. Because burning of slash piles is not a proposed fuel control action, detrimental soil burning is not expected to increase within the treatment units.

Approximately 4 miles of temporary roads would be constructed to provide access to several treatment units. All temporary roads would be rehabilitated after use. Rehabilitation would eliminate future use of the road with the objective of restoring hydrologic function. Rehabilitation activities may include waterbarring; recontouring slopes; subsoiling; seeding; placing slash, boulders, or logs on the roadbed; and disguising the entrance to prevent future vehicle use. Most compaction and puddling arising from road construction should be reversed by these activities. Any detrimental soil conditions remaining after rehabilitation would be expected to recover over a period of decades.

Compaction, puddling, and displacement are likely to occur to some extent on all units. Detrimental soil burning is not expected to increase within treatment units due to proposed activities because slash piles would not be used to control fuel levels. Based on the increase in detrimental soil impacts observed on the Summit and Flagtail salvage projects, the total additional detrimental soil impacts from implementation

Page 104 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project on previous fire salvage projects have ranged from 3 to 14 percent, depending on site specific conditions. The low end of this range (3 percent) is the increase in compaction observed on the Summit Salvage project; this project did not include monitoring of soil displacement. Displacement on the Flagtail Salvage project was nearly equal to compaction (6 and 7 percent, respectively). If this guideline is used along with the assumptions that: 1) the conditions on the current project planning area are more similar to the Summit Salvage project than the Flagtail Salvage project, and 2) the use of forwarder logging over slash creates less detrimental soil conditions than skidder logging, then the increase in detrimental soil impacts is estimated to be around 5 percent. This is reflected for each of the assessed units in Table 36. Design criteria were developed for this project with the intent of keeping increases in detrimental soil conditions as small as possible. However, an increase in detrimental soil conditions of 5 percent is an estimate and there is a chance this level may be exceeded. If detrimental soil conditions do exceed the 17 percent threshold, monitoring and rehabilitation would be undertaken to ensure Forest Plan Standard 126 is met (see PDC Soil-7 and the Monitoring section below). This applies to treatment units T1, T2, T3, T4, and T6. T5 has a higher level of disturbance and is discussed further in the Cumulative Effects section below.

Cumulative Effects The geographic scale for cumulative effects analysis is each proposed unit. The temporal scale is after operations cease when effects are maximum.

Activities associated with historic and recent timber harvests, fire suppression, historical grazing, and historical OHV use cause impacts on soil quality. Activities associated with timber harvesting are probably the main cause of existing compaction, puddling, and displacement within proposed treatment units. Biological and physical processes, including bioturbation by roots and soil organisms and freeze- thaw cycles, would continue to lessen the intensity of these detrimental soil conditions over decades, as described under alternative 1. Detrimental soil burning associated with slash pile burning following past timber harvests probably contribute far less than 1 percent of overall detrimental soil conditions within the treatment units. Fire suppression activities, such as machine-based building of fire breaks, can cause compaction, puddling, and displacement. However, these activities probably occurred over a relatively small area (less than 1 percent) of the proposed treatment units. Grazing can cause localized compaction and puddling that tend to be concentrated around areas of interest, such as watering troughs, salt licks, and prime forage areas, particularly when soils are seasonally moist. This type of damage from grazing is likely to affect only a negligible amount of area within the treatment units. Further damage from this source will be avoided because grazing is suspended within the project planning area until forage recovers to the extent that grazing can be reinitiated without the risk of causing long-term resource damage. Finally, OHV use, for both recreation and invasive plant management, may cause compaction, puddling, or displacement to forest soils. The damage to soils caused by past OHV use is likely to affect only a negligible area within the treatment units and gradual recovery from past OHV traffic is expected. Ongoing OHV use would be prohibited in the project planning area for the duration of the woodpecker salvage research study, so no further disturbance is expected from this source until after the study is complete.

Legacy compaction, puddling, displacement, and detrimental soil burning are likely to exist to some extent on all units. For T1, T2, and T3, project design criteria should limit the cumulative areal extent of detrimental soil conditions from this project plus past, ongoing, and future activities to less than 17 percent (20 percent, minus 3 percent for roads). As shown in Table 36, post-activity detrimental soil conditions are expected to range from 9 to 14 percent in these treatment units. Post-activity conditions in T4 and T6, which were not directly assessed, are also expected to fall within this range. Post- implementation remediation activities would resolve detrimental impacts exceeding this threshold (see Monitoring section below). T5 has experienced higher levels of past disturbance; as discussed above (see Existing Condition section), the T5 field assessment revealed detrimental soil conditions on

Page 105 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment approximately 28 percent of the proposed treatment area. Following Forest Service Manual guidance (see following section on Compliance), proposed activities are not prohibited on such areas of the Forest, but detrimental soil conditions after post-activity rehabilitation must not exceed pre-activity levels (FSM 2010). PDC Soil-7 was designed to ensure this guidance is upheld (see Table 36).

Compliance with Forest Plan and Other Relevant Laws, Regulations, and Policies The Malheur Forest Plan meets all legal and regulatory requirements for soil conservation. Forest Service Manual R6 Supplement No. 2500.98-1, Section 2520.2 say objectives of soil management are, “To meet direction in the National Forest Management Act of 1976 and other legal mandates. To manage National Forest Systems lands…without permanent impairment of land productivity and to maintain…soil…quality…. Soil quality are maintained when soil compaction, displacement, puddling, burning, erosion, loss of organic matter and altered soil moisture regimes are maintained within defined standards and guidelines” (FSM 2010). Therefore, if an action maintains detrimental impacts within the standards of the Malheur Forest Plan, legal requirements for soil conservation would be met.

Project design criteria for minimizing impacts to soil quality are listed in Table 36. These design criteria would keep compaction, puddling, and displacement to a minimum and Forest Plan Standard 126 should be met in all applicable units (T1, T2, T3, T4, and T6). If monitoring shows this standard is not being met, remedial actions would be undertaken (see monitoring section in chapter 2).

Forest Plan Standard 126 states that restoration will be considered “if detrimental conditions are present on 20 percent or more of the activity area.” Forest Service Manual R6 Supplement 2500-98-1, section 2520.3.3 provides further guidance regarding activities on areas already exceeding the threshold for detrimental soil conditions prior to project implementation (FSM 2010): “In areas where more than 20 percent detrimental soil conditions exist from prior activities, the cumulative detrimental effects from project implementation and restoration must, at a minimum, not exceed the conditions prior to the planned activity and should move toward a net improvement in soil quality.” These directions apply to treatment unit T5, which was found to have existing detrimental soil conditions of approximately 28 percent. PDC Soil-7 was designed to ensure Forest Plan Standard 126 is upheld and FSM guidance is followed.

Affected Environment – Erosion Potential

Methodology Scab soils were identified using the Malheur National Forest Soil Resource Inventory (SRI). Slopes were categorized using a slopes GIS layer derived from USGS 1:24,000 topographic quadrangle maps. The BAER team mapped soil burn severity. Post-implementation monitoring on the Flagtail and Summit Fire Salvage Projects provided information for potential effects of post-fire logging on moderately steep slopes.

Existing Condition Erosion directly impacts soil quality by removing valuable nutrient-binding mineral and organic particles within the A horizon and truncating the soil profile. These effects may last up to several hundred years and can lead to a decrease in forest productivity. Forested soils have abundant ground cover that protects the mineral horizons from erosive forces. Nonetheless, the potential for increased and detrimental levels of erosion exists where ground cover has been removed (Carlson 1974; McDaniel and Wilson 2007). The high infiltration rate of ash cap soils tends to reduce runoff and, thus, erosion, particularly when ground cover remains intact. However, if runoff does occur on exposed ash cap soils, soil particles are easily detached and eroded. The low productivity and shallow, rocky nature of scab soils make them susceptible

Page 106 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project to overland flow and, thus, erosion. See Table 35 above for the percent of scab and ash soils by treatment unit within the project planning area.

Past ground-based logging activities have likely contributed to increased erosion potential within the treatment units. Compaction, puddling, rutting, loss of ground cover, and displacement caused by logging can increase erosion potential by reducing infiltration capacity and concomitantly increasing overland flow. Thus erosion potential would increase on the disturbed areas, but also may increase on adjacent undisturbed soils that are not capable of absorbing increased water being delivered. The extent of this effect within the treatment units is difficult to isolate, but is usually negligible.

The occurrence of wildfire can influence forest soil erosion potential through two main pathways: removal of ground cover and formation of a hydrophobic layer at or near the soil surface. Moderate to high severity soil burning can cause a loss of ground cover as organic matter on the forest floor is consumed by fire. As mentioned above, removal of ground cover can greatly increase the erosion potential of forest soils. Wildfire can also cause volatilization of organic compounds that move down into the soil and condense to form a hydrophobic layer, typically within the top few inches of the soil profile. This hydrophobic layer acts as a barrier to infiltration, which leads to overland flow and an associated increase in erosion potential. Loss of ground cover and formation of a hydrophobic soil layer can occur to some degree in any wildfire, but areas of severely burned soils are more likely to experience an increase in erosion potential than soils burned at low or moderate severity. Severe soil burning can also result in consumption of roots, which leads to further destabilization. According to the BAER data, areas of high soil burn severity are primarily concentrated in the northern portion of the project planning area. Patches of soil burned with high severity are present in all study units, with the highest concentration of these patches being within study units S1 and S6 (56 percent and 52 percent, respectively). Maps are available in the project record.

Under typical conditions, the erosion hazard of forest soils is generally low on slopes less than 30 percent and moderate on slopes greater than 30 percent. However, this “rule of thumb” changes greatly when wildfire removes ground cover from soils. For the current project, harvest would not occur on slopes over 35 percent, but burned slopes ranging from 25 to 35 percent do occur throughout the proposed treatment units and are considered to be at an elevated risk of erosion (see discussion of past salvage projects in Alternative 2 – Direct and Indirect Effects below). In particular, study unit S3 appears to be the steepest area in which salvage activities would take place (approximately 24 percent of the area has slopes of 25 to 35 percent and 40 percent have slopes greater than 35 percent). Soils within the S3 treatment units (T3) were mostly burned with moderate severity. Most of the slopes over 35 percent within S3 remain outside the actual treatment units (T3) and should not be susceptible to an increase in erosion potential. The soils report in the project record has more details on slopes and soil burn severity.

Desired Condition Erosion is a detrimental soil impact and should be kept to a practical minimum. In no case should erosion from ground-based logging and associated activities (e.g., skidding, forwarding, road maintenance, etc.) affect water quality in streams.

Environmental Consequences – Erosion Potential

Methodology Effects of proposed actions on erosion potential are analyzed by the project soil scientist using best professional judgement and information gathered from past monitoring on similar areas within the forest.

Page 107 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Assessments / Process GIS analyses of SRI, slope, and BAER data can give general information about what areas area more susceptible to erosion than others. However, soils are highly variable on the landscape and the SRI may not accurately capture all areas of concern. Likewise, the GIS slope and BAER soil burn severity layers are only as reliable as the observations and models used to develop them; all observations and models have limitations. Additionally, soil science is not advanced enough to make accurate predictions of detrimental soil impacts, including erosion. Effects of management depend on the combination of a variety of factors, including weather, implementation details, and small-scale variations in soil types across the landscape. These factors were utilized during the assessment of erosion potential.

Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis The spatial boundaries for analyzing the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects on erosion potential are treatment unit boundaries because soil is normally a stationary resource. However, if erosion does occur soil particles may be transported into water bodies where they can negatively influence water quality. Therefore, streams adjacent to treatment units are also considered in the effects analysis.

Unless otherwise stated, the temporal boundary for analyzing the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects is the time period immediately following the proposed actions because that is when effects are the greatest.

Past, Present, and Foreseeable Activities Relevant to Cumulative Effects Analysis Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future activities within the project planning area are listed in appendix C. The activities relevant to the cumulative effects analysis for soils are historical and recent timber harvests, fire suppression, historical grazing, off-highway vehicle use, trail maintenance, and BAER mulching.

Alternative 1 – No Action

Direct and Indirect Effects As discussed above, erosion is a substantial concern in the post-fire environment, particularly on areas with steep slopes. Taking no action would cause no direct or indirect impacts to erosion potential. Erosion potential would be most elevated on areas with slopes over 25 percent that were moderately or severely burned in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire. Some level of erosion may occur in these areas, but the recovery of ground cover (vegetation and litter) within 2 to 5 years would stabilize these soils and return the risk of erosion to near pre-fire levels. When fire-killed trees fall they also reduce the risk of erosion by slowing overland flow of water on the landscape.

Cumulative Effects In evaluating actions found in Table 11, chapter 3, it is not anticipated that cumulative effects would occur.

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects As discussed above, erosion is a substantial concern in the post-fire environment, particularly on areas with steep slopes. The risk of erosion is expected to increase as ground-based logging activities further disturb the soils within the project planning area. Although erosion was not significantly different on salvaged and untreated areas 2 years after the Summit Fire (McIver and McNeil 2006), salvage activities 2 years after the Flagtail Fire led to substantial erosion, especially on skid trails with slopes over 25

Page 108 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project percent (McNeil 2005b). This is likely due to the occurrence of thunderstorms during Flagtail salvage operations, events which were not experienced during or following the Summit salvage operations. Harvesting activities associated with the proposed project are expected to take place during the summer months when there is a possibility of thunderstorms occurring. Hence, a project design criterion has been developed that would require erosion prevention and control work to be done as promptly as practicable. However, in some cases there would be a temporal gap between the completion of activities and the time when it is practicable to install erosion prevention and control features. In such an instance, the risk of erosion resulting from a thunderstorm over the treatment areas would still exist, but should be minimal. Additionally, the proposed project would be carried out with forwarders running over slash rather than skidders in order to minimize soil disturbance that can lead to increased erosion potential. Both Summit and Flagtail salvage operations involved the use of skidding, which tends to cause more soil disturbance than forwarding. This approach is expected to provide some extra protection for these areas that are at an elevated erosion risk.

In the absence of thunderstorms, the risk of erosion is still expected to increase throughout the treatment units due to compaction, puddling, displacement, and removal of ground cover. Compaction and puddling decrease infiltration capacity and form ruts, thereby concentrating overland flow and potentially leading to increased erosion not only on the compacted or puddled area, but also on adjacent soils that cannot adequately absorb the increased amount of water being delivered. To address this issue, a project design criterion that requires the placement of water bar outfalls on areas capable of slowing and absorbing overland flow has been included and should prevent additional erosion on areas adjacent to forwarder trails. Displacement forms ruts, loosens and destabilizes the soil, and can disturb aggregates, leaving soil particles susceptible to erosion. Water bar construction can cause soil displacement, but it should be only moderate displacement over small areas of soil, so construction of water bars is acceptable. Machine traffic removes ground cover, the recovery of which can be delayed due to detrimental soil conditions. Project design criteria that minimize compaction, puddling, and displacement (see Soil Quality section above) would also contribute to a reduction in the potential for erosion on areas disturbed by ground- based logging activities. Additionally, slash in excess of what is required on forwarder trails may be distributed on nearby areas to limit fuels accumulation to a depth of less than 2 feet. This should offer a small amount of extra protection against erosion for soils not directly disturbed by logging activity (see Fuels Report for details). Where appropriate, seeding forwarder trails with a native plant erosion control mixture, crushing slash on forwarder trails, and placement of other slash should move ground cover toward the ranges established by Forest Plan Standard 127 in order to limit erosion within the treatment units. See appendix B for a list of all project design criteria pertaining to soil erosion potential.

Subsoiling is a remedial activity that has been included in the project design criteria. Subsoiling loosens compacted soil, thereby improving bulk density, increasing infiltration capacity, and encouraging revegetation on disturbed sites, such as skid trails and temporary roads. Unfortunately, the loosening of compacted soil also makes detached particles more susceptible to erosion, at least in the short-term until vegetative cover is reestablished. However, if subsoiling is undertaken, erosion controls would include subsoiling in a “J” pattern, scattering slash, building waterbars, and/or other methods approved by a soil scientist or hydrologist (see project design criteria in appendix B). In the long-term, abatement of compaction would reduce concentrations of overland flow by improving infiltration capacity and allowing for more rapid revegetation, both of which should result in lowered risk of erosion.

Approximately 4 miles of temporary roads would be constructed to provide access to several treatment units. All temporary roads would be rehabilitated after use. Rehabilitation would eliminate future use of the road with the objective of restoring hydrologic function. Rehabilitation activities may include waterbarring; recontouring slopes; subsoiling; seeding; placing slash, boulders, or logs on the roadbed; and disguising the entrance to prevent future vehicle use. Erosion risk may increase during the period

Page 109 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment which the temporary road is being used. However, rehabilitation activities should prevent long-term increases in erosion potential on temporary road sites.

Erosion is an inherent risk in the post-fire environment and further physical disturbance of soils by ground-based logging activities is likely to increase that risk. Project design criteria are expected to control erosion that occurs during and immediately following project implementation until ground cover is sufficiently recovered. If a thunderstorm passes over the treatment area prior to installation of the additional protective measures described above, an elevated risk of erosion would be expected.

Cumulative Effects The geographic scale for cumulative effects analysis is each proposed unit, along with adjacent streams and areas that may be sinks for mobilized sediment. The temporal scale is after operations cease when effects are maximum.

Activities associated with historical and recent timber harvests, fire suppression, historic grazing, historical OHV use, trail maintenance, and BAER mulching can influence erosion potential on forest soils. Past ground-based logging activities can cause compaction, puddling, rutting, loss of ground cover, and displacement, all of which can create conditions that increase erosion potential. Before the Canyon Creek Complex Fire erosion from these existing sources was negligible, as it is on other unburned parts of the Malheur National Forest. In the post-fire environment erosion from these sources is likely to remain small because the soil has been recovering from these past impacts, in many cases for decades. Monitoring after the Flagtail fire confirms that erosion from old disturbance is small except for channel erosion probably caused by old skid trails in draw bottoms (McNeil 2005b). Fire suppression activities, such as manual and machine-based building of fire breaks, can also disturb soil and increase erosion potential. However, these activities probably occurred over a relatively small area (less than 1 percent) of the proposed treatment units. In addition, fire lines are water barred and have woody debris applied to control erosion. Soil disturbance arising from historical grazing may facilitate sediment delivery to streams as a result of reduced ground cover (roughness) and increased compaction near streams. This type of disturbance is likely to affect only a negligible amount of area within the treatment units and gradual recovery of existing disturbance is expected to continue over time. Because of limitations placed on project activities that take place near streams, sediment produced on areas disturbed by grazing is expected to settle out on areas of flat ground or with adequate surface roughness before reaching a water body, but the risk of small amounts of sediment entering streams still exists. Additional damage from ongoing livestock use is not expected because grazing is suspended within the project planning area until forage recovers to the extent that grazing can be reinitiated without the risk of causing long-term resource damage. OHV use, for both recreation and invasive plant management, may also cause soil disturbance leading to increased erosion. The damage to soils caused by past OHV use is likely to affect only a negligible area within the treatment units and riparian areas and gradual recovery from past OHV traffic is expected. Additionally, only a handful of riparian sites on the Malheur National Forest have OHV use that is known to damage streams and none of these sites are near the treatment units. Ongoing OHV use would be prohibited in the project planning area for the duration of the woodpecker study, so no further disturbance is expected from this source until after the study is complete. Trail maintenance activities can disturb soils, as well, but only a few, short sections of trail enter treatment units (T2 and T5), so damage caused by such activities are expected to be negligible. Finally, BAER mulching has been proposed for the northwest ridge of T4. If implemented, this activity is expected to reduce the risk of erosion over the area where mulch is applied.

For the proposed operations, limiting the extent of detrimental soil conditions and application of project design criteria should minimize erosion. Despite the negative impacts from historical grazing, historical OHV travel, and roads, minimal sediment production from inside treatment units combined with the

Page 110 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project sediment trapping outside the units indicates that sediment from the treatment units is unlikely to affect water quality. For a discussion of sediment from outside treatment units see Hydrology Report.

Compliance with Forest Plan and Other Relevant Laws, Regulations, and Policies As discussed under Soil Quality above, the Malheur Forest Plan meets all legal and regulatory requirements for soil conservation. If an action maintains detrimental impacts within the standards of the Forest Plan, legal requirements for soil conservation would be met. Project design criteria for minimizing impacts to erosion potential are listed in appendix B. These design measures would keep erosion within the project planning area to a minimum and Forest Plan Standard 126 should be met in all units. Where appropriate, seeding forwarder trails with a native plant erosion control mixture, as well as crushing slash on forwarder trails, should move ground cover toward the ranges established by Forest Plan Standard 127 in order to limit erosion within the treatment units.

Affected Environment – Organic Matter and Nutrients

Methodology Organic matter and nutrients are evaluated with professional judgement of the project Soil Scientist. The BAER team mapped soil burn severity.

Background To better explain the existing condition and potential effects of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project on organic matter and nutrients, it may be helpful to have a basic understanding of the attributes of soil.

Soil layers are known as “horizons”. A soil horizon is a layer generally parallel to the soil crust, whose physical characteristics differ from the layers above and beneath. Each soil type usually has three or four horizons. Horizons are defined in most cases by obvious physical features, chiefly color and texture. These may be described both in absolute terms (particle size distribution for texture, for instance) and in terms relative to the surrounding material (i.e., "coarser" or "sandier" than the horizons above and below). The differentiation of the soil into distinct horizons is largely the result of influences, such as air, water, solar radiation and plant material, originating at the soil-atmosphere interface. Since the weathering of the soil occurs first at the surface and works its way down, the uppermost layers have been changed the most, while the deepest layers are most similar to the original parent material.

Soil generally consists of visually and texturally distinct layers, also called profiles. Figure 10 provides a depiction of the various soil horizons, some of which are discussed on the following pages. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soil_horizon).

Page 111 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

O) Organic matter: Surficial organic deposit with litter layer of plant residues in relatively non- decomposed form.

A) Surface soil: Organics mixed with mineral matter. This layer of mineral soil contains the most organic matter accumulation and soil life. This layer eluviates (is depleted of) iron, clay, aluminum, organic compounds, and other soluble constituents. When eluviation is pronounced, a lighter colored "E" subsurface soil horizon is apparent at the base of the "A" horizon. A-horizons may also be the result of a combination of soil bioturbation and surface processes that winnow fine particles from biologically mounded topsoil. In this case, the A-horizon is regarded as a "biomantle".

B) Subsoil: Subsurface layer reflecting chemical or physical alteration of parent material. This layer accumulates iron, clay, aluminum and organic compounds, a process referred to as illuviation.

Figure 10 Illustration of soil horizons (Wikipedia 2008)

C) Parent rock, also known as substratum: The parent material in sedimentary deposits. Layer of large unbroken rocks. This layer may accumulate the more soluble compounds.

R) Bedrock: The parent material in bedrock landscapes. This layer denotes the layer of partially weathered bedrock at the base of the soil profile. Unlike the above layers, R horizons largely comprise continuous masses of hard rock that cannot be excavated by hand. Soils formed in situ will exhibit strong similarities to this bedrock layer. These areas of bedrock are under 50 feet of the other profiles.

Existing Condition Changing pools of organic matter and nutrients in forest soils can influence forest productivity and water runoff. Prior to Euro-American settlement, forest tree canopies in the Blue Mountains of Eastern Oregon were less dense and understory grass and forb species were more productive than in current times (Johnson 1994). This vegetation structure was established and maintained in part through the persistence of a frequent, but low- or mixed-severity fire regime (Hessburg et al. 2005; Johnson 1994). Fire usually decreases the amount of nutrients (pounds per acre) on the land through volatilization, although some plant-available nutrient forms in the soil – particularly nitrogen and phosphorus – may increase for up to a year or more in the post-fire environment (Binkley and Fisher 2013, pages 250-251; Certini 2005). The extensive root systems of grasses and forbs concentrate organic matter (organic matter) and, thus, nutrients in the A horizons of soils, whereas trees deposit organic matter and associated nutrients on top of the forest floor in the form of litter and duff. Consequently, much of the organic matter and nutrients within forest soils in historic times remained protected from fire because it existed within the mineral A horizon. The remaining organic matter (litter and duff) of the forest floor could have been charred by historic fires, but not necessarily entirely consumed (Boerner 1982).

Page 112 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Decades of fire suppression have resulted in denser forest canopies, the accumulation of ladder fuels, and a reduction in the extent of grass and forb communities (Hessburg et al. 2005; Johnson 1994). As a result, soil organic matter and nutrients have become more concentrated in the forest floor (O horizon) over time as trees have become more dominant over the landscape. Without frequent, low intensity fires to thin the forest floor, organic matter and nutrients have accumulated beyond historic levels during the past century, although this accumulation has been partially offset by nutrient removals during past logging and fuel treatments. However, because of the overall increased amount of fuels present within modern day forests, wildland fires have a greater tendency to be of moderate to high severity (Hessburg et al. 2005). This is probably the case in the treatment units. Thus, because of the accumulation of organic matter and nutrients in the forest floor and the higher fire severity, the Canyon Creek Complex Fire had a greater potential to remove organic matter and nutrients from the site than the frequent, low, or mixed severity fires of the past.

According to BAER data, the Canyon Creek Complex Fire burned all but approximately 2 percent of the soil within the treatment units. Approximately 22 percent of the soil within these areas was burned with low severity, 58 percent was burned with moderate severity, and 17 percent was burned with high severity. See the Soils report for more details on soil burn severity. Soils burned with low severity retain 50 percent or more ground cover – mostly forest floor litter and duff – and most of the nutrient-rich vegetation foliage is unconsumed. Soils burned with moderate severity retain 20 to 50 percent ground cover and much or most of the foliage is consumed. Soils burned with high severity retain 0 to 20 percent ground cover – often near 0 percent – and almost all foliage is consumed. In both low and moderate severity soil burning, consumption of litter and duff is incomplete, meaning it is charred, but still recognizable as needles, leaves, grass, etc. (Parsons et al. 2010). For this project, most of the project planning area was burned and organic matter and nutrients may be present at levels lower than the natural historical range of variability, especially in areas that experienced moderate or severe soil burning. Nonetheless, there are probably still sufficient organic matter and nutrients present in the mineral soil, fire ash, remaining forest floor, and standing live and dead vegetation to meet the requirements of the regrowing vegetation. Water tends to be the limiting resource within the Blue Mountain forests, not nutrients, so losses of organic matter and nutrients resulting from fire are not expected to strongly influence productivity or water infiltration.

Desired Condition In the long-term, organic matter and nutrients should approximate the natural range of variability. In the short-term, a decrease in organic matter and nutrients from harvest activities should not negatively influence forest productivity.

Environmental Consequences - Organic Matter and Nutrients

Methodology Effects of proposed actions on organic matter and nutrients are analyzed by the project soil scientist using best professional judgement and information gathered from past monitoring on similar areas within the forest.

Assessments / Process Levels of organic matter and nutrients on the Malheur National Forest were not quantified prior to European settlement, so the actual natural range of variability for these ecosystem characteristics is unknown. The analysis herein is based on generally accepted trends evidenced in the referenced literature.

Page 113 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis The spatial boundaries for analyzing the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects to soil are unit boundaries because Forest Plan Forest-wide Standard 126 applies to units and because soil is a stationary resource.

Unless otherwise stated, the temporal boundary for analyzing the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects is the time period immediately following the proposed actions because that is when effects are the greatest.

Past, Present, and Foreseeable Activities Relevant to Cumulative Effects Analysis Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future activities within the project planning area are listed in Table 11. The activities relevant to the cumulative effects analysis for soils are historical and recent timber harvests, firewood cutting, fire suppression, and invasive plant treatments.

Alternative 1 – No Action

Direct and Indirect Effects Taking no action would cause no direct or indirect impacts to soil organic matter and nutrients. As discussed in the Existing Conditions section above, the Canyon Creek Complex Fire has likely reduced organic matter to levels below the natural range of variability. However, fire-adapted forests eventually recover from this type of disturbance over decades as vegetative cover is reestablished and organic matter begins to accumulate once again. The level of some nutrients may have decreased as a result of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire, although easily available forms of nutrients such as nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) may have increased in the short-term. Accumulation of N after a burn is facilitated in part by the rapid, post-fire establishment of nitrogen fixing plants, especially Ceanothus.

Cumulative Effects Upon reviewing the actions in Table 11, chapter 3, it is not anticipated that cumulative effects to soil will occur under this alternative.

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects Tree biomass acts as a storehouse for organic matter and nutrients on the forest. Under natural circumstances, dead trees would fall and their organic matter and nutrients would be slowly released to the environment – including the soil – during decomposition. When trees are harvested this natural cycle is disturbed as future inputs of organic matter and nutrients are removed from the forest. However, Powers et al. (2005) observed that very little organic carbon from coarse woody debris in drier and warmer forests, such as the Malheur National Forest, ends up being incorporated into the soil; most is respired as carbon dioxide (CO2) during decomposition. Conversely, they assert that the main source of organic carbon to these forest soils is likely to be fine root matter, which noticeably increases organic matter pools within soils over 5 to 10 years after harvest.

The removal of nitrogen (N) with harvested trees may decrease productivity a few percent on some sites, but productivity in this area is generally limited by water, not by nutrients or organic matter. Observable decreases in productivity resulting from post-fire salvage harvest appear to be small in the short-term; Keyser et al. (2009) found productivity in ponderosa pine forests of the Black Hills, South Dakota was similar on salvaged and unsalvaged sites after 5 years. However, a decline productivity resulting from salvage activities may be a more long-term effect, taking 2 to 3 decades to be observable. In general, removal of nutrients through tree harvesting is limited because a large pool of nutrients would be retained

Page 114 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project in the mineral soil, the remaining forest floor, slash, and live and dead trees. Also, as mentioned above, the Canyon Creek Complex Fire may have already led to an increase in easily available forms of some nutrients, mainly nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P), throughout affected zones within the project planning area. However, forwarder traffic may kill or damage some Ceanothus bushes, which would reduce nitrogen fixation in the post-fire environment.

Another proposed activity that may affect organic matter (organic matter) and nutrients is tree planting. Planting trees may jumpstart the re-accumulation of organic matter and nutrients stored in living biomass that was lost through fire and salvage logging. On the other hand, as the planted trees grow their canopy would cast more shade. N fixing Ceanothus bushes are intolerant of shade, therefore tree planting may negatively influence N accumulation by shading Ceanothus bushes earlier than if planting had not occurred.

In the post-fire environment existing within the project planning area, tree harvesting and planting may shift the pools of organic matter and nutrients below the natural range of variability. However, the forest has already begun rebuilding pools of organic matter by establishing new vegetation on burned areas (personal observation of project Soil Scientist) and organic matter and nutrients should continue to increase despite further disturbance caused by proposed activities. The potential decrease in productivity due to changes in organic matter and nutrient status is expected to be unnoticeable.

Cumulative Effects The geographic scale for cumulative effects analysis is each proposed unit. Unless otherwise stated, the temporal scale is after operations cease when effects are maximum.

Activities associated with historical and recent timber harvests, firewood cutting, fire suppression, and invasive plant treatments cause impacts on organic matter and nutrients in forest soils. As mentioned above, timber harvesting decreases the overall store of organic matter and nutrients on a forest, as does firewood cutting. However, pools of organic matter begin recovering immediately after harvest activities and continue to do so with time as forest vegetation structure and function improves. In any case, water tends to be the limiting resource in dry forests, not organic matter or nutrients. Losses of organic matter and nutrients due to firewood cutting are relatively negligible. Fire suppression probably allowed organic matter and nutrients to increase beyond the natural range of variability, but the Canyon Creek Complex Fire likely reversed this trend as organic matter and nutrients were burned and/or volatilized. Consequently, conditions within the project planning area are probably closer to, perhaps even below, the natural range of variability for pre-European settlement times now than they were prior to this fire. Site- specific invasive plant treatments may impact organic matter and nutrient cycling via direct effects to decomposer soil organisms (e.g., toxicity/mortality) (Edwards and Pimentel 1989). Such effects are expected to diminish as herbicides decompose over the course of days to months and would only occur on areas with negligible aerial extent.

In summary, adding the loss of organic matter and nutrients resulting from project implementation to the loss from the fire and cumulative actions is unlikely to cause a measurable decrease in productivity or water infiltration.

Page 115 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Watershed The purpose of this section is to analyze the effects of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project to hydrology, stream channels, and water quality.

Indicators for Assessing Effects

Table 37 Resource elements, indicators and measures for assessing effects to hydrology, stream channels and water quality Resource Resource Measure Source element indicator Condition of 303(d) listed Best Management Practices, Clean Water Water quality Watershed biocriteria Act, Organic Administration Act conditions Proximity to Miles of native surface haul road Best Management Practices, Clean Water water within 300 feet of stream Act

Affected Environment

Methodology Analysis methods are summarized from numerous sources of field data that was reviewed, evaluated, interpreted and summarized. Sources of data include past Wildland Urban Interface projects within the same area, soil assessments, 2003 Watershed Analysis, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality website, Canyon Creek Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) reports, personal observations and professional knowledge of the local area.

A portion of the watershed condition framework was used for this analysis. The watershed condition framework identifies 12 watershed condition class indicators that are based on an integrated assessment of 4 process groups was used for the describing subwatershed scale conditions. The water quality, water quantity and road indicators were used for this analysis.

Existing Condition The project occurs within three subwatersheds: Upper Canyon Creek (170702010701), Middle Canyon Creek (170702010703) and East Fork Canyon Creek (170702010702), within the Canyon Creek Watershed (1707020107). The East Fork, Middle Fork and Mainstem Canyon creeks flow northwest and north before flowing into the John Day River in the City of John Day. Table 38 illustrates the amount of stream miles by Riparian Habitat Conservation Area (RHCA) within the project planning area. Notable stream names in East Fork Canyon Creek include Brookling Creek, Canyon Creek, East Fork Canyon Creek, Miners Creek, Wall Creek, and Tamarack Creek. Most of these streams occur within the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness area. Notable stream names in Middle Canyon Creek include Berry Creek, Canyon Creek, Fawn Creek and Vance Creek. The mainstem of Canyon Creek through this subwatershed is mostly private ownership. Notable stream names in Upper Canyon Creek include Canyon Creek, Crazy Creek, Middle Fork Canyon Creek and Wickiup Creek.

Table 38 Miles of stream by Riparian Habitat Conservation Area category for each subwatershed Subwatershed name Category 1 Category 2 Perennial water Category 4 East Fork Canyon Creek 16 15.8 31.8 9.2 Middle Canyon Creek 9.4 15.4 24.8 62 Upper Canyon Creek 24.3 20.1 44.4 43.9

Page 116 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Weather and Streamflow Patterns The project planning area experiences precipitation patterns of snowfall, spring rains, and some summer convective thunderstorms (Figure 11).

Figure 11 Average monthly precipitation at locations within and around the burned area perimeter (source: Western Regional Climate Center)

Three types of precipitation runoff events can occur in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire area: rainfall from frontal storms moving eastward from the Pacific Ocean, snowmelt (and rain-on-snow), and rainfall from convective storms. Frontal storms affect larger regional areas and last over several days, where the intensities on these storms are low and tend to occur mostly in the winter and spring. The effects of rain- on-snow are similar to a high-intensity rainstorm since they can produce a significant amount of runoff and erosion. These events can have a large effect, depending on the amount of snow melted. Convective events (thunderstorms) are of short duration and high intensity, occur during the summer months and are also known to result in erosion. Thunderstorms in the project planning area are on average 3 to 5 miles wide and generally last only 30 minutes. During July, August and September, there are on average 3 to 5 days each month with a thunderstorm occurrence. Thunderstorms are the dominant erosional input for the treatments units within the project planning area.

Streamflow patterns were observed with data from Gage No. 14038602 at Canyon Creek near Canyon City (OWRD). The gage is located on Canyon Creek below the confluence with Vance Creek. Average, minimum, and maximum mean daily discharges for the period of record from October 1, 1980 to September 30, 2011 are shown in Figure 12. The highest flows of the annual hydrograph typically occur in the spring months, as a result of spring rains and snowmelt. The annual hydrograph indicates that high flows can occur during the winter months and may be a result of rain-on-snow events. Snowmelt runoff is the dominant peak streamflow process at the mouth of the project planning area (three subwatersheds). Thunderstorms typically release large amounts of rain in a short period at a very local scale. Thunderstorms are the dominant peak flow process for smaller catchments, on the scale of 3 or 4th order streams.

Page 117 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Figure 12 Streamflow patterns from Canyon Creek (Gage # 14038602) (OWRD)

To address erosive storms that have a relatively high likelihood of occurring, the 2-year 30-minute duration was used as the design storm for analysis of a convective thunderstorm. Runoff from spring of 2016 was used as a normal, air temperature controlled snowmelt runoff pattern. Limited precipitation storm regressions have been conducted for Central Oregon. Anticipated precipitation for the 2-year storm is 0.81 inches. The 2-year design storm was initially used for the Burned Area Emergency Response analysis.

Soils The distribution of soils and their condition drives how much water from precipitation (or snow) will flow into the ground (infiltrate) or leave the area (runoff). Simply stated, soil condition is related to watershed condition because of water supply benefits associated with developing forest soils that promote infiltration and high-quality water. Hydrologic soil groups are good indicators on the inherent properties of the soil texture and its potential for runoff. These groups control the timing of streamflows across large watersheds. Group A has high infiltration rates and are a continuum to Group D, a very low infiltration rate. Group D typically have clays or a claypan that yields larger amounts of runoff from those areas. The majority of the project planning area is in a B or C hydrologic group (Table 39 ).They have a moderate or slow infiltration capacity.

Table 39 Acres within soil burn severity classes Subwatershed name Unburned Low Moderate High East Fork Canyon Creek 1,832 (12 percent) 5,813 (37 percent) 5,920 (37 percent) 2,357 (15 percent) Middle Canyon Creek 1,006 (5 percent) 8,416 (45 percent) 5,824 (31 percent) 3,274 (18 percent) Upper Canyon Creek 1,160 (5 percent) 11,704 (50 percent) 9,469 (41 percent) 1,016 (4 percent)

Page 118 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Water Quality

Nonpoint source pollution, defined as pollution that originates from many different sources, is the active pollutant in the project planning area. These pollutants are primarily derived from runoff generated from watershed surfaces. Fine sediment generated from roads may impact biological life instream. Streamside shade attenuates solar radiation from reaching the water surface. This reach scale process maintains proper water temperature for beneficial uses (i.e., fish). Streams were 303(d) listed in the project planning area for water temperature because the riparian condition of the channel and streamside shade has been altered by legacy activities (those activities before implementation of Best Management Practices). Water temperatures, sedimentation patterns, channel conditions and riparian vegetation influence the type of aquatic insect life that exists. Streams in the project planning area that do not contain the types of aquatic insects that should be present have recently been added to the 303(d) list as biocriteria.

To assess the condition of water quality, a query was completed on Oregon Department of Environmental Quality’s 2010 database. This information was present for streams that occur in the project planning area:

 23.9 miles of Canyon Creek in the Middle and Upper Canyon Creek subwatersheds are 303(d) listed for biocriteria. The upper end of Canyon Creek in the Upper Canyon Creek Subwatershed met the conditions for biocriteria and was not 303(d) listed.  27.5 miles of Canyon Creek in the Middle and Upper Canyon Creek subwatersheds was 303(d) listed for temperature with a rearing beneficial use of 64 degrees Fahrenheit. The 303(d) status was removed with the approval of the total maximum daily load (TMDL).  9.2 miles of East Fork Canyon Creek in the East Fork Canyon Creek subwatershed met the conditions for biocritiera, but are water quality limited for bull trout spawning and rearing temperature beneficial uses. The temperature standard for this creek is 53.6 degrees Fahrenheit.  8.3 miles of the Middle Fork Canyon Creek in the Upper Canyon Creek subwatershed met the conditions for biocriteria.  4.2 miles of Vance Creek in the Middle Fork Canyon Creek Subwatershed have a potential concern for biocriteria and are attaining the water temperature standards. The Canyon Creek Complex wildfire burnt vegetation (conifer and deciduous shrubs) that occurred along the stream that provided shade. Solar radiation reaching the water surface is higher and will increase water temperatures until riparian hardwoods get established and achieve a height that can provide shade. Primary and secondary productivity and nutrient cycling ecological processes increase following wildfires (Flitcroft et al. 2016).

The water quality condition was assessed through comparing the miles of stream within each subwatershed that are 303(d) and/or water quality limited. Good functioning conditions suggest there is no state listed impairments or problems. Fair conditions suggest less than 10 percent of the streams miles are listed or have moderate water quality problems. Poor or impaired functions indicate more than 10 percent of the stream miles are water quality limited.

Water quality was classified as fair for East Fork Canyon Creek. While most of the stream occurs within the wilderness area, past water temperature monitoring suggests that it does not meet bull trout standards of 53.6 degrees Fahrenheit. Middle Canyon Creek was rated in a fair condition due to the short length of 303(d) listed stream miles that occur along Canyon Creek in this subwatershed. Upper Canyon subwatershed was rated as poor condition for water quality because it exceeds the 10 percent of stream miles listed in a 303(d) condition.

Page 119 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Biocriteria was added to the 2010 Department of Environmental Quality assessment by the United States Environmental Protection Agency on December 2012. The criteria for biocriteria states “waters of the state must be of sufficient quality to support aquatic species without detrimental changes in the resident biological communities”. The beneficial use identified is aquatic life. A Total Maximum Daily Load is needed for this item as indicated by Department of Environmental Quality databases. Biocriteria is sampled by looking at the observed insect species and comparing this to what is expected (O versus E) for a similar site. Macroinvertebrate communities can change from year to year depending on drought and years since large channel forming flow that mobilize fine sediment from riffles and decreases embeddedness. However, macroinvertebrates are bio-indicators for the condition of upstream conditions, including riparian vegetation, water temperatures and channel conditions.

Water Quantity Water quantity indicators include magnitude, frequency and timing of runoff and are strongly influenced by watershed conditions. The quantity and timing of streamflow are critical components of ecological integrity of river systems and provide for fisheries values (Department of Environmental Quality beneficial uses). Water is the limiting factor in the semi-arid climate the project planning area occurs in. The water quantity condition indicator was assessed through evaluating if the subwatershed has hydrographs that have no or minor departure from natural conditions as Good, Fair as hydrographs that have moderate recognized departures from natural conditions part of the year and poor as the magnitude, duration, and/or timing of annual extreme flows (low and/or high) significantly depart from the natural hydrograph.

Water quantity was classified as fair for East Fork Canyon Creek subwatershed, Middle and Upper Canyon Creek subwatersheds. East Fork Canyon Creek had a diversion that led to an alteration in the rate of change for base flows downstream of the diversion. Middle and Upper Canyon Creek subwatersheds were ranked fair largely due to legacy conditions from past land use activities. These legacy conditions were due to past overgrazing, loss of beaver, and improper skidding activities that have altered the landscape through: 1) decreased upland grass communities influencing ground cover and infiltration rates, 2) rill and gulley development that accelerates runoff from hillslopes to the channel system, and 3) loss of floodplain connectivity and functional wetlands. These effects heighten the magnitude for streamflows around the bankfull stage and lessen the storage functions of the hillslopes and valley bottoms to provide near natural baseflows. The legacy conditions were from past management activities that were implemented before Best Management Practices. The Upper Canyon Creek subwatershed also had Canyon Meadows Dam that historically changed the magnitude of peak flows originating from the Mainstem Canyon Creek. This dam was removed in the fall of 2015 and a natural stream channel now flows through the dam site.

The Canyon Creek Complex wildfire had an effect on the streamflow characteristics. The wildfire caused tree mortality that has changed landscape evapotranspiration processes. The South Fork wildfire illustrates this effect where Oliver Creek was an ephemeral channel in 2014, only flowing during snowmelt runoff periods and became perennial into August 2015 due to tree mortality. The timing of peak will also occur earlier because of the blackened forest collecting higher amounts of solar radiation. Moderate hydrophobic conditions are present in high soil burn severity areas and may accelerate runoff until the hydrophobic soil compounds begin breaking down. The loss in ground cover may have the biggest change on infiltration processes and may increase runoff the greatest. Ground cover is lowest in the high soil burn severity areas and will be denuded likely until the growing season in 2017 or 2018, when a flush of grass should occur.

The Burned Areas Emergency Response team modeled peak flows increasing by 14-fold for 2 year, 30 minute thunderstorms of 0.81 inches. This increase in peak flows is most vulnerable over catchments that

Page 120 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project have more high soil burn severity or hydrologic soil group Ds. These larger peak flows could be expected from a thunderstorm for the first year and will taper off gradually over 5 years as ground cover improves.

Roads Road indicators include road density, road maintenance, proximity to water and mass wasting and are strongly influenced by watershed conditions. Roads affect watershed condition because more sediment is contributed to streams from roads and road construction than any other land management activity. Roads directly alter natural sediment and hydrologic regimes by changing streamflow patterns and amounts, sediment loading, transport, deposition, channel morphology and stability, and water quality and riparian conditions within a watershed. Road density is known to play a dominant role in human-induced augmentation of sediment supply by erosion and mass wasting in upland forested landscapes in the Pacific Northwest (Furniss et al. 1991).

The road condition indicator was assessed through evaluating if the subwatershed has road densities less than 1 mile per square mile as Good, Fair as 1 to 2.4 miles per square mile and poor as more than 2.4 miles per square mile. East Fork Canyon Creek subwatershed was fair and Middle and Upper Canyon Creek as poor due to the miles of road within the subwatershed.

Road maintenance can also increase sediment routing to streams by creating areas prone to surface runoff, altering slope stability in cut-and-fill areas, removing vegetation, and altering drainage patterns (Luce and Black 2001). The road maintenance indicator evaluates if Best Management Practices for the maintenance of drainage features at 75 percent of the roads (Good), 50 to 75 percent (Fair), 50 percent (Poor). Road maintenance has been reduced across the Forest over the last 20 years due to budget constraints. However, recently considerable mileage of roads within the project planning area have had maintenance to drainage features due to fire suppression, hazard tree removal projects and Burned Area Emergency Response implementation activities. All three subwatersheds were ranked as fair for the road maintenance condition indicator due to recent activities.

Table 40 Road attributes within the project planning area Subwatershed Miles of Miles of road within proximity to Drainage area Road density name road stream (percent of total roads) (miles²) (miles/miles²) East Fork Canyon 1.3 0.5 (38 percent) 24.8 0.05 Creek Middle Canyon 113.8 45.7 (40 percent) 29.1 3.9 Creek Upper Canyon 133 60.7 (46 percent) 36.4 3.6 Creek

The amount of roads within 300 feet proximity to water have a potential to be hydrologically connected to them. Subwatersheds with less than 10 percent of the road length in 300 feet to streams are good, 10 to 25 percent are (fair) and more than 25 percent are poor. All three subwatersheds rated as poor, however, East Fork Canyon Creek has a very low miles of road (1.3 miles). Middle Canyon and Upper Canyon have large distances of road within proximity to streams. The potential is heightened for fine sediment transport and water concentration alterations from this magnitude of roads within proximity.

Desired Condition The desired functioning condition for the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area is to have a properly functioning watershed at the 5th field scale, including restored natural processes and disturbance mechanisms that allow the watershed to maintain diversity and complexity. The desired future condition for watershed resources in the three 6th field subwatersheds within the Canyon Creek Complex

Page 121 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Fire Salvage project planning area can be best described as having a range of variability for their water quantity and quality conditions. Historically, flood, drought, fire, wind, snow, ice, and land movement all played a natural role in determining the diversity of conditions. The Canyon Creek Complex occurred within the Canyon Creek project planning area have produced results falling on the early seral portion of the natural range of variability.

The desired future conditions for watershed conditions within the project planning area meet objectives coming from multiple sources including the Malheur Forest Plan, as amended, and the John Day Total Maximum Daily Load. Goals from PACFISH to maintain or restore, include:

 Water quality to a degree that provides for stable and productive riparian and aquatic ecosystems.  Stream channel integrity, channel processes, and the sediment regime (including the elements of timing, volume, and character of sediment input and transport) under which the riparian and aquatic ecosystem developed.  Instream flows to support healthy riparian and aquatic habitats, the stability and effective function of stream channels.  Natural timing and variability of the water table elevation in meadows and wetlands.  Diversity and productivity of native plant communities in riparian zones.  Riparian vegetation to: o Provide an amount and distribution of large woody debris characteristic of natural aquatic and riparian ecosystems. o Provide adequate summer and winter thermal regulation within the riparian and aquatic zones. o Help achieve rates of surface erosion, bank erosion, and channel migration characteristic of those under which the communities developed.  Habitat to support populations of well-distributed native plant, vertebrate, and invertebrate populations that contribute to the viability of riparian-dependent communities.  Manage towards attainable and site-specific Riparian Management Objectives (RMOs). RMOs provide the ‘criteria’ against which progress towards attainment of the riparian goals can be measured. The goal of RMOs are to achieve a high level of habitat diversity and complexity. Pool frequency is the key feature, followed with secondary features of water temperatures, large woody debris, bank stability, and lower bank angle and width/depth ratio.  Improve the watershed condition class indicators towards good functioning conditions. o Improve riparian conditions for aquatic life.

Goals from the Department of Environmental Quality’s Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) include:

 Restoration of riparian vegetation and channel morphology, including floodplain area and connectivity, targeting natural conditions.  Instream flow restoration, where flow has been artificially reduced.

Page 122 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Environmental Consequences

Methodology Landscape models, professional judgement, limited field surveys and best available science were utilized as part of the methodology to determine watershed effects. Many discussions occurred with the Malheur National Forest Soils Scientist, Blue Mountain Ranger District Hydrologist and District Ranger about past salvage monitoring and annual post wildfire observations.

These summaries of past monitoring were used in development of Watershed and Soil project design criteria, BMPs and effects analysis. The Summit-Reed Project occurred two years after the Summit-Reed wildfire and a science article (McIver and McNeil 2006) evaluated commercial and fuel reduction projects on soil displacement, compaction and erosion machine-caused erosion. Silt fences were placed on the outlet of the treatment units and no erosion was observed exiting the unit. Low levels of erosion were thought to be caused by multiple observations, but the lack of a thunderstorm was likely the largest driver. Past monitoring of the Flagtail Salvage Project was different. A thunderstorm occurred during the most vulnerable period when water drainage features (Best Management Practices) were not constructed into skid trails, temporary lands, or roads. Skid trails were placed along the bottom of ephemeral draws and these runoff flow paths were extremely reduced in any ground cover or surface roughness to dissipate energy. As a result, water became concentrated on the skid trails and road segments. This water built up enough energy to scour a gulley in ephemeral draws approximately 5 feet deep. The soil from the gully deposited across the Silvies River and physically blocked it for a short time period.

NetMap served as the decision support tool that allowed an analysis of the landscape where landforms and physical processes are placed in context with spatial patterns. Landscape models used for the analysis include WEPP Disturbed, Compound Topographic Index, and RoadGRAIP. A spatially explicit version of the WEPP Disturbed model was used to assess post fire hillslope erosion rates across the treatments units within the project planning area. WEPP Disturbed is a physically based erosion model developed by US Federal Agency scientists. WEPP disturbed accounts for processes of surface hydrology, winter hydrology, water balance, percolation, soils, plant growth and residues and hillslope surface erosion. The Burned Area Reflectance Classification (BARC) map was used to assess soil burn severities from the wildfire. WEPP Disturbed outputs for hillslope surface erosion are routed to drainage wings, or local contributing drainage areas on either side of a stream channel. The Compound Topographic Index (CTI) is a model of ephemeral gully potential. CTI is defined as: CTI = A * S * PLANC, where A is the upstream drainage area, S is the local slope, which combined is a proxy for runoff discharge, and PLANC is the planform curvature, a measure of hillslope curvature (negative for ridges and positive for swales). RoadGRAIP was used to assess fine sediment production from various native surfaced road segments. Field surveys, GIS and professional judgement was used to evaluate roads within proximity to transport fine sediments to waterbodies. WEPP did not account for hydrologic soil groups.

The analysis compares two different precipitation or snowmelt runoff events. The larger more intense 0.8 inch in 30 minute thunderstorm was used for BAER modeling. The above average snowmelt runoff period of 2016 is used to illustrate normal conditions.

Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis The zone of influence for this analysis had a spatial extent at these multiple scales:

 Hillslope context,  treatment units down gradient to the junction of 3rd and 4th order streams, and  outlet of the project planning area (three subwatersheds).

Page 123 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Short-term effects are defined as ranging from 3 to 5 years, unless specifically stated. Long-term effects can last from 4 to 100s of years, depending on the processes that are impaired or at risk.

Past, Present, and Foreseeable Activities Relevant to Cumulative Effects Analysis Past, present and reasonably foreseeable future activities that were considered for the Watershed Report include: historical timber harvest (1860s to 1980s), Canyon Creek Wildland Urban Interface Fuel Reduction Project, fire suppression, past wildfires, Canyon Creek Complex BAER, Canyon Creek Complex Fire Hazard Tree Mitigation Project, historical, past and on-going grazing, and trail maintenance. The magnitude of salvage activities and their associate road activities on private lands is unknown. The geographical scale analyzed for cumulative effects extends to the outlet of the project planning area on Canyon Creek.

Historical timber harvests occurred prior to BMPs. Water quality issues may have occurred more frequently during those activities. Historic activities like timber harvesting (1860s to 1980s) occurred on streambanks and removed coarse woody debris from streams. The recent timber projects implemented BMPs to control sedimentation patterns and meet water quality goals. Fire suppression has altered primary and secondary productivity and may have degraded episodic wood and sediment recruitment processes. Past wildfires generated episodic pulses of sediment as inputs to Canyon Creek and tributaries. Past livestock grazing influenced the condition of stream channels and riparian vegetation and likely degraded aquatic insect habitats.

Canyon Creek Complex BAER identified many actions that affect water quantity and quality, including:

 Stormproofing, maintaining and improving drainage features that are at risk.  Removing soil fill that blocks or constrains floodplain processes.  Wood mulch applications in key high soil burn severity areas to promote ground cover.  Porous log jams that promote sediment retention and channel condition improvements.  Removal of Canyon Meadows Dam.

Alternative 1 – No Action

Direct and Indirect Effects - Water Quality and Water Quantity Implementation of the no action alternative would maintain different sized snags within the treatment units. Water would continue to be concentrated from past legacy activities and exacerbated by the Canyon Creek Complex wildfire effects to tree mortality, loss of ground cover and changes to soil structure. Legacy impacts that have created past rill and gulley development, with headwater extension of base leveling would route water from the hillslope to the stream network more efficiently (quicker).

Vegetative mortality from the wildfire holds water in the soil longer because plants are not transpiring the water through photosynthesis. Vegetative mortality from the wildfire would likely increase water yields by approximately 5 percent for 10 to 15 years (Luce et al. 2012). The black nature of a post-fire environment also increases solar radiation that influences timing of snowmelt. Snowmelt in the fire areas of the project planning area would likely melt earlier in the spring then normal. The timing effect could lead to an average peak flow date in late April as opposed to May. Peak flows are expected to be higher magnitudes at multiple scales, from gulches to the project planning area (BAER Hydrology Report 2015). These increases in peak flows have the potential to scour riffles and decrease the presence of fine sediments.

Page 124 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

All of these processes would pose risk to the area until 2017 when ground cover was restored. The ground cover in the project planning area would:

 Remain low in portions that were identified as high soil burn severity areas and moderate in moderate soil burn areas.  Moderate soil burn areas would receive effective ground cover from recruited needles within months and occur gradually over time.  It is assumed that dead trees (burnt from Canyon Creek Complex) last about 10 years before breaking down and that approximately 10 percent of its branch structure falls within a year.  Grass would likely respond in the understory in 2 years on high soil burn severity areas and 1 year in moderate soil burn severity. Grass and branches would provide some level of ground cover that would provide surface roughness that would break up the energy of slow or moderate runoff and promote infiltration, similar to the spring of 2016 snowmelt.

Observations of Canyon Creek indicate clear water conditions and a lack of sediment during the frequent 250 cubic feet per second (CFS) discharge events in Canyon City. 250 CFS illustrated bankfull conditions in sections of Canyon Creek. Contrast the bankfull event with a thunderstorm of 0.81 inches in 30 minutes on 3 to 5 mile range over the treatment area, or any of the high soil burn severity areas within the project planning area. This amount of water has excess energy that has the potential to erode the soil surface with rills, gullies or shallow landslides that could introduce fine and coarse sediments to the stream network. A high intensity, short duration thunderstorm occurs 3 to 5 times per month during July and August within the project planning area. The no action alternative would not fell woody debris at gully hazard areas and larger sediment hazard areas. As a result, there is a risk for 3 to 5 years of having a thunderstorm of a 2 year frequency to erode and deliver sediment to a 303(d) listed streams for biocriteria. While sedimentation effects have been viewed as degrading habitat over the past 50 years, new science is emerging that discusses the importance of sediment inputs to develop floodplains and channel habitat units. Further, disturbance variability in space and time is critical for maintaining biological diversity, resilience and productivity of many aquatic populations and communities (Poff and Ward 1990).

The 303(d) listed indicator, biocriteria has a beneficial use of aquatic life. Recent research has illustrated that post-fire watershed conditions may be important for aquatic biological communities. Post-fire environments may result in increased aquatic productivity by increasing primary and secondary production that balances losses in shade and high water temperatures (Flitcroft et al. 2016). Fire and the erosion that commonly follows contributes wood and sediment that creates and maintains productive aquatic habitats (Miller et al. 2003).

The no action alternative would maintain the streamside shade that is present in the existing conditions. Shade is reduced in areas where vegetative mortality occurred adjacent to the stream. If present, burnt riparian hardwoods and seed would sprout and restore shade in 7 to 10 years, depending on the magnitude and frequency of browse utilization levels.

Roads would continue to be on the landscape under the no action alternative. Roads are impervious features that intercept water from the hillslope and route it through a network of ditches back to the stream or hillslope. Roads would continue to route water away from the project planning area at a faster rate. The lack of road maintenance on some road segments would lead to culverts being filled up and water bars not being as effective, due to time since last maintenance. The no action alternative would keep roads in a similar condition. Timber operations would not occur and there would be no miles of haul occurring on native surface roads in the project planning area.

Page 125 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Cumulative Effects Under the no action alternative, there would be no management activities associated with the salvage treatments, and associated road activities in the project planning area; therefore, there would be no direct or indirect effects to water quality and quantity. There would continue to be ongoing effects from the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions. However, no cumulative effects would occur.

The hazard of thunderstorm and post-fire erosion is higher for approximately 5 years. The Canyon Creek Complex wildfire has created the largest influence on the condition of watershed resources for the project planning area. Most of the ground cover in high soil burn severity areas within the project planning area is not present. Needlecast is present in moderate soil burn severity areas, but is not very big in structure or function. Without placing slash and ground cover in these areas, the chance of a gully and sediment deposition to a 303(d) listed stream is heightened. However, episodic inputs of sediment following a wildfire are important components of highly functioning and complex aquatic habitats. Water temperatures would increase, for perhaps 10 years, depending on riparian shrub and tree recovery, but not associated with the proposed action.

A lack of road maintenance on various road segments identified in the proposed action may cause road drainage structures to fail. This has the potential to increase the risk to chronic water quality inputs and negatively affect aquatic biota.

Historical timber harvests occurred prior to BMPs. Water quality issues may have occurred more frequently during those activities. Historic activities like timber harvesting (1860s to 1980s) occurred on streambanks and removed coarse woody debris from streams. These past practices before BMPs likely had degrading water quality effects to biocriteria. The recent timber projects implemented BMPs to control sedimentation patterns and meet water quality goals. Fire suppression has altered primary and secondary productivity and may have degraded episodic wood and sediment recruitment processes, thereby negatively affecting biocriteria. Past wildfires generated episodic pulses of sediment as inputs to Canyon Creek and tributaries. Past livestock grazing influenced the condition of stream channels and riparian vegetation and likely degraded aquatic insect habitats.

Canyon Creek Complex BAER identified many actions that affect water quantity and quality, including:

 Stormproofing, maintaining and improving drainage features that are at risk.  Removing soil fill that blocks or constrains floodplain processes.  Wood mulch applications in key high soil burn severity areas to promote ground cover.  Porous log jams that promote sediment retention and channel condition improvements.  Removal of Canyon Meadows Dam. The BAER treatments may have had the biggest effects from a post-fire environment on sedimentation and runoff effects. BAER maintained a large number of open roads and cleaned ditches and drainage features. BAER treatments identified priority areas to treat with wood mulch to increase water infiltration and minimize runoff. It identified locations for log jams to capture sediment from post-fire runoff. These log jams will assist to ameliorate the effects of any sedimentation from the treatment units. The log jams will also help build aquatic habitat units and conditions that are beneficial for aquatic life (biocriteria).

The recovery of ground cover in moderate and high soil burn severity areas would be slower, and not progress quite as far as under alternative 2, because of the effects of adding slash to these areas. The potential for gully erosion in category 4 and ephemeral draws is heightened in alternative 1. As a result, there may be natural fine and coarse sedimentation to Canyon Creek.

Page 126 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects - Water Quantity The salvage treatments proposed would cause direct and indirect effects that may impact hydrological indicators of water runoff. Water runoff is typically accelerated in a post fire environment because of changes to the soil structure and loss of ground cover. Ground cover would be altered from the ground based logging system to transport cut trees to their landing zones. Forwarders transport the burnt trees longitudinally up and down the hillslopes. These skidding trails are potential conduits for accelerated water runoff that is already in an altered condition by burn severities and loss of ground cover. A project design criteria (Soil-9) accounts for erosion control on skidding trails through crushing slash, or by installing appropriately spaced waterbars where slash is insufficient. Slash may be limited in treatment units that utilize Level 1 silviculture treatment prescriptions from removing smaller size class material. Slash would function like ground cover in these potential water conduits where ground cover was altered by varying burn severities. Constructing waterbars where slash is not available would help to disperse the water and prevent concentration of water, but may cause localized compaction and runoff. Soil project design criteria accounts for past salvage logging monitoring and potential water quality effects of not having BMPs in place prior to the occurrence of a thunderstorm. Another BMP addresses that risk: install suitable erosion control measures to stabilize disturbed areas if severe storm events could result in sediment mobilization to Canyon Creek. This BMP should heighten situational awareness of leaving multiple areas open without implementing BMPs.

The scale of salvage treatments is approximately 1,200 acres. This is approximately 2 percent of the 57,773 acre project planning area would be affected. The existing condition identified that 26 percent of the treatment units occur in high soil burn severity areas. In addition, 59 percent of the treatment units are in moderate soil burn severity areas.

Hillslopes with higher slope steepness (20 to 35 percent) with fine soils and high soil burn severity have the potential to generate higher rates of sediment production and water runoff. These areas were modeled with WEPP disturbed, see appendix for maps of the project planning area, treatment units and sediment erosion classes. Runoff would be influenced by the moderate hydrophobic conditions until the fall of 2016, because the layer starts to get broken up. Portions of the treatment units that overlapped high or very high sediment production were mapped. Implementation of slash and waterbars on forwarder trails in these polygons will be critical for ensuring salvage treatments do not exacerbate post-fire runoff conditions (see appendix for maps).

Sediment and water concentration from the treatment units after salvage operations have occurred would likely not be accelerated from the unit under normal snowmelt runoff regimes as seen in the spring of 2016. This is based on many field observations during the spring to the Canyon Creek Complex and through evaluating the Summit Reed Salvage Project (McIver and McNeil 2006). If a 2 year thunderstorm of 0.8 inches in 30 minutes was to occur over any of the treatment areas, runoff by the intensity of precipitation would likely concentrate runoff and scour a gulley downgradient of the study units in areas with gulley potential (see appendix for maps of gully locations of moderate to very high). A gulley would alter the storage capacity for water on these hillslopes and ephemeral draws downgradient. A watershed PDC (WA-7) would fell trees to decrease runoff and minimize any gullying from occurring to ephemeral draws or channels downgradient.

Temporary roads would increase soil compaction and reduce infiltration at the road site. 14 segments of temporary road (approximately 3.4 miles) would be restored upon completion of activities. Initially BMPs are expected to control sediment and concentrated runoff on temporary roads for one to several years. These roads would be rehabilitated to restore hydrological function. Re-establishment of ground cover

Page 127 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment would control sediment and runoff until productivity was restored. Approximately 52.3 miles of road would be used for haul and would receive road maintenance. These activities would improve drainage features on the road and would minimize water concentration for approximately 15 to 20 years after work has been completed. However, some road segments have ditch relief culverts spaced too far apart and would likely route water from certain hillslopes to the stream faster. No temporary roads occur within riparian habitat conservation areas.

The reforestation of 1,210 acres would restore the original species composition back to the stand. This will clear a small area for the newly planted trees to get established. As these trees get established, soil- water transpiration will occur and will gradually decrease stream flows starting in approximately 10 years.

Subsoiling has been proposed by the Soils Scientist in project design criteria. Subsoiling influences soil structure and can increase infiltration on disturbed sites, such as skid trails and temporary roads. Unfortunately, there is potential for soil erosion in the short-term until vegetative cover is reestablished. However, if subsoiling is undertaken, erosion controls would include subsoiling in a “J” pattern, scattering slash, building waterbars, and/or other methods approved by a soil scientist or hydrologist (see project design criteria in appendix B). In the long-term, abatement of compaction would reduce concentrations of overland flow by improving infiltration capacity and allowing for more rapid revegetation, both of which should result in lowered risk of erosion.

Direct and Indirect Effects - Water Quality The salvage treatments would likely not be the causal factor for water quality issues if no thunderstorms were to occur over the treatment units for two years after logging had occurred. This is due to the flush of grass that would occur by this time that would have high stem density and the increase in ground cover from slash that would provide surface roughness functions.

The logging system for salvage treatments proposed would cause direct and indirect effects that may impact runoff and concentration of water in a 2 year (0.8 inches in 30 minute) thunderstorm. This accelerated runoff could scour a gulley in an ephemeral draw that could be transported down to Canyon Creek (303[d] listed). To address this concern, WA-7 identified key potential gully locations to place trees and increase surface roughness. These structures should capture any sediment coming down the drainages and help build floodplains.

Road activities proposed have the largest potential direct and indirect effects that may influence fine sediment. Road maintenance activities during pre-haul to blade native surface road types to remove water bars and holes in the road. Blading the road disturbs the road surface and allows for fine sediment to be more readily available for transport downstream. Stream crossings and native surface roads within 300 feet to streams have a natural, inherent proximity where they could deliver fine sediment to the waterbody. There would be 5 miles of haul on native surface roads within 300 feet of streams. As a result, project design criteria have been developed for the project to mitigate these potential effects. All native surface roads that have a Category 1 stream crossing would be rocked. Another project design criteria would add slash sumps or silt fences to specific locations that have high road sediment production estimates and are close to a waterbody. Native surfaced roads that have long segments within riparian habitat conservation areas would have higher densities of water bars constructed into their road prism when activities have been completed. These projects are targeted at controlling fine sediment from haul on native surface roads through the use of Best Management Practices (BMPs) and project design criteria (PDC). The expected effect through implementing PDCs are to mitigate effects of sedimentation to water bodies from the proposed action and move water quality towards their standards.

Page 128 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Road closures proposed in the proposed action would administratively close roads that are identified as being closed, but will not affect Watershed resources. These closures are procedural in nature and utilize this NEPA document to administratively close them on the ground.

Streamside shade would not be affected by the proposed action and the direct and indirect effects would be consistent with the no action alternative. This is because no commercial activities will occur within Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCAs) and where gulley treatments are proposed, primary shade will be not be impacted or the channels are ephemeral and not perennial.

There would be a minimal effect to 303(d) listed biocriteria under normal snowmelt conditions. However, if a 2 year thunderstorm were to produce 0.8 inches of precipitation in 30 minutes over the treatment units, then a gulley could occur in similar areas as identified in the no action alternative. The salvage activities could slightly exacerbate runoff in high erosion potential areas where slash may not be present on the forwarder trails. The duration where the salvage activities may influence runoff would extend for about 2 years, until ground cover provides optimal surface roughness to increase infiltration. Coarse and fine sediment inputs from post-fire runoff events are the episodic inputs of high quality aquatic habitat and floodplains. Biocriteria would not be negatively affected by the project, because PDCs control fine sediment from entering a waterbody and because macroinvertebrates have evolved with background pulses of higher sediment levels following wildfire or stream pulse disturbances.

Cumulative Effects Past, present and reasonably foreseeable future activities that were considered for the Watershed Report include: historical timber harvest (1860s to 1980s), Canyon Creek Wildland Urban Interface Fuel Reduction Project, fire suppression and rehabilitation, past wildfires, Canyon Creek Complex BAER, Canyon Creek Complex Fire Hazard Tree Mitigation Project, historical, past and on-going grazing, and trail maintenance. The geographical scale analyzed for cumulative effects extends the outlet of the project planning area on Canyon Creek.

Since direct or indirect adverse effects from the proposed salvage activities are expected to remain within unit boundaries, during common runoff events, adverse cumulative effects from the proposed activities are not expected. A 2 year thunderstorm in the wildfire area has the potential to scour a gulley and deposit sediment in a 303(d) listed stream, but the additive effects from the salvage activities are expected to be mitigated by BMPs and the addition of ground cover within the treatment units. Therefore, no cumulative effects are anticipated from the proposed action following normal runoff conditions.

Historical timber harvests occurred prior to BMPs. Water quality issues may have occurred more frequently during those activities. Historic activities like timber harvesting (1860s to 1980s) occurred on streambanks and removed coarse woody debris from streams. These past practices before BMPs likely had degrading water quality effects to biocriteria. The recent timber projects implemented BMPs to control sedimentation patterns and meet water quality goals. Fire suppression has altered primary and secondary productivity and may have degraded episodic wood and sediment recruitment processes, thereby negatively affecting biocriteria. Past wildfires generated episodic pulses of sediment as inputs to Canyon Creek and tributaries. Past livestock grazing influenced the condition of stream channels and riparian vegetation and likely degraded aquatic insect habitats.

Canyon Creek Complex BAER identified many actions that affect water quantity and quality, including:

 Stormproofing, maintaining and improving drainage features that are at risk.  Removing soil fill that blocks or constrains floodplain processes.  Wood mulch applications in key high soil burn severity areas to promote ground cover.

Page 129 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

 Porous log jams that promote sediment retention and channel condition improvements.  Removal of Canyon Meadows Dam.

The BAER treatments may have had the greatest effects from a post-fire environment on sedimentation and runoff effects. BAER maintained a large number of open roads and cleaned ditches and drainage features. BAER treatments identified priority areas to treat with wood mulch to increase water infiltration and minimize runoff. It identified locations for log jams to capture sediment from post-fire runoff. These log jams will assist to ameliorate the effects of any sedimentation from the treatment units. The log jams will also help build aquatic habitat units and conditions that are beneficial for aquatic life (biocriteria).

Future grazing activities may influence riparian hardwood establishment within the cumulative effects study area. However, they will get established if they meet the woody browse or utilization levels identified in the Forest Plan.

Road use for recreation and mushroom picking may impact the road surface if driven during wet conditions. However, much of this sediment will stay within the road prism and will look like ruts in the road.

Rehabilitation of fire suppression activities will gradually improve over time as ground cover becomes established. Dozer line and fire line may have removed and replaced organic matter soils that may have disturbed the ground cover. Sediment may become eroded locally after a thunderstorm, but will not be additive to the proposed action because it was rehabilitated.

Implementing proposed salvage treatments on approximately 1,200 acres would positively influence ground cover through adding slash to portions of the ground. Treating approximately 2 percent of the project planning area would not negatively influence 303(d) listed biocriteria. Five (5) miles of native surfaced haul roads will have BMPs that control sediment from entering a RHCA stream category.

The gully abatement treatments are likely to improve sedimentation patterns to 303(d) listed Canyon Creek. The gully treatments would help filter sediment incoming from these drainages from the greater wildfire area. Other gullies may form in other locations that are downstream of high burn severity and input sediment to Canyon Creek. This project would help dis-synchronize sediment inputs to Canyon Creek. Further, the scale of the treatments would only occupy 2 percent of the project planning area. This project through implementing BMPs would be an improvement in the overall condition of Watershed Resources in the project planning area. This project combined with past BAER projects in other locations in cumulative effects planning area would contribute to the cumulative recovery of biocriteria for the USFS managed lands. This is due to the goals of managing the episodic pulse of sediment from the wildfire in key depositional areas. .

Compliance with Forest Plan and Other Relevant Laws, Regulations, and Policies This project is consistent with the Clean Water Act and Forest Service responsibilities under the Clean Water Act as described in a Memorandum of Understanding with the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (2014) because the proposed action under normal conditions would not measurably increase watershed impacts, including sedimentation, over the existing condition.

The Memorandum of Understanding also directs that the Forest Service cannot further degrade water quality impaired streams, although short-term adverse impacts which occur with long-term benefits are allowed. Several streams in the project planning area were on the Oregon 303(d) list for above normal stream temperatures, prior to the Total Maximum Daily Load being finalized. All alternatives comply with the Clean Water Act, since none would raise stream temperatures, and since all follow Best

Page 130 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Management Practices as specified in “Forest Service R6 General Water Quality Best Management Practices” (1988) and “National Best Management Practices for Water Quality Management on National Forest System Lands” (2012).

The Forest Service is directed to comply with State requirements in accordance with the Clean Water Act for protection of waters of the State of Oregon (OAR chapter 34041) through planning, application, and monitoring of Best Management Practices (BMPs), which are recognized as the primary means to control non-point source pollution on National Forest lands. BMPs would be monitored by the Blue Mountain Ranger District hydrologists, fish biologist, sale administrators, and harvest inspectors. The Memorandum of Understanding also directs that the Forest Service cannot further degrade water quality impaired streams.

There is uncertainty whether a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit would be required for stormwater discharges from logging roads. Implementation of Best Management Practices (BMP) monitoring to ensure BMPs and project design criteria are being properly implemented should provide direction that we are meeting our NPDES requirements.

Floodplains (Executive Order 11988)

Executive Order 11988 says that Federal agencies shall avoid adverse effects to floodplains or minimize potential harm. Floodplains several to hundreds of feet wide occur in the project planning area. The floodplains are primarily contained within riparian habitat conservation areas. Implementation activities proposed would not meaningfully affect the function of floodplains. The proposed action would minimize adverse effects to the floodplains, and thus be consistent with Executive Order 11988.

Wetlands

Executive Order 11990 says that Federal agencies shall avoid management practices that would adversely affect wetlands. Wetlands would be avoided in this project through mapping Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas.

Aquatic Species This Biological Evaluation and Aquatic Specialist Report contains an analysis of existing and desired aquatic habitat conditions in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project analysis area and an analysis of effects from proposed activities on aquatic Threatened, Endangered, and Region 6 Sensitive Species (TES), Forest Plan aquatic Management Indicator Species (MIS), and aquatic habitat.

Indicators for Assessing Effects

Table 41 Resource elements, indicators and measures for assessing effects to the aquatics resource Resource element Resource indicator Measure Source Number of pools per mile of PACFISH, Forest Plan Aquatic habitat Pool frequency stream amendment 29 Water temperature and 7-day mean maximum water PACFISH, Forest Plan Aquatic habitat stream shading temperature amendment 29 Number of pieces of LWD to Large woody debris PACFISH, Forest Plan Aquatic habitat be maintained for each mile (LWD) amendment 29 of stream by ecotype Embeddedness and fine Composition of the stream PACFISH, Forest Plan Aquatic habitat sediment substrate amendment 29

Page 131 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Resource element Resource indicator Measure Source PACFISH, Forest Plan Aquatic habitat Width-to-depth ratio Wetted width and depth amendment 29 Percent stable banks for PACFISH, Forest Plan Aquatic habitat Bank stability each mile of stream amendment 29 Threatened, Endangered, Manage for species Endangered Species Act, Aquatic species and Sensitive Species recovery Region 6 Sensitive species list (TES) Management Indicator Maintain and enhance Aquatic species Malheur Forest Plan Species population viability

Affected Environment

Methodology Information on the affected environment was gleaned from multiple sources. The affected environment post-fire is described in the following document which is incorporated by reference as a supporting document: Canyon Creek Complex Fire Aquatics Burned Area Emergency Rehabilitation (BAER) report. Region 6 Stream Survey and temperature monitoring data inform the existing condition prior to the fire. Legacy land use effects pre-fire are described below, as well as a qualitative discussion on the effects of the fire on the primary habitat elements. The affected environment is only described for reaches of fishbearing streams or their tributaries that may be affected by the proposed action due to their proximity to action elements.

Existing Condition

Pool Frequency Pool frequency is a gage of aquatic habitat diversity, and is an indicator of the degree to which streams are capable of supporting a varied and complex community of fish species. Pools are important for providing rearing habitat for juvenile fish and cool-water refuge areas for adult fish during periods of low flow and elevated temperatures. Deep pools provide important habitat for fluvial bull trout and adult steelhead. Pool frequency is also an indicator for the function of physical processes such as scour and deposition.

Stream surveys indicate that pool frequency objectives are not being met within the following stream reaches: Canyon Creek reach 1, Canyon Creek reach 2, East Fork Canyon Creek reach 1, and Crazy Creek reach 1. Pool spacing is higher for reaches compared to potential channel types in the aquatic analysis area and there is an overall deficit in quality pools (>2 feet deep). This indicates a loss of pool habitat and general hydrological function as a result of past management activities, especially mining, riparian logging, and channel modification during road building.

Stream surveys indicate that pool frequency objectives are not being met within any stream reaches within the aquatic analysis area.

Water Temperature and Stream Shading Water temperature influences the metabolism, behavior, and health of fish and other aquatic organisms. Fish can survive at temperatures near extremes of suitable temperature ranges; however, growth is reduced at low temperatures because all metabolic processes are slowed. At the opposite extreme, growth is reduced at high temperatures because most or all energy from food must be used for maintenance needs.

Seven-day mean maximum water temperature (7-day mean max) data relevant to this analysis was reviewed. Data collected within Canyon Creek Reach 1 in 2002 where Forest Road 15 leaves Canyon

Page 132 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Creek indicated a 7-day mean max of 73.0 degrees Fahrenheit. Data collected within Canyon Creek Reach 2 in 2000 above the confluence with Crazy Creek indicated a 7-day mean max of 64.7 degrees Fahrenheit. Data collected within Crazy Creek Reach 1 in 2000 above its confluence with Canyon Creek indicated a 7-day mean max of 61.2 degrees Fahrenheit. Data collected within East Fork Canyon Creek Reach 1 in 1999 and 2000 at the Strawberry Wilderness Boundary indicated a 7-day mean max of 66.8 degrees Fahrenheit.

Both PACFISH RMOs and Amendment 29 DFCs specify compliance with Oregon state water quality standards. Canyon Creek (27.5 miles) in the Middle and Upper Canyon Creek subwatersheds was 303(d) listed for temperature with a rearing beneficial use of 64 degrees Fahrenheit. The 303(d) status was removed with the approval of the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL). This same standard applies to East Fork Canyon Creek and Crazy Creek.

Mean maximum water temperatures are above PACFISH RMO and Amendment 29 DFC standards for the suitable range for salmonid species present during summer months in the aquatic analysis area in the following stream reaches: Canyon Creek reach 1, Canyon Creek reach 2, and EF Canyon Creek reach 1. These standards are being met in Crazy Creek Reach 1.

Large Woody Debris Large woody debris plays an important role in forested stream reaches by dissipating stream energy, trapping sediment, providing for stream grade stabilization, and forming pools. Riparian forests, especially individual trees that are within ½ to ¾ tree length of the stream channel, produce large woody debris that is recruited into a stream where it creates critical habitat features for aquatic species. Forest Plan Amendment 29 specifies a range in the number of pieces of large woody debris to be maintained for each mile of stream in certain ecotypes. Stream surveys identified these reaches of Canyon Creek and Crazy Creek as mixed conifer ecosystem. Forest Plan Amendment 29 identifies Large and Key Wood desired future conditions for mixed conifer ecosystems: maintain 80-120 pieces/mile; at least 12 inches in diameter and 20 percent > 20 inches in diameter; and at least 35 feet long or 1.5 times bankfull width.

Prior to the PACFISH amendment (1995) to the Forest Plan, timber was harvested from areas adjacent to streams in the project planning area and removed where mining activity occurred. In the past, firewood was also taken from streamside areas. See the Existing Condition section for more information on past silvicultural activities within riparian areas. In extreme cases, removal of floodplain timber coupled with large increases in peak flows and large increases in channel width resulted in destabilization of in-stream pieces and subsequent transport downstream thus resulting in a decrease in large woody debris. Stream surveys indicate that large woody debris objectives are not being met in: Canyon Creek reach 1, Canyon Creek reach 2, East Fork Canyon Creek reach 1, and Crazy Creek reach 1. Large wood metrics by stream reach are summarized in Table 42. Additionally, large wood data was collected in October 2015 post-fire for selected stream reaches within the fire area:

 Canyon Creek reach 1: 42/mile  Canyon Creek reach 2: 38/mile  Crazy Creek reach 1: 61/mile Large wood numbers generally increased between 2006 and 2015 post-fire, although they are still significantly below Forest Plan Standards. Further, the 2015 post-fire large wood survey found that up to 1/3 of the large wood had become structurally compromised and would likely decay quickly. Due to the post-fire existing condition within the project planning area, there will be a pulse of large wood recruitment as fire-killed trees decay and fall over the next decade. Hazard trees along roads near streams have been, and will continue to be, felled as needed for safety concerns, adding to this expected pulse of

Page 133 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment wood. After this short-term pulse of wood recruitment, it will likely be 150 to 200 years before any substantial amount of large wood recruitment occurs.

Embeddedness and fine sediment Composition of the stream substrate is an important feature of aquatic habitat. Cobble and gravel substrates provide habitat for macroinvertebrates as well as eggs and early life stages of numerous fish species. Macroinvertebrates represent a substantial portion of the diet available to fish. Filling of interstitial spaces (i.e., the gaps between rocks on the stream bottom) with fine sediment (particles <2 millimeters in size) eliminates habitat for many macroinvertebrates. Fish eggs, early life stages, and winter habitat for juvenile salmonids can also be buried and smothered when interstitial spaces are embedded with fine sediment.

Stream surveys indicate that substrate embeddedness and fine sediment objectives are being met in: Canyon Creek reaches 1 and 2, and East Fork Canyon Creek reach 1; standards are not being met in Crazy Creek reach 1. The likely sources for fine sediment are activities in riparian areas, including channel modification from logging, mining, wildfire, channel erosion, livestock grazing (especially past grazing), and roads. Several roads in the project planning area have been identified as potential sources of fine sediment and are within the active floodplain.

Width-to-depth ratio Forest Plan standards for width-to-depth ratios are based on wetted width and depth. A large wetted width-to-depth ratio indicates a wide and shallow stream channel. Wide and shallow streams are prone to increases in stream temperatures due to high surface area to volume ratio and provide little habitat for fish, due to the lack of water depth.

Stream surveys indicate that objectives for wetted width-to-depth ratios are met in Crazy Creek reach 1. Canyon Creek reaches 1 and 2, and East Fork Canyon Creek reach 1, are not meeting objectives for wetted width-to-depth ratios. Width-to-depth ratio metrics by stream reach are summarized in Table 42.

Bank stability Channel types differ in their sensitivity to management activities due to differences in bank erosion potential and the influence of streamside vegetation on bank stability. Stream surveys indicate that bank stability objectives are being met in Canyon Creek reaches 1 and 2, East Fork Canyon Creek reach 1, and Crazy Creek reach 1.

Primary habitat elements Important aquatic habitat elements as defined by PACFISH and Forest Plan Amendment 29 include: 1) pool frequency, 2) water temperature and stream shading, 3) large woody debris, 4) embeddedness and fine sediment, 5) width-to-depth ratio, and 6) bank stability. These habitat elements are important in maintaining aquatic habitat function and health and are linked to physical and biological processes within the watershed.

There are several fish-bearing streams within the project planning area, however only the following fishbearing streams and their tributaries are in proximity to and may be affected by the proposed action, and are thus considered the aquatic species analysis area. Several streams within the project planning area are partially or entirely within the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness (where no ground-disturbing actions are proposed) or are within drainages where no actions are proposed. Further, the proposed treatment areas and associated road actions occupy a small proportion of the subwatersheds within the analysis area.

Page 134 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Table 42 Existing condition from most recent R6 stream surveys for 6 primary habitat elements used for comparison of alternatives Water

Survey Pool temperature Fine sediment / W:D Bank Stream name Percent LWD year frequency (7 day mean embeddedness ratio stability shade max) Canyon Creek 0 percent < 2006 13.4 73.0°F NA 2.2 24.2 97.8 Reach 1 2millimeters Canyon Creek 0 percent < 2006 12.6 64.7°F NA 9.4 14 99 Reach 2 2millimeters East Fork 0 percent < Canyon Cr 2006 16.9 66.8 NA 12.3 16.9 98 2millimeters Reach 1 Crazy Creek 25 percent < 1994 55.1 61.2°F 76.8 41.1 8.8 100 Reach 1 2millimeters

The Canyon Creek Complex Fire had an effect on the existing condition within the aquatic analysis area. The fire burned in a mosaic with low, moderate, and high severity patches. Much of the aquatic analysis area burned at high severity, which resulted in the loss of shading along stream channels, loss of instream wood, and both short-term (3 to 5 years) and long-term (10 to 50 years) loss of streamside vegetation. This could adversely affect fish habitat and populations. Rinne (1996) found that localized extirpation of fish could occur as the result of severe wildfires.

Water temperatures will likely increase for perhaps a few decades, depending on riparian shrub and tree recovery. Sediment from upland sources will likely increase for 1 to 5 years following the fire. Sediment from channel sources could increase due to higher peak flows and loss of stabilizing trees and shrubs. However, recovery of bank stabilizing herbaceous and shrubby vegetation would probably limit increased sediment from channel sources to less than 5 years. Severe fire can also supply an extended pulse of woody debris to streams, which would gradually decay over decades. Flitcroft et al. (2016) found mixed positive and negative effects of fire on Chinook salmon habitat, with negative effects on egg and fry habitat quality and abundance due to increased levels of fine sediment and temperatures, but a stronger positive effect on adult and juvenile rearing habitat quality and abundance due to increases in large wood from erosion and debris flows.

As noted by Dunham et al. (2003), the effects of wildfires depend on a variety of factors including their timing, location, area, extent, and intensity. Other factors include the characteristics of the ecosystems and the species affected along with other indirect physical and ecological linkages. While such events can cause short term negative effects, such as those listed below, over long time periods the resulting habitat conditions may be more productive then in areas where natural disturbance has been suppressed (Dunham et al. 2003). Wildfires can have a number of detrimental effects to stream channels such as decreasing stream channel stability, increasing discharge and affecting discharge variability, altering LWD delivery and storage, increasing nutrient availability, increasing sediment delivery and transport, increasing solar radiation and altering water temperature regimes (Dunham et al. 2003). In cases where natural stream processes are already impaired, including portions of the aquatic analysis area, the recovery of the stream ecosystem from the effects of severe wildfire is likely to be slower, more sporadic, and potentially incomplete (Minshall 2003).

The literature reports that suspended sediment and turbidity influences on fish range from beneficial to detrimental. Elevated total suspended solids (TSS) have been reported to enhance cover conditions, reduce piscivorous fish/bird predation rates, and improve survival, but elevated TSS have also been reported to cause physiological stress, reduce growth, and adversely affect survival. Although fish that remain in turbid waters experience a reduction in predation from piscivorous fish and birds, chronic

Page 135 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment exposure can cause physiological stress response that can increase maintenance energy and reduce feeding and growth.

As suspended fine sediment settles out downstream from points of delivery, minor increases in stream substrate embeddedness occurs. The literature reports that increases in fine sediments in stream substrates can decrease productivity and habitat quality for juvenile salmonids. Substantial increases in fine sediment levels reduce interstitial spaces between substrate particles, leads to shifts in invertebrate community structure, fills pools, and can entomb redds. In such cases, eggs are smothered, prey available for rearing juveniles is reduced, and habitat features are lost.

Aside from the Canyon Creek Complex Fire, a variety of legacy land use practices over the last 100 years have affected the aquatic analysis area. Practices have included past silvicultural treatments, dredge and placer mining, fire suppression, prescribed fire, road construction, and livestock grazing on public and private land. Fire suppression has involved a variety of activities including construction of firelines, retardant use, fire suppression rehabilitation, and Burned Area Emergency Rehabilitation activities. These activities have reduced aquatic species habitat quality and complexity of streams within the aquatic analysis area. Past logging and road construction in the riparian areas have reduced canopy cover in some areas, resulting in less shade over streams.

Roads in the aquatic analysis area that occur within 100 feet of streams or cross streams commonly impact fish and fish habitat more than roads located in uplands. A high percentage of roads in riparian habitat conservation areas in the aquatic analysis area are native surface roads which contribute fine sediment to streams that adversely affect aquatic habitat. These conditions reduce availability of subsurface cool water storage and have caused streams to become disconnected from floodplains.

Road-stream crossings have impacted local stream channels and water quality. Some crossings were poorly designed with improperly sized culverts and misalignment relative to the natural stream channel. Fine sediment is also a concern for roads that are hydrologically connected to disturbed areas.

Past grazing management practices (prior to the Forest Plan in 1990) impacted existing aquatic habitat and water quality due to reductions in shade and bank-stabilizing wetland vegetation, stream bank alteration, increases in width-to-depth ratios and fine sediment levels. These impacts were exacerbated within areas that had been disturbed by logging. Improved management practices, on both private land and Forest Service land, have resulted in improved aquatic conditions.

Recreation has also impacted streams due to road development providing increased access to the project planning area for hunting, fishing, hiking, firewood cutting, and dispersed camping. In the fall deer and elk hunting are popular recreation activities within much of the project planning area. Determining Presence of Species or Habitats

The following sources of information have been reviewed to determine if Threatened, Endangered, Sensitive, or Management Indicator Species and their associated habitats may or may not occur within the aquatic analysis area:

 Malheur National Forest GIS database  Regional Forester’s (R6) sensitive animal list (07/2015)  Forest Service stream survey reports, Blue Mountain Ranger District, John Day, Oregon

Page 136 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Aquatic Species with Special Management Status Relative to Analysis Area Mid-Columbia River steelhead (Threatened, Management Indicator Species), their designated Critical Habitat, and Interior redband trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss gairdneri) (R6 Sensitive, Management Indicator Species) are documented to occur within the aquatic analysis area in Canyon Creek, East Fork Canyon Creek, and Crazy Creek. Westslope cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii lewisi) (R6 Sensitive, Management Indicator species) occur in the aquatic analysis area in Canyon Creek, East Fork Canyon Creek, and Crazy Creek as well. The Columbia spotted frog (Rana luteiventris) (R6 Sensitive) is considered present in all subwatersheds of the Malheur National Forest and is known to occur within the analysis area in these same streams.

There are 10 miles of habitat for the threatened, endangered, and regionally sensitive aquatic species listed above within the aquatic analysis area.

Table 43 Miles of Mid-Columbia River Steelhead critical habitat by stream within the aquatic analysis area Stream name Miles of Mid-Columbia River Steelhead Critical Habitat Canyon Creek reach 1 1.75 Canyon Creek reach 2 3.6 East Fork Canyon Creek reach 1 2.75 Crazy Creek reach 1 1.9 Total 10.00

Due to similarities in information considered for Threatened, Endangered, Region 6 Sensitive, and Management Indicator Species analyses, this information is consolidated for individual species in this assessment.

Affected Environment - Steelhead Mid-Columbia River Steelhead (Mid-Columbia Distinct Population Segment [DPS], MCR steelhead) were listed by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) as Threatened under the federal ESA on March 25, 1999 (64 FR 15417). MCR steelhead is also a MNF MIS species. Critical habitat for MCR steelhead was re-designated on September 2, 2005 (70 FR 52630). Critical habitat is present in the aquatic analysis area.

Steelhead trout are the anadromous form of O. mykiss. Adult summer steelhead return to freshwater from June through September. Adults overwinter in large rivers while sexually maturing. Adults resume migration to spawning streams in early spring. Spawning takes place from March through May. Eggs incubate during the spring and emergence occurs from April through July depending on water temperatures. Juveniles typically spend 2 to 3 years in freshwater. Juvenile steelhead generally utilize habitats with higher water velocities than juvenile Chinook salmon. In winter, juveniles utilize deep pools with abundant cover. Juveniles may reside in their natal stream for their entire freshwater rearing phase or may migrate to other streams within a watershed. Smoltification occurs during late winter and emigration to the ocean occurs during spring. Summer steelhead adults normally rear for 1 to 2 years in the ocean.

Population Status

MCR steelhead runs in the John Day River Basin are composed entirely of native stocks. However, hatchery fish do stray into the John Day Basin from the Columbia River (John Day Subbasin Revised Draft Plan [JDSRDP 2005]). Steelhead occupy approximately 410 miles of habitat on the Malheur National Forest.

Page 137 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Steelhead occupy approximately 10 miles of habitat within the aquatic analysis area, which represents approximately 2.4 percent of available habitat on the Malheur National Forest. The aquatic analysis area is situated in the south area of available habitat on the Malheur National Forest.

Critical Habitat

Critical habitat was designated for MCR steelhead on February 16, 2000 (65 FR 7764). Critical habitat for MCR steelhead under the 2000 rule encompassed the major Columbia River tributaries known to support the DPS, including the Deschutes, John Day, Klickitat, Umatilla, Walla Walla, and Yakima Rivers, as well as the Columbia River and estuary. Critical habitat consisted of all waterways below long- standing (100 years or more), naturally impassable barriers, including the planning area. The adjacent riparian zone was also considered critical habitat. This zone was defined as the area that provides the following functions: shade, sediment, nutrient/chemical regulation, stream bank stability, and input of LWD/organic matter. Protective regulations for MCR steelhead were issued under section 4(d) of the ESA on July 10, 2000 (65 FR 42423).

In late 2000, a lawsuit was filed challenging the NMFS February 2000 final designation of critical habitat for ESUs/DPSs of Pacific salmon and steelhead listed under the ESA. A federal court ruled that the agency did not adequately consider the economic impacts of the critical habitat designations. In April 2002, NMFS withdrew its 2000 critical habitat designations.

Critical habitat for MCR steelhead was redesignated on September 2, 2005 (70 FR 52630). Designated Critical Habitat includes the stream channels within the designated stream reaches, and includes a lateral extent as defined by the ordinary high-water line (33 CFR 319.11).

In areas where the ordinary high-water line has not been defined, the lateral extent will be defined by the bankfull elevation. Bankfull elevation is the level at which water begins to leave the channel and move into the floodplain and is reached at a discharge which generally has a recurrence interval of 1 to 2 years on the annual flood series.

The primary constituent elements (PCEs) that are essential for the conservation of listed DPSs on the Malheur National Forest are those sites and habitat components that support one or more life stages, including:

 Freshwater spawning sites with water quantity and quality conditions and substrate supporting spawning, incubation and larval development.  Freshwater rearing sites with: o Water quantity and floodplain connectivity to form and maintain physical habitat conditions and support juvenile growth and mobility; o Water quality and forage supporting juvenile development; and o Natural cover such as shade, submerged and overhanging large wood, log jams and beaver dams, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, side channels, and undercut banks.  Freshwater migration corridors free of obstruction and excessive predation with water quantity and quality conditions and natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, side channels, and undercut banks supporting juvenile and adult mobility and survival.

Page 138 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Affected Environment – Redband trout Interior redband trout are a Region 6 sensitive species and a Malheur National Forest MIS species. Redband trout are the resident form of O. mykiss. Redband trout may or may not be reproductively isolated from steelhead. Redband and steelhead trout from the same geographic area may share a common gene pool.

Redband trout are sensitive to changes in water quality and habitat. Adult redband trout are generally associated with pool habitats, although various life stages require a wide array of habitats for rearing, hiding, feeding, and resting. Pool habitat functions as important refugia during low water periods. An increase in sediment lowers spawning success and reduces the quantity and quality of pool and interstitial habitat. Other important habitat features include healthy riparian vegetation, undercut banks, and LWD.

Redband trout may reside in their natal stream or may migrate to other streams within a watershed to rear. Habitat requirements are similar for redband trout and juvenile steelhead.

Spawning occurs during the spring, generally from March to June. Redds tend to be located where velocity, depth, and bottom configuration induce water flow through the stream substrate, generally in gravels at the tailout area of pools. Water temperatures influence emergence of fry, which is typically from May through June.

Population Status

Neither Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) nor the Forest Service routinely monitors abundance and distribution of redband trout in the John Day Basin. Juvenile O. mykiss with resident (redband trout) and anadromous (steelhead) life history types are difficult to differentiate where the two populations coexist, making independent monitoring difficult. Redband trout occupy approximately 1,089 miles of habitat on the Malheur National Forest.

Distribution and Habitat

Currently in the John Day Basin, redband trout are present in the North Fork, Middle Fork, Main stem, and South Fork John Day Rivers and their tributaries. Redband trout are present in all fish-bearing streams in the planning area. Summer distribution of redband trout is generally limited to headwater areas.

Redband trout are present in all fish bearing streams in the aquatic analysis area, however their population abundance is unknown. Their distribution within the analysis area, and habitat needs, are similar to those of steelhead. However, redband spawning may occur in areas with insufficient flow or two small of substrate for steelhead spawning. Redband trout occupy approximately 10 miles of habitat within the aquatic analysis area, which represents approximately 0.09 percent of available habitat on the Malheur National Forest. The aquatic analysis area is situated at the center of available habitat on the Malheur National Forest.

Population Status

Westslope cutthroat trout is a Region 6 sensitive species. Oregon populations of westslope cutthroat trout are disjunct from their greater contiguous distribution in the Upper Missouri and Columbia basins of Montanan and Idaho (Behnke 1992). Westslope cutthroat trout currently occupy 59 percent of their historical range (Shepherd 2005). Canyon Creek, East Fork Canyon Creek, and Crazy Creek in the aquatic analysis area are occupied habitat. Most populations express resident life history strategy, but migratory forms do exist within the Upper John Day Complex.

Page 139 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

There are 17 westslope cutthroat trout populations found within the Upper Mainstem John Day River. Distribution of westslope cutthroat trout is highly fragmented and limited to headwater streams in the Upper John Day River Basin.

Distribution and Habitat

Water temperatures greater than 20 degrees Celsius (68 degrees Fahrenheit) are not favorable to westslope cutthroat trout and favor rainbow trout. Approximately 75 percent of cutthroat populations within the Pacific Northwest are found in streams greater than 11 degrees Celsius (51.8 degrees Fahrenheit). Habitat within the aquatic analysis area includes Canyon Creek, East Fork Canyon Creek, and Crazy Creek, totaling approximately 10 miles. There are 150 miles of occupied westslope cutthroat habitat within the Malheur National Forest and the area within the aquatic analysis area represents approximately 6.6 percent of available habitat on the Forest.

Affected Environment – Columbia Spotted Frog The Columbia spotted frog is a Region 6 Sensitive species. Spotted frogs are highly aquatic and are rarely found far from permanent water. They are most commonly associated with perennial streams, and less commonly in lakes, ponds, springs, and marshes.

During winter, spotted frogs burrow into banks adjacent to streams, ponds, and springs. Breeding occurs in the spring varying with elevation. In the Columbia basin of Washington, breeding occurs from March to April in lower elevations, and from May to June in the higher elevations. Breeding habitat is usually found in quiet waters along streams or shallow water in ponds. Breeding may also occur in flooded areas adjacent to streams and ponds. Adults may disperse overland in the spring and summer after breeding.

Spotted frogs may be considered to occupy a similar range as redband trout on the Forest due to their predominantly stream-oriented habitat use. Spotted frogs would thus occupy approximately 10 miles of habitat within the aquatic analysis area, which represents approximately 0.09 percent of available habitat on the Malheur National Forest. The aquatic analysis area is situated at the center of available habitat on the Malheur National Forest.

Population Status

This species occurs in extreme southeastern Alaska, southwestern Yukon, northern British Columbia, and western Alberta south through Washington east of the Cascades, eastern Oregon, Idaho, and western Montana to Nevada (disjunct, Mary's, Reese, and Owyhee river systems), southwestern Idaho (disjunct), Utah (disjunct, Wasatch Mountains and west desert), and western and north-central (disjunct) Wyoming. Disjunct populations occur on isolated mountains and in arid-land springs. In Oregon, Columbia spotted frogs appear to be widely distributed east of the Cascade Mountains.

The US Fish and Wildlife Service lists livestock grazing and introduction of nonnative fish (salmonids and bass) as primary threats to the Great Basin population of Columbia spotted frogs (66 FR 1295).

Habitat in the Analysis Area

The spotted frog is considered present in all subbasins on the Malheur National Forest, including the aquatic analysis area. It is assumed this species is widely distributed in the Subbasin. Limited habitat surveys have been conducted specifically for spotted frogs; however, habitat probably exists along low gradient perennial streams. Fish surveys record incidental sightings of frogs but most do not differentiate species.

Page 140 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Existing Condition Compared to Desired Condition Fish habitat in the aquatic analysis area generally does not meet Forest Plan DFCs/RMOs for pool frequency, LWD, sediment, temperature, and width-to-depth ratio (Table 42). The condition of important habitat elements including low pool frequency, high water temperatures, reduced LWD frequency, high fine sediment levels, and moderately high width-to-depth ratios indicate reduced fish habitat quality as a result of past management activities. Although bank stability does meet the RMOs in general, specific locations where bank instability is occurring are not in the appropriate locations. Areas of bank instability often occur on the outside banks of stream meanders. Where stream channels have been straightened, bank instability is occurring on both sides of the stream channel (mostly related to roads) due to excessive stream energy and lack of energy dissipation in the form of LWD, sinuosity, and floodplain roughness. Most streams in the analysis area are in an altered state, with conditions of important habitat elements limiting quality of fish habitat.

Desired Condition The long-term desired condition for the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage aquatic analysis area is for the PACFISH Riparian Management Objectives and Forest Plan standards for the primary aquatic habitat elements to be met for fish-bearing streams and their tributaries within the analysis area. As stated above, important aquatic habitat elements as defined by PACFISH and Forest Plan Amendment 29 include: 1) pool frequency, 2) water temperature and stream shading, 3) large woody debris, 4) embeddedness and fine sediment, 5) width-to-depth ratio, and 6) bank stability. These habitat elements are important in maintaining aquatic habitat function and health and are linked to physical and biological processes within the watershed.

Some of the primary habitat elements were being met prior to the fire, and the fire is expected to have an insignificant effect on (bank stability for example). Other elements were not being met pre-fire, and the fire is expected to have a lasting effect on (large wood for example). Periodic disturbances in riparian areas are necessary to maintain important processes and functions, and fire with its resulting erosion contributes wood and coarse sediment that create and maintain productive aquatic habitats (Reeves et al. 1995). Because natural disturbances can affect the existing condition of the primary habitat elements, one cannot expect all the standards to be met for all primary habitat elements at all times in all reaches within a given area. However, land management practices should not prevent or retard attainment of those standards.

As an example, large wood standards were not being met within any reach in the aquatic analysis area pre-fire; portions of reaches that experienced moderate and high severity fire will likely experience a short-term wood recruitment event as fire-killed trees fall over or break down in chunks and begin to interact with the stream and floodplain over a period of roughly 10 years. These areas likely will not experience meaningful wood recruitment for another 100 to 150 years while trees regrow, become potential large wood, and then fall into streams and floodplains. However the short-term pulse of wood recruitment is expected to move streams in the analysis area towards desired conditions for large wood in the short-term, as well as improve conditions of other primary habitat elements that depend in part on large wood; pool frequency and width-depth ratios are expected to respond positively to the pulse of large wood. Pulses of fine sediment are likely to be delivered to streams in the short-term as a result of the fire as well. As described in the existing condition section, sediment from upland sources will likely increase for 1 to 5 years following the fire. Sediment from channel sources could increase due to higher peak flows and loss of stabilizing trees and shrubs. However, recovery of bank stabilizing herbaceous and shrubby vegetation would probably limit increased sediment from channel sources to less than 5 years. This sediment can reduce width-depth ratios in response reaches in the long term where adequate roughness in

Page 141 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment the form of wood and riparian shrubs provide for bank-building processes. That sediment may also be captured and stored in-stream or on floodplains behind the wood.

PACFISH established explicit goals and objectives for anadromous fish habitat condition and function. By following PACFISH standards and guidelines as well as design criteria specific to this project, it is believed that population viability for aquatic species with special management status will be met. The goal is to achieve a high level of habitat diversity and complexity through a combination of habitat features.

As described in the Regulatory Framework section, other laws and regulations that guide the desired condition include the National Forest Management Act (NFMA) which requires the Forest Service to manage fish and wildlife habitat to maintain viable populations of all native and desirable non-native wildlife species and conserve all listed threatened or endangered species populations (36 CFR 219.19), and the ESA which requires the Forest Service to manage for the recovery of threatened and endangered species and the ecosystems upon which they depend.

Additionally, the long-term desired condition for the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage aquatic analysis area is one where all life stages of aquatic organisms have access to potential habitats unimpaired by human-caused barriers. The most common source of impaired passage occurs at improperly designed road/stream crossings. Forest Plan MA-3B Standard 44 states: Leave stream channels of Class I to IV streams undisturbed by roads, except for crossings. Minimize adverse impacts to water and fisheries resources when designing necessary crossings.

This desired condition is currently being met, as there are no known human caused passage barriers in the aquatic analysis area.

Environmental Consequences

Methodology Information for the aquatic analysis was compiled from multiple sources. Region 6 (R6) stream survey data provide substantial existing condition data. Table 42 lists the most recent stream surveys and data for the 6 primary aquatic habitat elements for stream reaches in the analysis area.

The existing condition for fish bearing streams has changed for several Primary Habitat Elements due to the Canyon Creek Complex Fire since the streams in the analysis area had R6 Stream Surveys completed.

Streams in the aquatic analysis area have been evaluated qualitatively, based on principles of applied fisheries and watershed science, professional judgment, and knowledge of the area. Some quantitative post-fire data collection has occurred, including that for large wood counts on five stream reaches within the aquatic analysis area (data shown in the primary habitat elements section above). Other sources of information considered for this report include field trips to perennial portions of fish bearing streams within the project planning area, the forest GIS system providing spatial and tabular data, Forest water temperature monitoring data, streamnet.org, and discussions with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) personnel from the John Day Watershed District. Analysis for aquatic habitat was conducted by analyzing the impacts of the action for each alternative on the six aquatic habitat elements.

Assessments / Process As stated above, the existing condition for fishbearing streams within the aquatic analysis area has changed post-fire. Only the stream survey data for large wood counts have been updated since the fire

Page 142 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project was contained. With little time to collect additional site-specific quantitative data post-fire, this analysis uses a more qualitative approach to overcome the changed existing condition.

Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis The project planning area lies within the Canyon Creek Watershed of the John Day River Subbasin. The aquatic analysis area encompasses all known and potential habitats for Threatened, Endangered, Region 6 Sensitive, and MIS species that may be affected by the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Area Salvage Project. Based on topography, drainage patterns and the effects analysis, the aquatic analysis area (action area) includes the following streams and their tributaries: Canyon Creek from the Canyon Meadows Dam site (removed in 2015) downstream to the Forest Boundary, Crazy Creek from its headwaters downstream to the confluence with Canyon Creek, and East Fork Canyon Creek from the Wilderness Boundary downstream to the Forest Boundary. Measurable effects from proposed activities are unlikely to extend downstream of this area. The analysis area for aquatic species and the cumulative effects boundary are the same as used for aquatic habitat.

Effects timeframes for all habitat elements are very similar. While the analysis below determines that any effects to the habitat elements would be insignificant and discountable, those effects would occur in the short-term (1 to 5 years post-implementation.

Past, Present, and Foreseeable Activities Relevant to Cumulative Effects Analysis Past, present and reasonably foreseeable future activities that were considered for the Aquatic Species Report include: historical timber harvest (1860s to 1980s), Canyon Creek Wildland Urban Interface Fuel Reduction Project, fire suppression, past wildfires, Canyon Creek Complex BAER, Canyon Creek Complex Fire Hazard Tree Mitigation Project, historical, past and on-going grazing, and trail maintenance. These activities have contributed to landscape changes that may have affected processes such as overland flows, channel development, and riparian and fish habitat within the drainages associated with this project. Legacy effects from past management activities may continue to impact aquatic habitat in the project planning area and downstream of the project planning area. The magnitude and timing of these potential impacts are unpredictable, but they would have short-term (1 to 3 years) to long term (50+ years) negative effects on fisheries habitat in this watershed. These activities have been considered for their cumulative effects on aquatic habitat and associated aquatic species. Effects are addressed for all aquatic species considered in this analysis together due to the insignificant differences between the species’ niches. The analysis area for aquatic species and the cumulative effects boundary are the same as used for aquatic habitat.

Alternative 1 – No Action Under alternative 1, there would be no management activities associated with the salvage logging or research in the aquatic analysis area. However there would be cumulative effects as described below. Some level of road maintenance would occur in the aquatic analysis area, but would occur at a much reduced scale when compared with alternative 2; this would likely allow several miles of roads to continue acting as potential sediment sources. No product haul would occur as well, which also has the potential to contribute sediment to stream courses.

As described in the Fire and Fuels Report, the patch sizes under consideration in the proposed action are small and within larger patches of high basal area loss, and the lack of treatment in these specific patches under the no action alternative is unlikely to contribute to success or failure of fire suppression activities; thus, the no action alternative would have a negligible effect on the hazard of another moderate or high severity fire. See the affected environment section for a discussion on the effects of moderate and high severity wildfire on aquatic habitat elements and aquatic species.

Page 143 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Treatment units proposed for reforestation under the action alternative were also proposed for reforestation in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Reforestation decision memo (signed in Spring of 2016), thus reforestation activities would occur under in treatment units regardless of which alternative is chosen, speeding the restoration of a functioning forest canopy.

Direct and Indirect Effects

Pool Frequency Alternative 1 would maintain the current levels of pool habitat, which are below objectives for streams in the analysis area and limit important habitat for salmonids, especially for rearing juveniles and adults migrating prior to spawning.

Water Temperature/Stream Shading Alternative 1 would maintain the current levels of stream shading, with a slow increase as trees in burned riparian areas regrow with no or little reforestation. Before the fire, water temperatures exceeded objectives for water temperature in nearly all streams in the analysis area (Table 42). Post-fire, water temperatures can be expected to increase. Mean maximum water temperatures were already above the suitable range for redband trout, Westslope cutthroat trout, and juvenile steelhead which are all present in the aquatic analysis area during the summer months.

The no action alternative would have a negligible effect on the hazard of another moderate or high severity fire, as shown in the Fire and Fuels Report, and would thus have a negligible effect on stream shading.

Large Woody Debris Alternative 1 would maintain the current levels of LWD. Current levels of LWD are below objectives for all 4 stream reaches in the aquatic analysis area (Table 42) and are resulting in degraded stream conditions including low pool frequencies. Replacement LWD would be recruited into stream channels as live and fire-killed conifers die and fall into streams; in incised/confined channels, wood would likely be suspended over the channel and not become incorporated as functional LWD.

The no action alternative would have a negligible effect on the hazard of another moderate or high severity fire, as shown in the Fire and Fuels Report, and would thus have a negligible effect on large wood. Where moderate and high-severity fire occurred next to streams, it will likely take 150 years or more for tree regrowth to suitable size and become recruited into the stream.

Embeddedness/Fine Sediment Overall, alternative 1 would maintain the current levels of fine sediment/embeddedness over much of the analysis area. Existing fine sediment levels are likely having adverse impacts to aquatic habitat. These adverse effects include reduced spawning success for salmonids and reduced quality of rearing habitat for juvenile salmonids. Fine sediment levels in the streams discussed above would slowly decrease as channels stabilize from the Canyon Creek Complex Fire as well as past grazing and road building.

Under this alternative, no trees would be felled into select drainages to address the potential for gully erosion and consequent delivery of fine sediment to aquatic habitats downstream. While this treatment is proposed in alternative 2 to address this potential that may be exacerbated by proposed salvage logging treatments in the adjacent uplands, a slight potential for gully erosion exists even without the salvage logging treatments.

Page 144 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

The no action alternative would have a negligible effect on the hazard of another moderate or high severity fire, as shown in the Fire and Fuels Report, and would thus have a negligible effect on sediment.

Existing native surface roads located in riparian habitat conservation areas would continue to deliver fine sediment to streams at their current levels due to a lesser degree of road maintenance occurring. Stronghold populations of salmonids are associated with higher-elevation forested lands and the proportion declines with increasing road densities (Quigley et al. 1996). The higher the road density, the lower the proportion of subwatersheds that support strong populations of key salmonids, and road maintenance reduces the delivery of fine sediment to adjacent streams. Specifically, Quigley et al. (1996) showed a strong correlation with road densities of 2 miles/mile2 or higher and reduction of strong populations of salmonids. Further reductions of strong salmonid populations were identified at densities of 3 miles/mile2 and 4 miles/mile2 or greater. Roads in the aquatic analysis area that occur within 100 feet of streams or cross streams commonly impact fish and fish habitat more than roads located in uplands.

Width-to-Depth Ratio Alternative 1 likely would maintain the current width-to-depth ratios over much of the analysis area. Width-to-depth ratios are higher than objectives for three of the four stream reaches in the aquatic analysis area (Table 42) and are likely having adverse effects to aquatic habitat, primarily through elevated water temperatures. Adjacent roads are influencing the channel morphology of several of these streams. Livestock grazing to Malheur Forest Plan standards on allotments within the analysis area and natural LWD recruitment should maintain or slowly improve width-to-depth ratios of these streams.

Bank Stability Alternative 1 would maintain the current levels of bank stability. Bank stability is generally high in the analysis area with the exception of specific locations where bank instability is occurring due to altered hydrological processes. Range allotment monitoring in allotments within the analysis area indicates that bank stability is on an upward trend. This trend is expected to continue under current grazing levels.

Aquatic Species

Steelhead Determinations:  Mid-Columbia Summer Steelhead ESA Determination (T): No Effect (NE).  Mid-Columbia Summer Steelhead Sensitive Species Determination (S): No Impact (NI).  Steelhead Management Indicator Species Determination (MIS): No Impact to Viability.  Steelhead Designated Critical Habitat ESA Determination (D): No Effect (NE).

Redband Trout Determinations:  Interior Redband Trout Sensitive Species Determination (S): No Impact (NI).  Redband Trout Management Indicator Species Determination (MIS): No Impact to Viability.

Westslope Cutthroat Trout Determinations:  Westslope Cutthroat Trout Sensitive Species Determination (S): No Impact (NI)  Westslope Cutthroat Trout Management Indicator Species Determination (MIS): No Impact to Viability.

Page 145 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Columbia Spotted Frog Determination:  Columbia Spotted Frog Sensitive Species Determination (S): No Impact (NI).

Rationale: Habitat for MCR steelhead, redband trout, Westslope cutthroat trout, and Columbia spotted frog in the aquatic analysis area is currently in a degraded state; high water temperatures, low LWD levels, and loss of floodplain connectivity from past land management practices have reduced the habitat capability of streams in the aquatic analysis area to support these species. Loss of coldwater storage in stream networks has increased peak flows, reduced baseflows, and elevated water temperatures toward the upper end of thermal limits for salmonids. Channelization and associated loss of floodplain connectivity has resulted in high stream energy that prevents smaller streambed substrates from depositing, reducing the available spawning sites for steelhead. The Canyon Creek Complex Fire has reduced stream shading and will likely result in even higher stream temperatures than the pre-fire condition.

The hazard from severe wildfire would be slightly higher under this alternative than the proposed action. If another wildfire does occur, the timeframe for recovery of important habitat elements would be further extended.

Alternative 1 proposes no new activities, resulting in no activity-related short-term impacts to aquatic species and their habitat. A slow and partial recovery of some habitat conditions would occur as a result of passive improvements in overall land management.

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action For the purposes of this analysis, the component parts of the proposed action are organized into the Project Elements listed below. As there would be no ground disturbance associated with 1) the Research Data Collection (including activities within the two Study Control Units); 2) the Potential Temporary Closure for Cross-Country Travel; or 3) the NEPA closure of 7.5 miles of road currently closed on the ground, there would be no effect to the Primary Habitat Elements or Aquatic Species, and these actions will not be analyzed further in this BE. The Project Elements that will be analyzed further are:

 Timber Felling (includes Salvage Logging Prescriptions, Gully Erosion Abatement, and Danger Tree Felling)  Temporary Roads, Landings, Yarding with Ground-Based Logging Systems, and Reforestation  Road Maintenance and Use (includes Haul & Water Drafting)

Descriptions regarding proximity of Project Elements to aquatic resources are stated in only the first of the six Primary Habitat Elements below (Pool Frequency) for brevity.

Direct and Indirect Effects Pool Frequency

Timber Felling (includes Salvage Logging Prescriptions, Gully Erosion Abatement, and Danger Tree Felling)

Salvage logging activities would not be located in riparian habitat conservation areas. Limiting these activities to areas outside of riparian habitat conservation areas and implementation of PDCs would ensure that salvage logging has insignificant and discountable effects to existing and future pool habitat. RHCA widths are sufficient to prevent removal of trees that have the potential to fall into stream channels

Page 146 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project and create pool habitat, and RHCA widths and PDCs are likely sufficient to prevent delivery of sediment to the degree that pool filling occurs.

Felling of trees for gully erosion abatement would occur in small isolated sections of four Category 4 RHCA streams and one ephemeral draw.

 Four segments of Category 4 RHCA streams were identified through NetMap modeling with the potential for gully erosion. This treatment would occur at one site per segment no closer than 0.75 miles from aquatic species habitat and MCR Steelhead Critical Habitat. The treatment involves felling approximately 3 trees 12 to <15 inches diameter at breast height and approximately 10 trees 6- 12 inches diameter at breast height per site. See the hydrology specialist report for additional information on NetMap modeling used.  This same action would also occur in one segment of ephemeral draw, with the treatment location approximately 0.27 miles up the draw from MCR Steelhead Critical Habitat in Crazy Creek. Critical Habitat is also occupied by other aquatic species considered in this analysis.

NetMap modeling identified these areas with high potential for gully erosion that may be exacerbated by proposed salvage logging treatments upslope in adjacent uplands. Felled trees would create flow obstructions in these drainages where fine sediment would be trapped and stored at or near the source. The function of the wood placed along the contour of the drainage is to slow overland flow, add roughness, minimize erosion, and filter sediment in order to minimize delivery of sediment to streams in the project planning area resulting from salvage logging in moderate to high severity burn areas. A 2 year thunderstorm could deliver a peak flow runoff event that is increased by 14 fold in smaller gulches and drainages as described in the Hydrology Specialist Report. Keller and Swanson (1979) and Scott et al. (2014) found that individual large wood pieces or jams can create flow obstructions resulting in backwater areas in which particulate matter is stored. All trees would be felled outside of salvage logging units. This action would minimize potential for sediment mobilization from moderate- and high-severity burn areas to areas of aquatic species habitat downstream where that sediment could reduce pool frequency and quality. This action would have insignificant and discountable effects to pool frequency due to the proximity of activities away from aquatic species habitat and the very small extent of the proposed work.

Felling of danger trees for human safety along haul routes in riparian habitat conservation areas has the potential to reduce the supply of LWD to stream channels and therefore pool habitat. Under PACFISH, trees may be felled in riparian habitat conservation areas when they pose a safety risk (PACFISH Standard RA-2). Danger trees felled within or into riparian habitat conservation areas would be felled into the stream where feasible or otherwise left within the RHCA. Where trees are felled into the stream, they may create pools. This action would have insignificant and discountable effects to pool frequency.

Temporary Roads, Landings, Yarding with Ground-based Logging Systems, and Reforestation

No temporary roads, landings, yarding, or reforestation activities are proposed within riparian habitat conservation areas under alternative 2. Limiting these activities to areas outside of riparian habitat conservation areas would likely keep effects to pool frequency at an insignificant and discountable level. In most cases, temporary roads (14 segments totaling 4 miles) would occur on previously decommissioned routes, and past landings would be re-used where feasible. Temporary roads would be rehabilitated by some combination of the following: recontouring slopes (removing cut and fill slopes); subsoiling (loosening) compacted soils in a “J” pattern to a depth of 16 inches (unless prevented by bedrock or rock content of soils); pulling berms; pulling slash (where available); planting or seeding disturbed areas with native species that naturally occur in the project planning area to achieve a minimum

Page 147 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment of 35 percent ground cover; restoring natural drainage patterns and waterbarring as needed; and/or disguising the first hundred yards of travel way with large pieces of organic material such as cull logs and tops of trees. Methods will be determined in consultation with a heritage specialist and a hydrologist, fisheries biologist, or soil scientist. Rehabilitation of temporary roads, especially subsoiling, may result in mobilization of a minor amount of sediment from the road surface, however the long term improvement in hydrologic function and location of these activities outside of riparian habitat conservation areas would likely keep effects to pool frequency at an insignificant and discountable level.

Table 44 Miles of haul and road maintenance by road type within riparian habitat conservation areas Category Category Category Total 1 RHCA 2 RHCA 4 RHCA Miles of closed road haul routes in each of: 0 0 0.6 0.6 Miles of open road haul routes in each of: 5.8 3.4 2.8 12 Miles of haul routes on native surface roads in each 0.3 <0.1 1 1.3 of: 5.0 (0.09 miles of Miles of haul routes on native surface roads within 0.3 0.19 4.6 overlap between 300 feet of streams in each of: Cat 2 and Cat 4 Miles of haul routes that overlap Roadside Hazard 5.8 3.4 3.3 12.5 Tree Removal Project haul routes in each of:

Road Maintenance and Use (includes Haul and Water Drafting)

Approximately 12.6 miles of haul routes on open and closed roads would occur in Category 1, 2, and 4 riparian habitat conservation areas. Road maintenance would occur on all haul routes. See Table 44 for a summary of Haul and Road Maintenance by road type within riparian habitat conservation areas. Approximately 5 miles of haul routes occur on native surface roads within 300 feet of streams, 0.3 miles of which are located within 300 feet of Category 1 riparian habitat conservation areas; these are the areas with the highest potential for sediment delivery to aquatic species habitat. Approximately ten miles of closed roads would be opened for log haul and reclosed after use. Closed roads are those roads on which motorized traffic has been excluded by regulation, barricade blockage, or by obscuring the entrance. A closed road is still an operating facility on which motorized traffic has been removed (year-long or seasonal) and remains on the Forest Road Transportation System. Project design criteria include those specified in the Forest-wide Road Maintenance Plan, those specified in the Project Log Haul PDCs, and other PDCs identified by the interdisciplinary team. These PDCs prevent or minimize the probability and magnitude of sediment delivery to streams from road maintenance and use. With implementation of PDCs, delivery of fine sediment resulting from Road Maintenance and Use would have an insignificant and discountable effect on pool frequency.

Water withdrawals for dust abatement during haul activities would occur. Water withdrawals would be in accordance with the PDCs, including NMFS guidance. Use of these PDCs would insure that water withdrawals result in insignificant and discountable effects to pool habitat.

Water Temperature/Stream Shading Timber Felling (includes Salvage Logging Prescriptions, Gully Erosion Abatement, and Danger Tree Felling)

Salvage logging activities would not be located in riparian habitat conservation areas. Limiting these activities to areas outside of riparian habitat conservation areas would ensure that salvage logging has no effect to water temperature and stream shading. RHCA widths are sufficient to prevent removal of trees that have the potential to shade streams.

Page 148 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Gully erosion abatement tree felling would occur in small and isolated locations on Category 4 RHCA streams and ephemeral draws. This action would have insignificant and discountable effects to water temperature and stream shading due to the small extent and location on stream channels or draws that go dry before water temperatures become limiting for aquatic species. Conifers felled into streams would also immediately shade a minor portion of the stream. Trees would be directionally felled within channels to trap and store fine sediment mobilized by erosional processes upstream.

Danger tree felling may occur under the proposed action along 0.1 miles of haul routes within riparian habitat conservation areas. While there are roughly 12.6 miles of haul routes where danger trees could be felled within riparian habitat conservation areas, 12.5 miles of haul routes (over 99 percent) overlap with the Canyon Creek Complex Roadside Hazard Tree Removal Project haul routes; this project began implementation January 2016 and is currently ongoing and it is anticipated that all hazard tree felling identified for that project will be completed prior to implementation of the proposed action. Thus additional danger tree felling for the proposed action may occur along 0.1 miles of haul routes within riparian habitat conservation areas as part of the proposed action. Previous field observations of danger trees felled along haul routes in the Canyon Creek Complex Roadside Hazard Tree Removal Project suggest a range of 10-20 trees per mile may be felled, thus approximately 1-2 danger trees are anticipated to be felled within riparian habitat conservation areas as part of this proposed action. Danger trees are usually dead and provide little shade; as well, only a portion of the danger trees that would be felled are currently shading streams in the aquatic analysis area (proximity). Most haul routes within the wood recruitment zone of streams occur along intermittent streams upstream of occupied habitat for aquatic species, where these streams go dry before water temperatures become limiting for aquatic species. Further, the small extent of hazard tree felling relative to the existing condition of thousands of acres of moderate and high intensity fire where over 50 percent of the trees have been killed, measurable increases in stream temperatures would not likely result from proposed danger tree felling and this action would have insignificant and discountable effects to water temperatures and stream shading. Additionally, danger trees felled within or into riparian habitat conservation areas would be felled into the stream where feasible or otherwise left within the RHCA. Conifers felled into streams would immediately shade a minor portion of the stream, as well as provide sheltered sites for riparian hardwood growth through reduction of browse by herbivores, which would enhance stream shading in the long term. See Hydrology Report for additional analysis regarding the effects of the proposed action on stream temperatures.

Temporary Roads, Landings, Yarding with Ground-based Logging Systems, and Reforestation

No temporary roads, landings, yarding, or reforestation activities are proposed within riparian habitat conservation areas under alternative 2. Limiting these activities to areas outside of riparian habitat conservation areas would ensure these activities have no effect on water temperatures and stream shading. RHCA widths are sufficient for streams to prevent removal of trees that provide stream shading.

Road Maintenance and Use (includes Haul and Water Drafting)

Road maintenance, haul, road closures, and water drafting would have insignificant and discountable effects to stream shading and water temperatures. Water withdrawals for dust abatement during haul activities may occur. Water drafting can occur only as long as supply is adequate to provide for both fish and withdrawal. The maximum withdrawal from one site in an 8-hour period would be 18,000 gallons of water. Water withdrawals would be in accordance with the criteria described in the 2010 Malheur National Forest Road Maintenance BA and NMFS guidance. Use of these criteria would insure that water withdrawals do not result in a measurable increase in water temperatures.

Page 149 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Large Woody Debris

Timber Felling (includes Salvage Logging Prescriptions, Gully Erosion Abatement, and Danger Tree Felling)

Salvage logging activities would not be located in riparian habitat conservation areas. Limiting these activities to areas outside of riparian habitat conservation areas would ensure salvage logging has no effect to large wood. RHCA widths are sufficient to prevent removal of trees that have the potential to become recruitment large wood.

Gully erosion abatement tree felling would occur in small and isolated locations on Category 4 RHCA streams and ephemeral draws. This action would have insignificant and discountable effects to large wood due to the small extent and location on stream channels or draws upstream of aquatic species habitat. Conifers felled into drainages would also immediately function as large wood in minor portions of the drainage network. Trees would be directionally felled within channels to trap and store fine sediment mobilized by erosional processes upstream.

Felling of danger trees for human safety along haul routes in riparian habitat conservation areas has the potential to reduce the supply of large wood to stream channels if they cannot be felled into the stream. Trees felled within or into riparian habitat conservation areas would be felled into the stream where feasible and left within the RHCA. Where conifers are felled into the stream, they may immediately function as large wood. Under PACFISH, trees may be felled in riparian habitat conservation areas when they pose a safety risk (PACFISH Standard RA-2). Proposed felling of danger trees would not likely result in a reduction of large wood in streams; where felling of trees into streams is not feasible, it is usually because they lean away from the stream and would not have been recruited as large wood when falling under natural processes. Further, this felling would be limited in size and frequency. Felling of danger trees would have insignificant and discountable effects on large wood.

Temporary Roads, Landings, Yarding with Ground-based Logging Systems, and Reforestation

No temporary roads, landings, yarding, or reforestation activities are proposed within riparian habitat conservation areas under alternative 2. Limiting these activities to areas outside of riparian habitat conservation areas would ensure these activities have no effect on existing and future large wood. RHCA widths are sufficient for streams to prevent removal of trees that provide existing and future large wood.

Road Maintenance and Use (includes Haul and Water Drafting)

Activities would not likely result in a reduction of LWD to Category 1, 2, or 4 RHCA stream channels from road maintenance and use. No trees are anticipated to be felled for these activities. Hazard tree felling was analyzed above under the Timber Felling project element. Road maintenance and use would have insignificant and discountable effects to large wood.

Embeddedness/Fine Sediment

Timber Felling (includes Salvage Logging Prescriptions, Gully Erosion Abatement, and Danger Tree Felling)

Salvage logging activities would not be located in riparian habitat conservation areas. Limiting these activities to areas outside of riparian habitat conservation areas, along with erosion control PDCs, would likely prevent additional increases in existing levels of fine sediment from these activities. Salvage logging would have insignificant and discountable effects to embeddedness and fine sediment. RHCA

Page 150 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project buffer widths were designed to provide an area to trap fine sediment generated from upslope activities such as timber harvest.

Proposed gully erosion abatement is not expected to involve ground-disturbing activities, and this action would minimize potential for sediment mobilization from moderate- and high-severity burn areas to areas of aquatic species habitat downstream. Additionally, danger tree felling is not expected to involve ground- disturbing activities; inputs of fine sediment are not expected to occur and these activities would have insignificant and discountable effects to embeddedness and fine sediment.

Temporary Roads, Landings, Yarding with Ground-based Logging Systems, and Reforestation

No temporary roads, landings, yarding, or reforestation activities are proposed within riparian habitat conservation areas under alternative 2. Limiting these activities to areas outside of riparian habitat conservation areas, along with erosion control PDCs, would ensure these activities likely have insignificant and discountable effects on embeddedness and fine sediment. RHCA buffer widths were designed to provide an area to trap fine sediment generated from upslope activities such as these. See the direct and indirect effects to Pool Frequency section above for supporting rationale.

Road Maintenance and Use (includes Haul and Water Drafting)

Road maintenance would occur at a level commensurate with use, and includes several activities that potentially result in sedimentation from the road prism to the ditch line, or the adjacent slope. Typical road maintenance activities include: blade and shape road including existing drainage dips, grade sags, and waterbars, repair damaged culverts and ditches, place rock in some existing drainage dips and grade sags, place rock in wet areas of road, brushing, and dust abatement. PDCs include rocking of stream crossings to minimize sediment delivery to streams from haul. Machinery would be kept on the road prism.

The longer term effects of road maintenance are to maintain or improve existing road conditions. Road maintenance may decrease chronic sedimentation in some locations. Improving drainage, removing ruts and rills from the driving surface, and adding less erosive surfacing material would reduce detachment and transport of sediment. This is especially important for roads within riparian habitat conservation areas. Because road maintenance activities would be commensurate with use, it is possible that if winter logging occurs, little to no road maintenance may be necessary and therefore would not occur. Alternatively, if operations occur in the summer, road maintenance may occur on all or nearly all of the haul roads.

Proposed road maintenance and haul activities in riparian habitat conservation areas would likely result in creation and transport of a negligible amount of fine sediment to stream channels due to loosening of sediment particles and destruction of ground cover. However, PDCs would be implemented during these activities, and are expected to limit fine sediment delivery to streams, keeping amounts reaching stream channels to negligible levels for other than rare precipitation events (insignificant and discountable effects).

Water withdrawals for dust abatement during haul would be in accordance with the PDCs, including NMFS guidance. Use of PDCs for water drafting would ensure that any delivery of fine sediment to streams from water withdrawals would be insignificant and discountable.

Road closure actions include construction of drainage structures that would be self-maintaining after closure. Closure of these roads poses a negligible risk of sedimentation to fish bearing streams since dry land "filtration" lies between the closure sites and any streams, and since the amount of land disturbed

Page 151 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment during gate construction is too small and too flat to produce noteworthy sediment. However, since these roads are being kept as part of the forest road system, the benefits of the closures would likely not be “permanent.”

Road maintenance and use would have insignificant and discountable effects on embeddedness and fine sediment.

Width-to-Depth Ratio and Streambank Stability

These indicators are grouped since they are affected similarly by PEs.

Timber Felling (includes Salvage Logging Prescriptions, Gully Erosion Abatement, and Danger Tree Felling)

Salvage logging activities would not be located in riparian habitat conservation areas and would have no effect to width/depth ratios and streambank stability due to proximity of actions away from the stream channel and implementation of PDCs. The possible minor amounts of sediment entering channels would have no effect to width/depth ratios and bank stability at the site and reach scale.

Temporary Roads, Landings, Yarding with Ground-based Logging Systems, and Reforestation

No temporary roads, landings, yarding, or reforestation activities are proposed within riparian habitat conservation areas under alternative 2. Limiting these activities to areas outside of riparian habitat conservation areas, along with erosion control PDCs, would ensure these activities would not damage stream banks or deliver sediment to the degree that any effects to bank stability or width-to-depth ratios would occur. These activities would have no effect on width-to-depth ratios or streambank stability.

Road Maintenance and Use (includes Haul and Water Drafting)

The possible minor amounts of sediment entering channels from road maintenance and use activities would not affect floodplain connectivity, streambank stability, or width/depth ratios at the site or reach scale. These activities would have no effect on width-to-depth ratios or streambank stability.

Table 45 Summary of project element effects of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project to the primary habitat elements Primary habitat Temp roads, landings, Timber felling Road maintenance & use elements yarding, reforestation Insignificant & Pool frequency Insignificant & discountable Insignificant & discountable discountable Water temperature and Insignificant & No effect Insignificant & discountable stream shading discountable Insignificant & Large woody debris No effect Insignificant & discountable discountable Embeddedness and fine Insignificant & Insignificant & discountable Insignificant & discountable sediments discountable Width-to-depth ratio No effect No effect No effect Bank stability No effect No effect No effect

Direct Effects to Aquatic Species The Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project aquatic analysis area contains MCR steelhead, redband trout, and Westslope cutthroat trout migration, spawning, and rearing habitat. At certain times and under various conditions it is possible for components of one project element to directly affect MCR steelhead, redband trout, and/or Westslope cutthroat trout, and that component is the water drafting component of

Page 152 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project the road maintenance and use project element. Direct effects to MCR steelhead, redband trout, and Westslope cutthroat trout from the remaining project elements are not expected to occur.

Water withdrawals for dust abatement during haul activities would occur. Water is the only agent that would be used for dust abatement for proposed haul activities. Dust abatement typically occurs only during the dry summer months (late June, July, early August) when road dust is an issue; disturbance of spawning fish is unlikely since fish in the project planning area do not spawn at this time. Water drafting could potentially decrease stream flow and thus, the amount of water available for fish. Water drafting could also remove fish from the stream or injure them, if they are held against screens. Water drafting can occur only as long as supply is adequate to provide for both fish and withdrawal. Approved screens would be attached to intake hoses to prevent adverse impacts to fish. NMFS developed criteria for pump intake screens would be used on all water pump intakes. Screen mesh openings shall not exceed 3/32 inch for woven wire or perforated plate screens, or 0.0689 inch for profile wire screens, with a minimum 27 percent open area. Trucks would be maintained to prevent oil leaks. Loading is done in a manner to minimize overflowing and discharge of wash into streams. The maximum withdrawal from one site in an 8-hour period would be 18,000 gallons of water. PDCs include the NMFS criteria and water drafting guidelines from the 2010 Forest Road Maintenance BA, included as appendices of this aquatics specialist report. These guidelines would avoid or minimize the potential harm to fish.

The Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project aquatic analysis area also contains habitat for Columbia spotted frogs, which are highly aquatic and rarely found far from permanent water. At certain times and under various conditions it is possible for all project elements to directly affect spotted frogs. Due to the implementation of PDCs, the short-term nature of this risk, the expected timing of ground-disturbing in- and near-water project activities during dry-field conditions (low to moderate soil moisture levels) when spotted frogs are unlikely to be dispersing, and the distance of the vast majority of project sites from permanent water, direct effects on spotted frogs would be minimized.

Direct and Indirect Effects to Aquatic and Riparian Habitat Use of the six Primary Habitat Elements to determine effects to TES species is based upon using the effects of the action on key habitat elements as a surrogate for effects to the species. The premise is that the Primary Habitat Elements depict the biological requirements of the TES species. Since there is a direct relationship between habitat condition and the growth and survival of individual fish and Sensitive species at various life stages, the effects of the action on habitat variables can be linked to effects to individuals of the species, and ultimately to an effect determination.

The analysis in the Primary Habitat Elements section evaluated specific key habitat features that correspond to the Primary Constituent Elements (PCEs) of listed species Critical Habitat (CH). The PCEs are used to describe “those physical or biological features that are essential to the conservation of the listed species.” The same sub-set of key habitat features evaluated for effects to PCEs also apply to the analysis of effects to the species. Those Primary Habitat Element/Project Element combinations for which a conclusion of effect was “insignificant and discountable” are listed in Table 45, and may affect, but are not likely to adversely affect, listed MCR steelhead and their designated critical habitat. Insignificant effects meet the ESA definition of “insignificant” effects and they are discountable because the effects are not likely to occur. Consequently, the effect determination for MCR steelhead and designated critical habitat is “May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect” (ESA effects); they also May Impact Individuals or Habitat (Region 6 Sensitive Species effects to redband trout, Westslope cutthroat trout, and Columbia spotted frog). See Table 45 for a summary of effects of the project elements on the primary habitat elements.

Page 153 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Effect Determinations Effect determinations for TES, R6 Sensitive, and MIS species are presented below.

MCR Steelhead Determinations:

 Mid-Columbia Summer Steelhead ESA Determination (T): May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect (NLAA).  Mid-Columbia Summer Steelhead Sensitive Species Determination (S): May Impact Individuals or Habitat, but will not cause a loss of viability to the population or species (MIIH).  Steelhead Management Indicator Species Determination (MIS): Continued Viability at the Forest Scale.  Steelhead Designated Critical Habitat (D): May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect (NLAA). Because this alternative impacts less than 2.4 percent of suitable steelhead habitat across the Malheur National Forest, the overall direct, indirect, and cumulative effects would result in a small negative trend of habitat in the short-term. The negative effect on habitat would be insignificant at the scale of the Forest. This alternative is consistent with the Forest Plan, and thus continued viability of steelhead is expected on the Malheur National Forest.

Redband Trout Determinations:

 Interior Redband Trout Sensitive Species Determination (S): May Impact Individuals or Habitat, but will not likely contribute to a trend towards federal listing or cause a loss of viability to the population or species (MIIH).  Redband Trout Management Indicator Species Determination (MIS): Continued Viability at the Forest Scale. Because this alternative impacts less than 1 percent of suitable redband trout habitat in relation to the distribution throughout the Malheur National Forest, the overall direct, indirect, and cumulative effects would result in a small negative trend of habitat in the short-term. The effect on habitat would be insignificant at the scale of the Forest. As such, the implementation of the project may impact individuals or habitat, but would not likely contribute toward federal listing or cause a loss of viability to the population or species at the Forest scale.

Westslope Cutthroat Trout Determinations:

 Interior Westslope Cutthroat Trout Sensitive Species Determination (S): May Impact Individuals or Habitat, but will not likely contribute to a trend towards federal listing or cause a loss of viability to the population or species (MIIH).  Westslope Cutthroat Trout Management Indicator Species Determination (MIS): Continued Viability at the Forest Scale. Because this alternative impacts less than 6.6 percent of suitable Westslope cutthroat trout habitat in relation to the distribution throughout the Malheur National Forest, the overall direct, indirect, and cumulative effects would result in a small negative trend of habitat in the short-term. The effect on habitat would be insignificant at the scale of the Forest. As such, the implementation of the project may impact

Page 154 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project individuals or habitat, but would not likely contribute toward federal listing or cause a loss of viability to the population or species at the Forest scale.

Columbia Spotted Frog Determination:

 Columbia Spotted Frog Sensitive Species Determination (S): May Impact Individuals or Habitat, but would not likely contribute toward federal listing or loss of viability to the population or species (MIIH). Because this alternative impacts less than 1 percent of suitable spotted frog habitat on the Malheur National Forest, the overall direct, indirect, and cumulative effects would result in a small negative trend of habitat in the short term. The effect would be insignificant at the scale of the Forest. The action alternative may impact individuals or habitat, but would not likely contribute toward federal listing or loss of viability to the population or species at the Forest scale.

Cumulative Effects

Aquatic Habitat The cumulative effects boundary is the same as the aquatic analysis area. Past and ongoing actions are described in the Environmental Assessment. Effects of the past and ongoing actions are described in the Affected Environment section above:

 Effects of Past and Ongoing Actions  General Existing Stream Conditions  The Affected Environment sub-sections for Pool Frequency, Large Woody Debris, Bank Stability, Embeddedness/Fine Sediment, Width-to-Depth Ratio, and Water Temperature/Stream Shading. Cumulative effects are mostly due to roads (including those for timber harvest, firewood cutting, recreation, and other authorized activities), legacy grazing, and legacy riparian harvest. Lesser effects may be due to contemporary grazing. The aquatic habitat and water quality effects of future activities are negligible, except for the ongoing actions mentioned in the preceding sentence. The Canyon Creek Complex Fire Danger Tree Mitigation/Salvage Project which overlaps the proposed action included a variety of road maintenance activities which are expected to improve road conditions within the analysis area. With full implementation of Forest Plan grazing standards there is little likelihood of cumulative effects from grazing since these standards are designed to allow a near natural rate of recovery of aquatic habitat and riparian vegetation. The current grazing standards are designed to eliminate any effects on aquatic habitats that could carry over to the following year.

If another severe crown fire occurs, shade would be further reduced, and water temperatures would increase. Sediment would increase from channel and upland sources, and a pulse of woody debris would fall into the streams. Both low flows and peak flows would increase for perhaps 10 years, until evapotranspiration recovers.

The no action alternative would permit natural slow, partial recovery from effects of past grazing, past riparian road construction, and past riparian harvest. This recovery would occur as riparian trees grow larger (including those existing, planted through reforestation efforts, and natural recruitment), as large wood falls into the streams, as channel types change to more stable, narrow configurations, as sediment from past actions is flushed out of stream substrates, and as riparian shrubs and sedges recover and contribute to more stable stream banks. Recovery would be only partial because ongoing impacts from

Page 155 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment some past land management activities, particularly riparian road maintenance, would not permit full recovery nor restore physical processes that facilitate recovery.

Threatened, Endangered, and R6 Sensitive (TES) species and Management Indicator Species (MIS) Species Effects Summary The following is a summary of both Threatened, Endangered, and R6 Sensitive (TES) species and Management Indicator Species (MIS) effects determinations for alternatives documented from the Aquatic Biological Evaluation for the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project.

Table 46 TES and MIS aquatic species with effect determinations by alternative Alternative 1 (no Alternative 2 (proposed Aquatic species Status action) action) Mid-Columbia River steelhead NE NLAA T, MIS Oncorhynchus mykiss NI MIIH Mid-Columbia steelhead Designated D NE NLAA Critical Habitat Interior redband trout S, MIS NI MIIH O. mykiss gairdneri Westslope cutthroat trout S, MIS NI MIIH Oncorhynchus clarki lewisi Columbia spotted frog S NI MIIH Rana luteiventris

Table 47 Threatened and Endangered Species effects determinations abbreviations Abbreviation Threatened and Endangered Species effects determination NE No Effect NLAA May Effect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect LAA May Effect, Likely to Adversely Affect BE Beneficial Effect

Table 48 Sensitive Species determinations abbreviations Abbreviation Sensitive Species determination NI No Impact May Impact Individuals or Habitat, but Will Not Likely Contribute to a Trend Towards Federal MIIH Listing or Cause a Loss of Viability to the Population or Species Will Impact Individuals or Habitat with a Consequence that the Action May Contribute to a Trend WIFV Towards Federal Listing or Cause a Loss of Viability to the Population or Species BI Beneficial Impact

Table 49 Designated Critical Habitat effects determinations abbreviations Abbreviation Designated Critical Habitat effects determination NE No Effect LAA May Effect, Likely to Adversely Affect NLAA May Effect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect

Compliance with Forest Plan and Other Relevant Laws, Regulations, and Policies Malheur Forest Plan

Alternative 1 (No Action) - The no action alternative does not fully meet the MA–3B standards, and PACFISH standards and guidelines. The no action alternative is not consistent with the following Forest Plan standards:

Page 156 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

 MA–3B Standard 41: “…Minimize the density of opens roads in this management area by obliterating, revegetating, or closing unnecessary roads or any roads causing significant resource damage.”  PACFISH Standard RF – 3c: Determine the influence of each road on RMOs. Meet RMOs and avoid adverse effects on inland native fish by: o Closing and stabilizing or obliterating, and stabilizing roads not needed for future management activities. Prioritize these actions based on the current and potential damage to anadromous native fish in priority watersheds, and the ecological value of the riparian resources affected. Degraded aquatic habitat conditions that have known adverse impacts to aquatic resources would remain in their current condition under the no action alternative.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

 The proposed action is consistent with the following applicable MA 3B and PACFISH standards:  PACFISH RF-2b: Proposed temporary roads and landings/staging areas in RHCAs are minimized.  PACFISH RF-3a & b: Roads that will be used for proposed vegetation management activities will have drainage problems repaired and will be brought up to standards prior to haul.  PACFISH RA-2: Danger trees felled in RHCAs and outside of the road way will be left on site where woody debris objectives are not being met.  Forest Plan DFC's/RMO's: Activities proposed under Alternative 2 would not retard the attainment of Forest Plan RMO's for aquatic habitat (LWD, replacement LWD, pool frequency, bank stability, width-to-depth ratio, sediment/substrate, shading, and water temperature). Design criteria will be used to minimize the amount of fine sediment resulting from proposed activities.  Design prescribed burn projects and prescriptions to contribute to the attainment of RMO's (PACFISH Standard FM-4).  Prohibit storage of fuels and other toxicants within RHCAs. Prohibit refueling within RHCAs unless there are no other alternatives. Refueling sites within a RHCA must be approved by the Forest Service and have an approved spill containment plan (PACFISH Standard RA-4).  Locate water drafting sites to avoid adverse effects to listed anadromous fish and instream flows, and in a manner that does not retard or prevent attainment of RMO’s (PACFISH Standard RA-5).  Design fuel treatment and fire suppression strategies, practices, and actions so as not to prevent attainment of RMO’s, and to minimize disturbance of riparian ground cover and vegetation. Strategies should recognize the role of fire in ecosystem function and identify those instances where fire suppression or fuel management actions could perpetuate or be damaging to log-term ecosystem function, listed anadromous fish, or designated critical habitat (PACFISH Standard FM-1). Clean Water Act - The project complies with the Clean Water Act and the Malheur Forest Plan, since none raise water temperatures, and since all follow Best Management Practices (BMPs) as specified in “Forest Service R6 General Water Quality Best Management Practices” (1988), and in standards and guidelines in the Forest Plan. The site specific BMPs are listed in the Project BA, in PACFISH Standards and Guidelines (as described earlier in the Regulatory Framework section), and in standard timber sale contracts.

Endangered Species Act - The ESA requires the Forest Service to manage for the recovery of threatened and endangered species and the ecosystems upon which they depend. Forests are required to consult with the FWS or the NMFS if a proposed activity may affect the population or habitat of a listed species.

Page 157 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Federally listed fish species and their designated critical habitat in the project planning area subject to consultation include Mid-Columbia River Steelhead and their designated critical habitat. The Malheur National Forest has initiated ESA section 7 consultation with the NMFS and expects to receive concurrence from the Blue Mountains Level I consultation team that the project is not likely to adversely affect MCR Steelhead or their designated Critical Habitat. Consultation is anticipated to be completed using the Blue Mountains Expedited Process. The completed BA and concurrence letter will be located in the project file.

Floodplains (Executive Order 11988) - Executive Order 11988 says that Federal agencies shall avoid direct adverse effects to floodplains or minimize potential harm. Floodplains several feet wide occur within the aquatic analysis area. The floodplains are well within RHCAs, and so the proposed action avoids adverse effects to the floodplains, and thus are consistent with Executive Order 11988.

Recreational Fisheries - The proposed action includes a suite of PDCs and BMPs that would protect the quantity, function, sustainable productivity, and distribution of recreational fisheries by reducing impacts from elevated levels of fine sediment as directed under Executive Order 12962, Recreational Fisheries.

Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources Irreversible effects are not expected. Reduced population viability for MCR summer-run steelhead, Westslope cutthroat trout, redband trout, and Columbia spotted frog is not expected. PACFISH established explicit goals and objectives for anadromous fish habitat condition and function. By following PACFISH standards and guidelines as well as design criteria specific to this project, it is believed that irretrievable commitments of this resource can be avoided. The goal is to achieve a high level of habitat diversity and complexity through a combination of habitat features.

Botany This section addresses potential impacts to federally listed, proposed, and candidate plant species as well as plant species designated as sensitive on the most recent Region 6 Regional Forester's Special Status Species List (USDA Forest Service 2015d). Species designated as sensitive are those for which there are conservation concerns, and for which special management considerations may be implemented. All plant species designated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as federally listed, proposed, or candidate, are also included on the Forest Service (FS) sensitive plant list. The sensitive plant list includes vascular plants, non-vascular plants (mosses and liverworts), lichens, and mushroom species. These will collectively be referred to as sensitive plants throughout this report.

There are currently 90 species of Forest Service designated sensitive plants documented, or suspected, to occur, on the Malheur National Forest (USDA Forest Service 2015d). See the Botany Specialist Report for a complete list of sensitive plant species for the Malheur National Forest.

This report describes sensitive plant species and their habitats potentially found in the project planning area. Potential direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of the alternatives on sensitive plants, and potential sensitive plant habitat, are also presented

Indicators for Assessing Effects The resource elements in this botany biological evaluation are: 1) documented sensitive species populations; and 2) sensitive and unique habitats. There are several sensitive and unique habitats within the project planning area that will be discussed individually under the sensitive and unique habitats heading.

Page 158 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Table 50 Resource elements, indicators and measures for assessing effects to botanical resources Resource element Resource indicator Measure Source Documented Sensitive Potential impacts to Integrity of population FSM Section 2672.4 Plant Populations integrity FSM Section 2672.4 Sensitive and Unique Extent of potential Integrity of habitat USDA Forest Service 1990, Habitats impacts to integrity page IV-31, Standards 56/57

Affected Environment - Documented Sensitive Plant Populations

Methodology There are 90 Region 6 sensitive plant species documented or suspected to occur on the Malheur National Forest (USDA Forest Service 2015d). The NRM TESP database GIS layer was assessed for known sites of sensitive plant species within the project planning area. Analysis of GIS habitat models, aerial photos, and geospatial imagery were used to determine sensitive and unique habitats within the project planning area. Additionally, the NRM GIS database was consulted to determine extent of past sensitive plant habitat surveys.

A pre-field review is normally completed to determine areas of high probability in a project planning area to survey specific sites for sensitive species. However, because the Canyon Creek Complex fire occurred in a location that was not included in a very recent vegetation treatment or grazing project, it was not possible for this salvage project. The data used in this report was data already documented prior to 2015. Additionally, because the schedule for this project would be implemented during the growing season after the fire, and the area cannot be re-surveyed to determine the location and quality of all sensitive species sites and habitats in the project planning area, only those that were present and documented before the fire will be analyzed in the effects analysis. If any sensitive plants are found during implementation, mitigations for protection would be developed.

Past botanical surveys for this project were conducted according to standard Forest Service procedures (FSM 2670, Sections 2672.4 and 2672.42). Surveys were done using the intuitive control technique. This means that large areas are surveyed, with emphasis on searching specific sensitive habitats.

Existing Condition Between 1991 and 2014, approximately 4,913 acres were surveyed for sensitive plant species within this project planning area. There is one documented sensitive species occurrence inside the project planning area. One population of Snowline spring-parsley is located approximately 100 meters from the project boundary at an elevation of approximately 7,400 feet on a ridgetop in the north-central part of the project planning area. The population is within the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness.

Snowline spring-parsley inhabits high-elevation lithosol habitats, where fuel loads are generally low. It is very likely that this population survived the fire due to its habitat type and its location along the non- forested ridgeline. The burn severity level ranged from “low” to “unburned” in the location of this population.

Desired Condition The Malheur Forest Plan does not define any desired conditions for Region 6 sensitive plants.

Page 159 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Environmental Consequences

Methodology Each sensitive species has a different response to the disturbances related to vegetation treatments. However, there are few empirical studies of the 90 sensitive species on the Malheur National Forest and, therefore, analysis of effects from proposed actions is often based on their habitat characteristics, and the professional judgement and observational data of journey-level botanists.

Basis of Effects Determinations The four possible effect determinations for sensitive plants are outlined in Forest Service Manual 2670. These definitions were used to guide the determination of effects:

 NI: When sensitive species occur in habitats which are not expected to be directly or indirectly affected in any way, they are given a “No Impact” determination. This is also used for known specific existing populations where no project activities are proposed, or the population is buffered or otherwise protected from project activities.  BI: When sensitive species, and their potential habitats, are expected to be favorably affected by a particular alternative, they are given a “Beneficial Impact” determination.  MIIH: When sensitive species, and their potential habitats, occur that could possibly be negatively affected, they are given a determination of “May impact individuals or habitat, but will not likely contribute to a trend towards federal listing or cause a loss of viability to the population or species”. This determination is used in cases where there is unsurveyed potential habitat, or where potential impacts are uncertain, or considered to be relatively minor. o This determination acknowledges that the action could have negative impacts, but due to the following factors, the degree of consequences is not known with certainty. . the complexity of the proposed action . the differential impacts across the landscape . the lack of best available science Additionally, this recognizes that even the most substantial impacts of the proposed action will not contribute to a trend toward listing the species under the Endangered Species Act. The effects are expected to be minor enough that they will not cause a loss of viability of the species in the planning area.

 WIFV: When sensitive species, and potential habitat, occur that will most likely be negatively affected by the project, they are given a determination of “Will impact individuals or habitat with a consequence that the action may contribute to a trend towards federal listing, or cause a loss of viability to the population or species”. This determination is used in cases where negative impacts will clearly occur, and they are of a magnitude that they may contribute to crossing a threshold leading to Federal Listing under the Endangered Species Act.

Assessments / Process Populations of sensitive plant species on the Forest have typically been mapped with an accuracy of 100 feet, or better. Small mapping errors may mean that sites on the ground are actually slightly different than as mapped in GIS. Additionally, sensitive plant populations may expand or contract over time.

The only sensitive fungus currently suspected on the Malheur National Forest is the umbrella false-morel (Pseudorhizina californica). Fungi only fruit under very specific moisture and temperature conditions.

Page 160 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Therefore, it is very difficult to locate species of fungi because of their ephemeral nature. It is possible that there are undocumented populations of the umbrella false-morel on the Forest.

Some sensitive plant species do not produce above-ground plants every year. These plants include some grape-ferns (Botrychium spp.), and many annual species which are dependent upon sufficient early spring rains. Some of the annual sensitive species include least phacelia (Phacelia minutissima), disappearing monkeyflower (Mimulus evanescens), dwarf evening-primrose (Eremothera pygmaea) annual muhly grass (Muhlenbergia minutissima), lowland tooth-cup (Rotala ramosior), and desert chaenactis (Chaenactis xantiana).

Some species, such as the least phacelia, annual muhly grass, and grapeferns, are so tiny and difficult to find in dense vegetation that even expert botanists may overlook them during surveys. Many of the non- vascular plants are very difficult to identify; it is possible that botanists may also overlook some of these species.

We also know that the Canyon Creek complex fire had an effect on sensitive species. Some species may be negatively affected by fire and others may be stimulated by it. There are no empirical studies on the impacts of logging, burning, or grazing to most sensitive plant species that occur on the Malheur National Forest. The strategy for management of known populations has generally been avoidance of activities that may impact populations. Therefore, all discussion of potential impacts to sensitive plant populations and habitat is based upon general experience and inferred responses based upon observations and studies of more common species.

Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis The spatial context for this analysis is the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area. This scale is at the watershed level and is large enough to identify trends to sensitive species that could result from implementation this project. Since plants do not generally move over large areas quickly, it is not necessary to analyze effects to sensitive plants outside of the planning area.

The temporal context for effects analysis includes short term and long term effects. Short term effects for this analysis are considered to be one to two years after project implementation. These would generally be from direct effects to individuals or habitat such as ground disturbance or incineration and would be anticipated to persist for one to two years. Long term effects for this analysis are considered to be longer than two years. These effects would generally be from indirect effects such as changes in sunlight from thinning/removal of trees or changes in hydrologic regimes through erosion, and would last from two years until many years into the future.

Past, Present, and Foreseeable Activities Relevant to Cumulative Effects Analysis In the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future, there have been, and will continue to be, projects and activities within the planning area that may cause impacts to sensitive plants and their habitats. Projects and activities that create ground disturbance, change vegetative composition, and changes in domestic animal grazing patterns may potentially cause detrimental impacts to sensitive plant populations and habitats. These actions include road construction, timber harvest, fuel reduction treatments (landscape and pile burning, lopping and scattering of slash), fire suppression, recreation development, mining, and livestock grazing. In addition, restoration efforts such as road decommissioning, and stream improvements may also potentially impact sensitive plant populations and habitat. Road construction and recreation developments have permanently altered native plant habitat in limited areas of the planning area.

Page 161 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Livestock grazing has occurred in most of the project planning area for decades and has resulted in changes in plant communities, especially in non-forested and riparian areas. Grazing will continue to occur in the project planning area.

Climate change effects may also be considered as a component of cumulative effects. Changes in climate influence vegetation, water, and disturbance frequencies, and these changes, in turn, influence one another. Attempts to quantify this would be speculative.

Alternative 1 – No Action

Direct and Indirect Effects Alternative 1, the no action alternative, does not propose any new activities. Therefore, if the no action alternative is selected, there would be no direct or indirect effects to sensitive plant species. Because no management would occur, there would be no proposed action effects to add to ongoing or future actions that would contribute cumulative effects. The overall call for the no action alternative for all species of sensitive plants is No Impact (NI).

The one documented population of Snowline spring-parsley would see No Impact (NI) from the no action alternative. Due to its rocky habitat, the population likely only experienced low severity fire and thus should see quick recovery during the next few growing seasons.

In the long-term, sensitive plant habitats and populations in the project planning area would recover from fire on a time-scale dependent on their requirements. There would be some inherent risk to burned areas of invasive species infestation depending on fire burn severity.

Cumulative Effects In evaluating the actions in Table 11, chapter 3, it is anticipated that no action would not create a cumulative effect.

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects There are no proposed activities in the location of the one documented sensitive plant site, which is inside the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness. Therefore there would be No Impact (NI) to the documented occurrence of Snowline spring-parsley in the project planning area. Project design criteria for sensitive and unique habitats, such as prohibiting ground-disturbance in lithosols and springs, would prevent any direct or indirect effects to undocumented sensitive plant populations. Additionally, if any are located during implementation, project design criteria indicate that these be protected from ground disturbance. Overall, there would be No Impact (NI) to documented sensitive species populations from the proposed action alternative.

Cumulative Effects Direct and indirect effects to documented sensitive plants have been described above. The determination of No Impact (NI) was made for known populations of sensitive plants in the project planning area. Since there would be no impact to these resources, there would be no cumulative effects to those resources.

Page 162 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Affected Environment – Sensitive and Unique Habitats

Methodology Analysis of GIS habitat models, aerial photos, and geospatial imagery were used to determine sensitive and unique habitats within the project planning area. Additionally, the NRM GIS database was consulted to determine the extent of past sensitive plant habitat surveys. A pre-field review is normally completed to determine areas of high probability in a project planning area to survey specific sites for sensitive species. However, because the Canyon Creek Complex fire occurred in a location that was not included in a recent vegetation treatment or grazing project, it was not possible for this salvage project. The data used in this report was data already documented prior to 2015. Additionally, because the schedule for this project would be implemented during the growing season after the fire, and the area cannot be re-surveyed to determine the location and quality of all sensitive and unique habitats in the project planning area, those that were present and documented before the fire will be analyzed in the effects analysis. If any sensitive plants are found during implementation, mitigations for protection would be developed.

Past botanical surveys for this project were conducted according to standard Forest Service procedures (FSM 2670, Sections 2672.4 and 2672.42). Surveys were done using the intuitive control technique. This means that large areas are surveyed, with emphasis on searching specific sensitive habitats.

Existing Condition Sensitive and unique habitats are generally isolated or uncommon on the Malheur National Forest. They are often biodiversity hotspots because of their unique characteristics (e.g., saturated soil for 365 days a year, extremely thin and rocky soil) that vary from the larger forested areas. A total of approximately 4,913 acres within the project planning area were surveyed with over 100 surveys between 1991 and 2014, before the fire occurred. Despite the fire in 2015 that changed many habitats, the majority of sensitive and unique habitats, like springs and seeps, do not have enough fuel to carry high severity fire. Additionally, some sensitive species and habitats may be adapted to fire. The specific types of sensitive species habitat are listed below. See the Botany Report for a comprehensive list of sensitive and unique habitats on the Malheur National Forest and those Region 6 Sensitive Species that inhabit them.

The sensitive and unique habitats present within the project planning area in a measurable amount include: lithosols (scablands), springs and seeps, intermittent and perennial streams, and cliff/talus habitat.

Lithosol Lithosols are habitats with very shallow soils on poorly weathered basalt or andesitic bedrock. This habitat type has often been called scabland. While the soils can be saturated following spring snow melt, they dry quickly and are exposed to full sun for the entire growing season. Plants adapted to this harsh environment usually bloom and fruit early in the growing season. Basalt lithosols can be found in the dry upland shrubland potential vegetation group, and the dry upland herbland potential vegetation group. Basalt lithosols may also be found as small inclusions within a larger matrix of grassland and shrublands.

Given the low productivity and discontinuous fuels in this habitat group, fire has probably burned at low intensities and infrequently in this habitat type. However, when invaded with non-native grasses such have medusahead and African hair-grass, fuel levels can increase to a level where fire carries better, damaging and increasing mortality of native plants, and/or decreasing the quality of the native plant communities and sensitive species habitat. Invasion of lithosols by invasive grasses has been observed within the project planning area, but not quantified.

Page 163 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

There are several sensitive plant species that may occur in lithosol habitats, including snow-line spring parsley. Many culturally significant root plants occur in this habitat type as well. These include onions, various biscuit roots, yampa, and bitter-root.

Springs and seeps Springs are points where groundwater emerges and flows. Groundwater also feeds seeps, but seeps do not produce perennial flow. Springs and seeps are typically small, but are well distributed on the Malheur National Forest. Many springs are mapped in GIS. Seeps are generally less well documented on the Forest. Seeps and springs are often developed for cattle troughs. Many of these areas have been dewatered and/or trampled due to these developments historically. Many developed springs now have fences to protect the water source. These areas provide important habitat for several sensitive plant species, most notably several species of mosses and liverworts.

It is unlikely that fire carried over these spring and seep habitats in the project planning area due to their generally saturated soil and moist microclimate within the greater landscape.

Cliffs, rock outcrops, and talus Cliffs and rock outcrops have vertical faces where very few plants are able to survive. Talus is accumulated boulders and cobbles at the base of cliffs or on steep slopes. Because these habitats are largely composed of bedrock or accumulations of rock, they are assumed to be in good condition with a stable trend. The nature of this habitat group means it is resistant to management activities or has been avoided with most management activities. The main exception to this is when these areas are used for rock sources.

This habitat type is very limited on the Malheur National Forest, and within the project planning area. There are only a few sensitive plants that occur in this habitat type. Several of them are further restricted to specific, unusual rock types, such as limestone or argillite.

Fire likely only carried at very low levels through this habitat type. Like lithosols, the native plant communities of cliffs, rock outcrops and talus slopes often lack sufficient fuel to carry fire.

Intermittent and perennial streams Intermittent streams are channelized areas where water only runs part of the year. Most of the moisture in these streams comes from snowmelt runoff. These areas are classified as stream category 4 for riparian management standards and objectives. Perennial streams are channelized areas where water flows all year long. These areas are classified as stream category 1 (fish-bearing) or stream category 2 (non-fish bearing). These habitat types are generally quite narrow on the Malheur National Forest; they often extend upslope less than 100 feet above the water level. In flatter areas, they transition into moist and wet meadow types. Streams on most portions of the forest are dominated by riparian shrubs and trees.

Fire carries through riparian areas in varying intensities, dependent on fire behavior and availability of fuel (such as a thick riparian shrub component) along the water, and the topography of the valley bottom. Vegetation in riparian habitats after a fire often regenerate quickly because of availability of water and nutrients along the stream.

Table 51 Sensitive habitat types and extent within project planning boundary Sensitive habitat type Extent Lithosol 2,392 acres Springs and seeps 84 documented

Page 164 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Sensitive habitat type Extent Warm riparian forest 15 riparian habitat conservation areas Cliff/talus Present in small amounts

Desired Condition The Malheur Forest Plan does not define any desired conditions for sensitive and unique habitats.

Environmental Consequences

Methodology Sensitive plants tend to grow in specialized habitat types within broader plant communities. For example, some species are found in moist swales and depressions within general sagebrush habitat. Others occur in the transition zones between habitat types. For this analysis, plant communities and special habitats have been grouped into broad habitat association groups.

Each sensitive plant species has been assigned to one, or more, of each described Malheur National Forest sensitive plant habitat group(s) (see appendix 1 Malheur National Forest Sensitive Plants Grouped by Habitat Type). The sensitive species that are known to inhabit any specific sensitive habitat type may respond differently to the various proposed actions. For instance, one species may experience more effects from increased sunlight exposure caused by conifer thinning, or some species may be more resilient to direct soil compaction from yarding logs than others due to their morphological differences. However, these species are generally dependent on the overall habitat integrity of the type they occur within and thus analyzing effects to habitat integrity should accurately represent or estimate the effects to the potential sensitive species within them. Additionally, some sensitive plant species do not produce above-ground plants every year, and others are so tiny and inconspicuous that it is possible that they may be overlooked during surveys. For these reasons, we analyze effects to the integrity of sensitive species habitat types, treating habitat integrity as a proxy for the potential sensitive plants within.

Alternative 1 – No Action

Direct and Indirect Effects Because no management would occur, there would be no direct or indirect effects to sensitive species habitats. Sensitive species habitats would continue to recover from the Canyon Creek Complex fire under the no action alternative. In some habitats, such as lithosols, the burned areas may be more susceptible to infestations of invasive non-native annual grasses such as medusahead, cheatgrass, and African hair-grass that change the plant community and would reduce the quality of sensitive species habitat.

Cumulative Effects In evaluating the action on Table 11, chapter 3, it is anticipated that no action would not create a cumulative effect.

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects The proposed action involves activities including tree harvest, use of off-road equipment, log yarding, the creation of landings, temporary road construction, and road maintenance.

Page 165 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

While effects such as damage by falling trees, logging equipment, and road construction can directly impact habitats, project design criteria that establish buffers around habitats such as lithosols, and springs and seeps would prevent disturbance to those sensitive habitats that occur in the project planning area.

No tree harvest or ground disturbance would occur in any riparian habitat conservation areas. Additionally, the extent of disturbance would be limited to several smaller treatment units within the larger project planning area, so effects to general forest habitat like soil erosion from machinery within the treatment units would likely not affect hydrological processes in intermittent and perennial streams downstream from the treatment areas in a way that would disturb the sensitive plant habitat.

Cliff and talus habitats would not be affected by the proposed action because any actions taking place near these habitats would naturally avoid them because of inability to traverse them and because they do not support any harvestable trees. As long as lithosols are excluded from all off-road ground disturbance, as outlined under the project design criteria, they would experience no additional vulnerability of non- native grass invasion than under the no action alternative.

There would be No Impact (NI) to sensitive and unique habitats from implementation of the proposed action.

Cumulative Effects Direct and indirect effects to documented sensitive plants have been described above. The determination of No Impact (NI) was made for known populations of sensitive plants in the project planning area. Since there would be no impact to these resources, there would be no cumulative effects to the resource.

Compliance with Forest Plan and Other Relevant Laws, Regulations, and Policies National Environmental Policy Act - This biological evaluation fulfills, in part, requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 which directs federal agencies to “... insure that environmental information is available to public officials and citizens before decisions are made and before actions are taken” [40 CFR §1500.1(b)], and to ensure that the applicable standards and guidelines of Malheur National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan are included in the project design.

Endangered Species Act - This report addresses potential impacts to federally listed, proposed, and candidate plant species. It also addresses plant species designated as sensitive on the most recent Region Six Regional Forester's Special Status Species List (USDA Forest Service 2015d).

There are no known populations or potential habitat for any federally listed, or proposed, plant species in the project planning area. One candidate for federal listing occurs in the area. White bark pine (Pinus albicaulis) is located in the extreme northwest portion of the Glacier Mountain Roadless area. There are no proposed activities in this portion of the project planning area. Therefore, this project should have no effect to any federally listed, candidate, or proposed plant species. Consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is not required for this project for rare plants.

Malheur National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan - The Malheur Forest Plan does not specifically outline any goals or desired future conditions for sensitive plants.

Under Fish and Wildlife, two goals may be interpreted to include plant habitats (USDA Forest Service 1990, page IV-2).

 Goal 15. Assist in the identification, protection, and recovery of threatened, endangered, and sensitive species.

Page 166 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

 Goal 19. Provide a diversity of habitat sufficient to maintain viable populations of all species. Malheur National Forest Land and Resource Management plan forest-wide standards for Unique and Sensitive Habitats (Microhabitats) would help protect potential rare plant habitat (USDA Forest Service 1990, page IV-31-33):

 Standard 56. Maintain the integrity of unique habitats including meadows, rim rock, talus slopes, cliffs, animal dens, wallows, bogs, seeps and springs by incorporating cover buffers approximately 100 feet in width. Utilize additional mitigation/enhancement measure identified through project level analysis.  Standard 62. Meet all legal and biological requirements for the conservation of threatened and endangered plants and animals. Assess all proposed project that involve habitat change or disturbance and have the potential to alter the habitat of threatened, endangered or sensitive plant and animal species.  Standard 63. Maintain and update lists of threatened, endangered, and sensitive plants and animals periodically as new information is collected. Submit pertinent Forest information to the Regional Office for updating the Regional Forester’s sensitive species lists, and to the appropriate agency for inclusion in state-wide databases.  Standard 64. When threatened or endangered species or habitats are present, follow the required biological assessment process, according to the requirements of the Endangered Species Act (Public Law 93-205). Meet all consultation requirements with the USDI Fish and Wildlife Service and state agencies.  Standard 65. Specify all protection or mitigation requirements (36 CFR 219.27(a)(8)) before project implementation begins. Manage all habitats for existing federally classified threatened and endangered species to help achieve recovery objectives.  Standard 66. Perform a biological (field) evaluation for use in planning of proposed projects when sensitive species are present or suspected. Conduct surveys in cooperation with other agencies and groups to document the locations of sensitive species populations and to provide more specific information on habitat requirements and relative management guidelines. All project design criteria and project proposals for the action alternative comply with the above listed laws and Forest Service regulations. All proposed project activities are consistent with the applicable Malheur Forest Plan standards. The interdisciplinary process for this project has included full participation from the botanist.

Other Relevant Mandatory Disclosures There are no other relevant mandatory disclosures related to sensitive plants for this project.

Invasive Plants This section addresses potential effects to invasive plant species, particularly the potential of new infestations and the exacerbation of the existing situation. Forest Service Manual (FSM) direction requires that invasive plant risk assessments be prepared for all projects involving ground-disturbing activities.

Invasive plants are federally defined as “non-native plants” whose introduction does or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human health (Executive Order 13112). The State of Oregon legally recognizes “noxious weed” as “a terrestrial, aquatic or marine plant designated by the State Weed

Page 167 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Board under ORS 569.615 as among those representing the greatest public menace and as a top priority for action by weed control programs.” (ODA 2015)

Invasive plants are distinguished from other non-native plants by their ability to spread (invade) into native ecosystems. They spread between National Forest System lands and neighboring areas, with potential to affect all land ownerships. Invasive species were identified by the Chief of the Forest Service as one of the four threats to forest health (for more information see http://www.fs.fed.us/projects/four- threats/). Invasive plants are currently damaging the ecological integrity of lands. They are displacing native plants, increasing the potential for soil erosion and potentially destabilizing streams, reducing water quality and the quality of fish and wildlife habitat, and degrading natural areas. Invasive plants can have adverse effects on rare or endemic species, which could result in listing under state or federal endangered species laws.

The Malheur National Forest is committed to integrated invasive plant management, which depends on preventing introductions, monitoring the land to detect infestations, and treating infestations to contain or eradicate.

Some of the diverse pathways for introduction include:

 Seeds becoming attached to fur of wildlife and domestic livestock as they pass through existing infestations and then falling off at remote locations.  Seeds and weed propagules being transported by vehicles and machinery that have previously operated in infested areas.  Management actions that disturb soils and reduce competing vegetation, making more desirable sites for invasive/noxious weed establishment.  Seeds can spread through natural vectors such as insects, wind, and water. The Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project does not propose any invasive plant treatments; those are handled through other planning and management processes. This planning effort, however, will consider pathways of prevention. This report describes invasive plant infestations in the project planning area. Project design criteria (see beginning of this chapter) help protect both known sensitive plant populations and prevent invasive plant introductions. Potential direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of the alternatives on known invasive plant populations and the potential for introduction are also presented.

Resource Indicators for Assessing Effects

Table 52 Indicators for assessing effects to invasive plants Resource element Resource indicator Measure Source Extent of ground Extent of invasive plant Invasive plant species disturbance and vector FSM 2081.03 population presence

Invasive Plant Species

Affected Environment

Methodology Surveys for invasive species within the project planning area were conducted at various times before and after the Canyon Creek Complex Fire. This report was developed using GIS analyses from all collected

Page 168 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project data, including the Natural Resource Manager (NRM) Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Plants and Invasive Species (TESP-IS) dataset.

Despite the potential for mortality of invasive plants from the Canyon Creek Complex fire, the infestations that were mapped previous to the fire will be included in the existing condition and analysis. A large percentage of these infestations were located within areas of low fire severity. Because of this, it is likely that they were relatively unaffected. Many of the species in the project planning area are resilient to, and even stimulated by, disturbances such as fire and soil disturbance. Besides being stimulated to germinate or regenerate after fire, the bare soil, higher sunlight levels, and mortality of previously- dominant native species can present an opportunity for invasive species to spread to new areas (Brooks and Lusk 2008; Ferguson and Craig 2010).

Due to the length of the active fire, little time was available for post-fire surveys. Only a few of these sites were from documentation after the fire occurred. However, the currently documented data should paint a reliable picture of the weed presence in the area accurate enough to conduct a risk assessment.

Existing Condition There are many species from the Malheur National Forest Invasive Plant List within the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area (see Table 53. There are currently 35 different non-native plant species documented within the project planning area boundary, with a total of 382 separate infestations over about 92 acres (see Table 53). The majority of infestations experienced only low-burn severity during the fire. This is likely because most of the documented infestations occur along roadsides, which generally have little to no vegetation.

There are many invasive plant species which are known to grow or expand after fire events. Some of these species are documented within the project planning area. These include cheatgrass (Melgoza et al. 1990), diffuse knapweed (Wolfson et al. 2005), mullein (Brown 2010), and Dalmatian toadflax (Dodge et al. 2008; Phillips and Crisp 2001), among others.

The Canyon Creek Complex fire has increased the vulnerability of the landscape to invasive plants because of: 1) increased availability of light and nutrients in the burned areas, 2) reduction in competition from native plants for subsurface resources such as nutrients and water, and 3) increased opportunity for introduction and spread where fire fighting vehicles, heavy equipment, hoses, and foot traffic undoubtedly picked up seeds and spread them to new areas. New infestations are highly likely and may not be detected until the next growing season. Additionally, the coverage of previously documented infestations is likely to increase, despite the fact some individual invasive plants may have been consumed in the fire in moderate and high-severity burned areas.

Additionally, wildfire suppression efforts created some disturbance through bulldozer and hand line within the fire perimeter. In addition, numerous staging areas and safety zones were created. Although weed washing stations were set up, some of the firefighting equipment came onto the Forest from outside the area without being washed, so new weed species could have been introduced.

Table 53 Invasive plant species within the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area # of Acres Species Common name Total acres sites High med low unburned Acroptilon repens Hard heads 3 0 0.11 0.23 0 0.34 Agrostis gigantea Redtop 1 0 0 0.1 0 0.1 Bromus inermis Smooth brome 4 0 0.1 0.3 0 0.4 Bromus tectorum Cheatgrass * 36 0 0.37 4.73 0.17 6.132 Cardaria draba Whitetop 4 0 0.2 0.2 0 0.4

Page 169 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

# of Acres Species Common name Total acres sites High med low unburned Centaurea diffusa Diffuse knapweed 24 0 0.6 4.54 0.1 5.24 Centaurea stoebe ssp. Spotted knapweed* 12 0 0.31 1.39 0 1.7 micranthos Centaurea virgate ssp. Squarrose knapweed 1 0 0 0.12 0 0.12 quarrosa Cirsium arvense Canada thistle 6 0 0.2 0.3 0 0.5 Cirsium vulgare Bull thistle* 59 0 0.81 6.189 0.17 8.51 Convolvulus arvensis Field bindweed 5 0 0 0.24 0.14 0.38 Cynoglossum officinale Gypsyflower* 57 0 36.1 5.3 0 42.07 Dactylis glomerata Orchardgrass 4 0 0.2 0.2 0 0.4 Dipsacus fullonum Fuller’s teasel 4 0 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.4 Dysphania botrys Jerusalem oak 1 0 0 0 0.1 0.1 goosefoot Euphorbia esula Leafy spurge 1 0 0 0.1 0 0.1 Euphorbia myrsinites Myrtle spurge 1 0 0 0.26 0 0.26 Hypericum perforatum St. Johnswort 8 0 0.2 1.2 0 1.4 Lactuca seriola Prickly lettuce 1 0 0 1.24 0 1.24 Leucanthemum vulgare Oxeye daisy 4 0 0 0.14 0.14 0.28 Linaria dalmatica Dalmatian toadflax* 32 0.1 1.2 4.11 0.24 5.89 Lythrum salicaria Purple loosestrife 1 0 0 0.1 0 0.1 Melilotus officinalis Sweetclover 2 0 0 0.07 0.7 0.77 Onopordum acanthium Scotch cottonthistle 9 0 0.1 0.8 0 0.9 Phleum pretense Timothy 2 0 0 0.2 0 0.2 Poa bulbosa Bulbous bluegrass 3 0 0 0.14 0.1 0.24 Potentilla recta Sulphur cinquefoil 12 0 0.1 0.87 0.3 1.27 Rumex acetosella Common sheep 1 0 0 0.1 0 0.1 sorrel Senecio jacobaea Stinking willie 2 0 0 0.2 0 0.2 Taeniatherum caput- Medusahead 1 0 0 0.1 0 0.2 medusae Taraxacum officinale Common dandelion 4 0 0.1 0.24 0 0.34 ssp. officinale Thinopyrum Intermediate 3 0 0 0.3 0 0.3 intermedium wheatgrass Tragopogon dubius Yellow salsify 4 0 0 1.37 0.1 2.37 Ventenata dubia North Africa grass 2 0 0 0.2 0 0.2 Verbascum Thapsus Common mullein* 68 0 0.67 5.98 0.44 9.66 Totals 382 0.1 41.5 41.8 2.8 92.8 *Some species have infestations spanning multiple severity-levels and therefore not all acreages were captured when measuring acreages by severity-level, but total acreages for these species are accurate.

Desired Condition The desired future condition is that invasive plants do not jeopardize the ability of national forests to provide goods and ecosystem services. This may be achieved by the prevention of new invasive plant establishments and cessation of established invasive plant spread with a corresponding reduction in established invasive plant presence. Allowing for the return of disturbed areas to a more natural condition and promoting establishment of the native plant community can impede invasive plants from dominating these areas. This condition can be advanced through implementation of good management practices, minimizing human caused disturbance where possible, and executing mitigation measures such as invasive weed removal and native species re-vegetation.

Page 170 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Environmental Consequences

Methodology Surveys for invasive species within the project planning area were conducted at various times before and after the Canyon Creek Complex Fire. These sites have been inventoried in the NRIS database and mapped in GIS. Those infestations that were mapped previous to the fire will be included in the analysis. A large percentage of these infestations were located within areas of low fire severity. Because of this, it is likely that they were relatively unaffected. A number of the invasive species in the project planning area are resilient and even stimulated by disturbances such as fire and soil disturbance (Brown 2010; Dodge et al. 2008; Phillips and Crisp 2001; Wolfson et al. 2005).

The risk assessment below illustrates the factors used to determine the level of risk based on potential sources and vectors, type of ground disturbing activity, and the proximity to existing invasive plant infestations to the proposed units. Because timber harvest is proposed in areas that suffered moderate to high severity burns, there is already a large extent of bare ground exposed as a result of vegetation consumption by fire in these units. Factors which include the species of invasive plant, size of infestation, life history characteristics, as well as the dispersal mechanisms, are also incorporated into the risk rating. The results from current and previous surveys, and the factors mentioned above form the rationale for analyzing direct, indirect, and cumulative effects.

Assessments / Process Data used consisted of past data and early season assessments. No area has been exhaustively surveyed for invasive plants.

Most surveys for this project were done before specific ground disturbing activities had been proposed. It is possible that activities would be implemented in areas that would not be surveyed. Therefore, there may be effects to undiscovered populations of invasive plants.

Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis The project planning area encompasses a watershed affected by the Canyon Creek Complex Fire. It encompasses many small treatment units where harvest actions would take place that lie within 6 distinct study units, all located inside the larger project planning area.

The spatial context for this analysis is the project planning area. This scale is large enough to identify trends to invasive plant species that could result from implementing this project. Since plants do not generally move over large areas quickly and no downstream effects are anticipated, it is not necessary to analyze effects to invasive plants outside of the planning area.

The temporal context for effects analysis includes short-term and long-term effects. Short-term effects for this analysis are considered to be one to two years after project implementation. These would generally be from direct effects, such as ground disturbance or pile burning. Long-term effects for this analysis are considered to be longer than two years. These effects would generally be from indirect effects, such as changes in sunlight, hydrologic regimes, and changes in animal grazing patterns and intensity.

Effects Boundaries The geographic scale considered for direct, indirect, and cumulative effects is the project planning area. This is due to the fact that plant populations generally do not move significantly over time. The time scale for this cumulative effects analysis from 150 years ago (when European Americans arrived in the area) to 10 years into the future. It is not possible to anticipate Forest Service activities beyond this time.

Page 171 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Past, Present, and Foreseeable Activities Relevant to Cumulative Effects Analysis In the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future, there have been, and will continue to be, projects and activities within the planning area that may cause impacts to invasive plant species and their populations. These actions include road construction, timber harvest, fuel reduction treatments (landscape and pile burning, lopping and scattering of slash), fire suppression, recreation development, mining, and livestock grazing. All of these have had and may continue to have effects on the extent of invasive plant infestations within the project planning area.

Specifically, the Canyon Creek Wildland Urban Interface Fuel Reduction Project, historical and recent timber harvest, fire suppression from the Canyon Creek Complex Fire and other fires, the Burned Area Emergency Rehabilitation and Hazard Tree Mitigation activities for the Canyon Creek Complex Fire, past and present grazing, future invasive plant treatments, future Aquatic Restoration projects, recreation, and road work activities would have the most potential to interact with the proposed action to create cumulative effects.

Climate change effects may also be considered as a component of cumulative effects. Changes in climate influence vegetation, water, and disturbance frequencies, and these changes, in turn, influence one another. Attempts to quantify this would be speculative.

Alternative 1 – No Action

Direct and Indirect Effects Because no actions would occur under this alternative, there would be no effects to invasive species from project activities. However, fire alone often promotes invasion of invasive plant species. Burning removes existing vegetation, exposes mineral soil, redistributes soil nitrogen, and post-fire environments are drier and have more direct sunlight, all conditions which can promote non-native plants in comparison to native plant regeneration.

The intensity and scope of disturbance is varied, as the burn severity throughout the project planning area ranged from high to un-burned. Therefore, some higher-burn severity areas will be more vulnerable to invasive plant spread and some low burn-severity areas will be more intact, making it easier for native species to regenerate. Additionally, under this alternative, several vectors of invasive plant species would continue to be present. Forest Service roads will continue to be utilized, and grazing permits will continue after the period of post-fire rest.

The no action alternative would pose the least risk to invasive plant spread and introduction relative to the proposed action because no additional ground disturbance by machinery and equipment would occur and thus fewer vectors could spread seed. However, non-native invasive plant species are likely to increase overall across the project planning area even without any additional disturbance from proposed actions.

Cumulative Effects In evaluating the action on Table 11, chapter 3, it is anticipated that no action would not create a cumulative effect.

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects Fire alone often promotes invasions of non-native and/or invasive plants. Burning removes existing vegetation, exposes mineral soil, redistributes soil nitrogen, and post fire environments are drier and have more light, all conditions which can promote non-native plants, including invasive plants like cheatgrass,

Page 172 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project knapweeds, scotch thistle, and non-native rhizomatous grass cultivars such as smooth brome and intermediate wheatgrass. In a review of 35 studies, D’Antonio (2000) found that only 20 percent of the time did fire reduce or eliminate invading species but often post-fire changes altered the competitive relationships between native and non-native species. Freeman et al. (2007) looked at data collected from 7 wildfire sites in coniferous forests and found that wildfire was responsible for substantial increases in nonnative species richness and cover. Non-native rhizomatous grass species were seeded across the Malheur National Forest for forage and erosion control. Medusahead is a rapid colonizer of burned areas when a seed source is present and it is highly likely that it would spread rapidly into the moderate to high severity burned areas even if none of the proposed activities take place.

The effect being considered is the intensity and scope of disturbance and the increased risk of invasive plant introduction and spread from known populations.

The major components of the proposed action include fire salvage treatments, research plans, reforestation efforts, and road activities. The details of each component in relation to its potential effects on invasive species infestations are discussed below.

The impacts of salvage logging, including tree removal and skidding on understory vegetation may be site specific. Review of the literature shows some conflicting results on the effect of salvage logging on understory vegetation recovery and increases in non-native plants. Beschta et al. (2004) noted that post- fire salvage logging can adversely affect soil integrity and persistence of native plant species and impede ecological recovery after a fire through changes to microclimate and mechanical damage to regenerating plants and soils. Purdon et al. (2004) found reduced abundance of understory vegetation following salvage logging in the forest stands that had experienced high-severity fire in the boreal forests of southern Quebec. Kurulok and Macdonald (2007) found higher weedy species presence in salvage logged areas in Alberta than other untreated wildfire areas in the short-term, but in the long-term the recovery of native plant community depended on the stand recovery levels over time.

However, Keyser et al. (2009) found no discernible effect of salvage logging on understory development 5 years after fire and neither a reduction in total plant cover nor an increase in the abundance of exotic species in ponderosa pine forests in the Black Hills. Acton (2003) saw increases in exotic species cover after salvage logging and concluded that the measurement scale may be an important consideration in experiment design.

Clearing vegetation for landings is the other ground-disturbing activity proposed under the salvage logging treatments. This activity involves the removal of sizeable (¼ acre to ~ 2 acres) areas of vegetation, creating relatively large locations of intense ground disturbance which would then be vulnerable to new or expanded weed infestation because of: 1) removal of all native vegetation which decreases competition for resources and 2) changes in sunlight levels, nutrient levels, and hydrological patterns that would benefit colonizing invasive species over slower-growing natives. However, there are PDCs, including revegetation of landings with native species that would help prevent infestation if completed quickly enough after implementation.

The actions undertaken as part of the research proposal would have minimal impact on the introduction of weed species or expansion of infestations, because no ground disturbance would be involved in research activities after implementation is completed.

Reforestation occurring within the project planning area would have minimal effect on the spread or introduction of invasive plants. However, reforestation would also help quicken stand recovery, thus potentially affecting habitat characteristics such as shade levels and water infiltration that could potentially benefit the native plant community over a weed infestation in the long-term.

Page 173 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Because the majority of documented invasive species sites are located adjacent to roads within the project planning area, road work activities proposed in this alternative would potentially have the most risk for introducing or spreading weeds during implementation. This is true because: 1) ground disturbance that would occur along already infested roadsides would provide more bare ground that could potentially be quickly colonized by the infestations that are already present along the same roadside and 2) vehicles can act as a vector and efficient dispersal mechanism for noxious weed seeds along roadways. Specifically, creating temporary roads off of open roads with infestations along them would create a high risk of infestation along the temporary road, even if it is rehabilitated. Rehabilitation activities would include some ground disturbing actions like waterbarring and recontouring slopes. However, planting and seeding of native plant species is also included in the proposed action for temporary road rehabilitation, which would reduce risk somewhat if implemented the first autumn after implementation. Re-opening closed roads would create a similar immediate risk of invasive plant spread.

Road maintenance activities, such as blading, brushing, minor re-aligning of road junctions and fill material, could also pose risk to spreading weed sites along these roadways by creating some ground disturbance and reducing shade levels along the roads. Specifically, using gravel for road fill could introduce new invasive plants to the roads undergoing road maintenance.

Overall, the Canyon Creek Complex Salvage Project poses a high risk of introduction and spread of invasive plants because the proposed activities are expected to disturb soil, impact some native plant species and introduce vectors for invasive seed spread. These risks would be somewhat reduced by project design criteria such as washing heavy equipment before going off-road, and consulting the invasive species coordinator before brushing, blading, and seeding with native plant species in areas of ground disturbance. However, these project design criteria would prevent some but not all spread of invasive plant species due to the proposed actions in this alternative. The majority of effects would be long-term (decades or more). Although the expansion and contraction of a weed site may depend on the species and its ecology, most, if not all, of the invasive species present (or any new infestations) within the project planning area would persist for more than the immediate two growing seasons after the implementation of the proposed salvage treatments.

Cumulative Effects In the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future, there have been and will continue to be projects and activities within the planning area that have introduced, spread, or reduced invasive plants.

Projects and activities that create ground disturbance, change vegetative composition, and change domestic animal grazing patterns may potentially cause the spread of infestations or create new invasive plant populations due to dispersal. These actions include road construction, timber harvest, fuel reduction treatments (landscape and pile burning, lopping and scattering of slash), fire suppression, recreation development, mining, and livestock grazing. Road construction and recreation developments have permanently altered native plant habitat and increased the extent of invasive plant species populations throughout the project planning area.

Historic grazing has resulted in loss of native plants, habitat disturbances through general trampling and herbivory by livestock, as well as stream down-cutting and accelerated erosion processes that alter local surface hydrology in riparian habitats. Historic logging practices included skidding logs and constructing temporary roads, which could have facilitated invasive plant introductions and provided soil openings for new plants to establish. Future foreseeable grazing activities could potentially provide vectors for invasive plant sites newly introduced by the proposed action. However, the extent to which grazing would facilitate invasive plant spread would depend on the recovery of native plant communities during the first few growing seasons after the fire. Project design criteria that would ensure seeding of native plant

Page 174 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project species in areas with ground disturbance would help to promote a quick recovery of native species in some parts of the project planning area.

Ongoing recreation activities have and will continue to occur, including hunting and dispersed camping. Recreational activities can contribute to the introduction and spread of invasive plants because vehicles, people and animals can act as vectors as they travel through the forest.

Several smaller wildfires are documented to have occurred in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area in the past with unknown effects on invasive plant distributions. Additionally, fire suppression efforts from past fires and from the Canyon Creek Complex Fire may have caused ground disturbance and introduction of invasive plants from bulldozer line, and construction of safety zones.

The effects to invasive plants from the current Canyon Creek Complex Hazard Tree Mitigation Project could potentially interact in space or time with the effects of the proposed action because the vehicles and heavy equipment used in the hazard tree mitigation may have introduced or spread invasive plants that would then be present during the implementation of the proposed action. Some of these vehicles and equipment may be using the same routes during these two separate projects, thus increasing the risk of invasive plant spread to a higher level than if the hazard tree mitigation had not occurred.

The aspect of the Burned Area Emergency Rehabilitation efforts after the Canyon Creek Complex Fire that has the most potential to facilitate or affect invasive plant species in this project planning area is mulching activity. Mulch was inspected for weed seed presence, but because it was not possible to survey 100 percent of the material, it is possible that there was weed seed present in some of the mulch that was applied to some of the high burn-severity areas within the project planning area. Therefore, it is possible that this will result in new weed infestations that could potentially be spread by the actions of the proposed action, such as off-road equipment inadvertently carrying weed seeds from a mulched area to a non-mulched area.

Foreseeable future aquatic restoration actions within the project planning area may have short-term ground disturbance potential that may allow invasive plants to be introduced; however, in the long term, the establishment of more vigorous native plant community’s function will make the systems more resistant to invasive plant proliferation.

The Malheur National Forest Site-Specific Invasive Plants Treatment Project Record of Decision authorizes the use of herbicides and biocontrol agents as part of integrated invasive plant management. The effect is an increased efficacy in invasive plant treatments and an ability to better restore native plant communities.

The historical abundance and distribution of invasive species on the Forest is not known; however, at some point in the past, they were completely absent. Past activities have likely incrementally affected their abundance and distribution. Beginning in approximately 1990, botanical surveys and biological evaluations were conducted for most Forest Service projects planned and implemented on the forest to reduce negative effects to sensitive species. Since 2005, standards have been in place to prevent and manage invasive plants. Therefore, present and foreseeable future projects, and those that have occurred in the recent past, are not likely to contribute any notable negative impacts to the invasive species described above.

Compliance with Forest Plan and Other Relevant Laws, Regulations, and Policies National Environmental Policy Act - The Invasive Species Report for this project fulfills, in part, requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 which directs federal agencies to “... insure that environmental information is available to public officials and citizens before decisions are

Page 175 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment made and before actions are taken” [40 CFR §1500.1(b)], and to ensure that the applicable standards and guidelines of Malheur National Forest land and resource management plan are included in the project design. This Invasive Species Report discloses the existing condition of invasive plant populations, and analyzes the potential effects to these resources.

Executive Order 13112 and Forest Service Invasive Plant Policy - The invasive plant specialist report for this project analyzes potential actions that may affect the status of invasive plants, particularly prevention measures.

Malheur National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan - Under Noxious Weeds (USDA Forest Service 1990, page IV-45):

 Goal # 188. Implement a weed control program to confine present infestations and prevent establishment of noxious weeds in new areas. Favor biological control for noxious weeds that have effective host insects. Where biological control is not effective, a combination of hand grubbing, spot application of herbicides, and aerial application of herbicides will be used. This program will be coordinated with county, State, and other Federal agencies. All National Environmental Policy Act requirements will be completed prior to using any herbicides. All project design criteria and project proposals for all alternatives comply with the above listed laws and Forest Service regulations. All proposed project activities and alternatives are consistent with the applicable Malheur Forest Plan standards and guidelines. All alternatives comply with the Malheur Forest Plan.

Pacific Northwest Region Invasive Plant Program Preventing and Maintaining Invasive Plants - All alternatives comply with Prevention Standard #6 (USDA Forest Service 2005):

 Use available administrative mechanisms to incorporate invasive plant prevention practices into rangeland management. Examples of administrative mechanisms include, but are not limited to, revising permits and grazing allotment management plans, providing annual operating instructions, and adaptive management. Plan and implement practices in cooperation with the grazing permit holder.

Other Relevant Mandatory Disclosures There are no other relevant mandatory disclosures related to invasive plant species for this project.

Range This section describes the affected environment and effects of the proposed action on permitted livestock grazing within the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area.

Indicators for Assessing Effects

Table 54 Resource elements, indicators and measures for assessing effects Resource element Resource indicator Measure Source Erosion from cattle Visible resource damage Degree of damage FS-2200-10 trailing (e.g. bare soil) Recovery or Established plant Meeting the Range R6-2210-22 reestablishment of forage communities Readiness criteria Protection of riparian Adverse impact to riparian Meeting the permit FS-2200-10 areas during recovery areas administrative standards

Page 176 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Affected Environment

Existing Condition There are three term livestock grazing permits currently issued for three allotments within the project planning area: the Fawn Springs, Dark Canyon, and Hunter Cabin allotments.

Table 55 Permitted cattle and grazing dates by allotment Permitted Cattle Allotment name Grazing start date Grazing end date (cow/calf pairs) Fawn Springs 107 June 1st October 15th Dark Canyon 194 June 15th October 30th Hunter Cabin 301 June 15th October 30th

All of these allotments are managed under a deferred rotation schedule, which means pastures within an allotment are used at different times of the grazing season each year, with some pastures left to rest when possible, dependent on conditions during the grazing season.

The Canyon Creek Complex Fire burned with various intensities, from low to high severity. As a result, up to 90 percent of structural range improvements (i.e., fences, water troughs) were damaged or destroyed.

Both forage and riparian vegetation were partially or completely burned in some areas, while left untouched elsewhere. It is anticipated that forage availability within the project planning area will take varying amounts of time to recover, dependent on the types of plants and their adaptation to fire, fire intensity, precipitation (before and after the fire), soil type, previous history of grazing and fire, presence of competition, season of fire, and current management.

Desired Condition The lands included in the project planning area are to be managed to achieve a desired condition, as described in the Malheur Forest Plan, and to maintain a healthy ecosystem. The Forest Plan also requires that lands be managed to encourage healthy plant communities, remain diverse and resilient, and to restore damaged ecosystems. The desired condition is to achieve quality land management under the sustainable multiple-use management concept to meet the diverse needs of people.

Two of the allotments, Fawn Springs and Dark Canyon, are managed in compliance with the terms and conditions and conservation measures of the National Marine Fisheries Service Endangered Species Act Biological Opinion and Letter of Concurrence for Mid-Columbia River steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and their critical habitat. Management goals include improving condition of MCR steelhead habitat while also providing for overall health of riparian areas.

Repair or reconstruction of structural developments (troughs) within the project planning area will begin in 2016. The water developments that were destroyed as a result of the fire are critical for the proper management of livestock on the allotment. It is expected that these troughs will be replaced within the next five years.

The allotments within the project planning area will have managed uplands that utilize available forage while maintaining vegetation and site productivity. The annual use of available forage on these allotments will be 45 percent in the uplands. Site specific riparian standards are issued under the Biological Opinion and are attached to the term grazing permits as “modifications of term grazing permit.”

Page 177 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Methodology This analysis provides basic rangeland resource information within the project planning area. Discussion regarding the project planning area is focused on the grazing allotments and their respective pastures for the purpose of addressing grazing permit administrative impacts or impacts to permittees.

Annual range vegetation monitoring of uplands as well as riparian areas has been conducted on the grazing allotments located within the project planning area. Range administration is conducted yearly by both the Forest Service and permittees. Range administration is also conducted by the permittees to meet terms and conditions of the grazing permit.

 Other sources of information include:  Grazing permits  Malheur National Forest geographic information system (GIS) database  Malheur National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan  On-the-ground knowledge of the project planning area  Conversations and field visits with permittees  2012-2016 Biological Opinion for livestock grazing

Assessments / Process NEPA analysis has not been completed on the allotments within the project planning area. Additionally, and as a result of the lack of allotment specific NEPA, the allotment management plans (AMPs) for these allotments need to be updated to accurately reflect the positive change in management and conditions that have occurred since the AMPs were last updated.

The long-term upland condition and trend data plots were not read and analyzed prior to this report being written. Given that this planning area is in a recently burned area, these results may not have been useful for this analysis.

A comprehensive inventory of the condition of each water development and segment of fence after the fire has not been completed. It is not expected that this will have an impact on the results of the analysis for this project.

Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis The spatial context for this analysis is the project planning area which lies within, and across, the boundaries of three grazing allotments on the Blue Mountain Ranger District of the Malheur National Forest. Spatially, per allotment, the effects of the proposed action would exist at a scale of the landscape that is: 52 percent of the Fawn Springs allotment, 6 percent of the Dark Canyon allotment, and 4.5 percent of the Hunter Cabin allotment. The allotments within the project planning area are spatially static and the effects from the proposed action are expected to occur solely within their boundaries.

The temporal context used for this analysis spans from immediately following the action to 2 years (short- term effects) and from 2 to 10 years after the project is implemented (long-term effects). Project disturbance is expected to span less than 2 years, while the effects from the project, or the lack thereof, will be analyzed for the 10 years following project implementation. It is expected that disturbance from the project would be greatest during implementation, however due to the fact the allotments are not anticipated to be utilized to an extent that interaction with the project would cause negative effects to the range resource, the analysis will focus on the period post implementation. During this period it is

Page 178 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project expected that effects from the proposed action would increase over time, in comparison to the areas that were not treated by the proposed action. These effects would be long-term and generally from indirect effects, such as changes in sunlight, hydrologic regimes, and changes in animal grazing patterns.

Past, Present, and Foreseeable Activities Relevant to Cumulative Effects Analysis Past actions in or near the project planning area include timber management, wildland fuels management, fire suppression, grazing, recreation, firewood cutting, and road and facilities construction and maintenance. All activities have affected current forest composition, structure, and management infrastructure of the area. As a result of the fire the effects of these past activities more difficult to discern if at all reflected in the current condition of the area’s natural resource and human environment values.

As such, the cumulative effects of past projects is not likely to have an effect on range resources within the project planning area. Alternatively, the present, and foreseeable projects in association with the proposed action would have a positive effect on the landscape by increasing available forage and transitory space. Previous harvest and thinning activities have generally had a positive impact on all range resources by reducing the overstory and allowing forage species to thrive. This project would treat forested stands by thinning which would increase forage availability, decrease the effects of jackstrawed timber that occurs after a fire (i.e., dead trees falling), reducing and eliminating livestock from traversing throughout areas of the allotments.

Environmental Consequences

Alternative 1 – No Action

Direct and Indirect Effects The no action alternative would have no overall direct or indirect short-term impacts to permittee operations. Currently grazing practices within the project planning area are suspended pending further analysis of overall conditions of grass resources as well as structural improvements. It is anticipated that a suspension of grazing or at least a partial suspension will continue for 2 to 3 more years, or until such time that the resources are capable of being grazed without causing long-term damage.

The negative effects from this alternative occur in the future when the unharvested trees begin to fall to the ground. A common effect from this event is that the trees create a jackstraw effect and the fallen trees begin to build up above of forest floor making areas impassable and thus unusable by livestock. Under this alternative, the overall efficiency of managing livestock on the allotments within the project planning area would decrease. Additionally, the decrease of resources available would cause the remaining resource to be used more. This could result in shortened seasons of use by livestock or a decrease in the number of livestock that the area can handle, and thus a decreased in authorized numbers for the area.

Cumulative Effects Because there would be no direct or indirect effects there would be no cumulative effects to livestock grazing operations. The reasonable and foreseeable future activities in the project planning area include (but are not limited to) use and maintenance of Forest roads, fire suppression, livestock grazing, firewood cutting, aquatic restoration activities, and year-round recreational use. The existing forage base would continue to recover from the effects of the fire. The structural improvements would be maintained/rebuilt, over time. Authorized livestock numbers and season would increase as the resource conditions improve and are able to withstand the disturbance.

Page 179 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects Alternative 2 would have no overall direct short-term impacts to permittee operations. Currently grazing practices within the project planning area are suspended pending further analysis of overall conditions of grass resources as well as structural improvements. It is anticipated that a suspension of grazing or at least a partial suspension will continue for 2 to 3 more years, or until such time that the resources are capable of being grazed without causing long-term damage.

Salvage treatments: salvage treatments would positively affect range conditions and increase available forage for livestock. Based on professional experience on the Malheur National Forest the proposed harvest would have a positive effect on the long-term range conditions by keeping the area open and accessible by livestock. The snags retained in the treatment units would eventually fall and provide some barriers to livestock, but not as much as with no action.

Logging systems: logging systems activities are not expected to have an effect on range resources within the project planning area because livestock grazing is expected to be in suspension while the activities are occurring so there would be minimal interaction between the two activities.

Reforestation: reforestation activities would not have a short-term effect on range resources. Long-term effects are only negative if the project planning area is not treated in the future for density or disease and the area is not treated in a manner that increases its resiliency to the effects of fire.

Research: research activities would not have an effect on range resources within the project planning area because there would be minimal interaction between the two activities.

Forest Road Activities: Forest road activities (temporary road construction, log haul, and road maintenance) are not expected to have an effect on range resources. Livestock grazing would be in suspension while the activities are occurring so there would be no interaction between the two activities.

Potential temporary closure of cross country travel: cross country travel is often utilized by permittees for managing livestock on Federal land. However, due to several factors including the recently changed landscape condition, the suspension of livestock grazing activities within the project planning area, and the terms and conditions of the term grazing permits, this activity is not expected to have an effect on range resources.

Rock pit material sources: use of rock pit material sources would not affect range resources because rock pits are not necessary for the management of livestock in the planning area and it is expected that grazing would be in suspension while the activities are occurring so there would be minimal interaction between the two actions.

Cumulative Effects Activities such as timber harvest, fire suppression, livestock grazing, invasive weed treatments, cross country travel, fire wood cutting and dispersed camping have had an effect on the range resource. However, the effects from these actions have been replaced by the effects of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire. It is expected that the past actions contribute to the cumulative effect to the range resource however the effects from these activities is not measurable.

The potential for detrimental direct and indirect effects to range resources from the proposed activities are minimal and would be mitigated by following project design criteria. The vegetation in the grazing allotments will continue to be managed in accordance with the Malheur Forest Plan as well as the

Page 180 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Biological Opinion as they relate to livestock grazing. Therefore, this project combined with foreseeable future projects, and those that have occurred in the recent past, are not likely to contribute to any long- term adverse cumulative effects to range resources.

Compliance with Forest Plan and Other Relevant Laws, Regulations, and Policies All alternatives are consistent with the Forest-wide Standard 82: Manage residues to facilitate the use of forage by domestic livestock (USDA Forest Service 1990, page IV-34).

Alternative 2 is consistent with the following Forest-wide Standards:

 Forest-wide Standard 85: Design improvements to protect tree regeneration and/or to distribute livestock use (USDA Forest Service 1990, page IV-35).  Forest-wide Standard 88: Design and implement structural and nonstructural range improvements to maintain productivity and range condition in addition to benefiting both wildlife and livestock. Locate range structural and nonstructural improvements to encourage livestock movement away from riparian areas (USDA Forest Service 1990, page IV-35).

Other Relevant Mandatory Disclosures There are no irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources that may result from the proposed action or other action alternatives with respect to rangeland management.

Roads This section describes the existing condition and effects of the proposed action on access and travel management of the National Forest System roads in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project planning area. Road maintenance, temporary road construction, and re-opening of closed roads are the proposed activities that would potentially affect access and travel management and maintenance. Road actions related to the forest transportation system are analyzed to ensure that the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project is consistent with Forest Service travel management objectives. Potential effects to the transportation system from the project are assessed within the context of direct, indirect and cumulative effects, and information required for findings under the National Environmental Policy Act. The agency’s top priority is to provide a road system that is responsive to public needs, safe and environmentally sound, and affordable and efficient to manage.

The primary road access to the project planning area is via U.S. Highway 395 and County Road 65. Other main National Forest System access roads are: 15, 1520, 1530, 3925, and 6510. These are all either Maintenance Level 2 or Maintenance Level 3 roads with an asphalt, aggregate or improved surface. This determination was based on the guidelines included in the Forest Level Roads Analysis, dated April 2005 and in the Malheur National Forest-wide Travel Analysis dated 09-2015 as part of the Minimum Road System.

Project level roads analysis strives to meet long-range road density goals established in the Malheur Forest Plan by identifying opportunities to reduce both open road densities and total road densities, while balancing needs for public and administrative access. Efforts focus on reducing the amount of funding needed for road maintenance, reducing road related impacts to fish and wildlife, and reducing the spread of exotic plants and noxious weeds.

Page 181 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Indicators for Assessing Effects The measurement indicators detailed in Table 56 are used for assessing the effects to the transportation system in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project planning area.

Table 56 Resource elements, indicators and measures for assessing effects to roads Resource element Resource indicator Measure Source Malheur LRMP, USDA Access and Travel Roads open/closed for Miles of open/closed Forest Service 1990; Management public access roads USDA Forest Service 2004

Affected Environment Existing Condition In 1908, the Malheur National Forest was established and a slow but steady road-building program began. Most of these roads were established to facilitate fire protection and other administrative duties. A limited number of roads were constructed primarily to expedite recreational use of the Forest. By 1928 there were 383.5 miles of road on the Forest (Mosgrove 1980). This was sufficient, in theory, to allow firefighters to reach any fire reported on the Forest within one hour. The pace of road building increased in the 1930s through the 1980s as larger networks of roads were developed to support commercial timber harvest and, to a lesser extent, recreation, on the Forest. By the late 1980s, over 8,000 miles of road existed on the Malheur National Forest (USDA Forest Service 1990, appendix I). Most roads on the Forest were originally constructed for commercial access purposes including grazing, timber, and mineral extraction. Other roads were developed to access administrative sites, private property, recreation facilities, trailheads, power line corridors, or construction for other administration purposes.

Recent Road Restoration The following road work is scheduled for completion as part of the Burned Area Emergency Response for the Canyon Creek Complex Fire. Work is planned for completion in Fall 2015 and Spring 2016.

Table 57 Recent road restoration Forest Service Description Road number 1516000 Clean culverts, drain ditches, and catchment basins of sediment and debris 1516996 Remove 1 undersized culvert 1516997 Clean culverts, drain ditches, and catchment basins of sediment and debris, Install 1 armored dip 1520000 Clean culverts, drain ditches, and catchment basins of sediment and debris, install 1 rolling dip, install 5 culvert risers 3900875 Install additional cross drains where they will be most efficient and necessary, install 1 armored dip 3900895 Clean culverts, drain ditches, and catchment basins of sediment and debris 3920000 Clean culverts, drain ditches, and catchment basins of sediment and debris, install 1 armored dip, remove 2 undersized culverts 3920868 Install additional cross drains where they will be most efficient and necessary, install 3 armored dips 4920000 Excavate and install 1 riprap armoring in the fill slope at edge of road 6500194 Install 1 armored dip 6500331 Clean culverts, drain ditches, and catchment basins of sediment and debris, install 2 armored dips 6500336 Install 2 Armored Dips 6510000 Clean culverts, drain ditches, and catchment basins of sediment and debris, install 2 armored dips 6510812 Clean culverts, drain ditches, and catchment basins of sediment and debris, install 1 armored dip (not typical needs engineering design), install 1 culvert riser

Page 182 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Within the project boundaries there is a total acreage managed by the Forest Service of 53,500 acres in the East Fork Canyon Creek, Upper Canyon Creek, and Middle Canyon Creek subwatersheds that drain into the John Day River, which equates to approximately 83.6 square miles. The existing total roads are 2.5 miles per square mile for Maintenance Level 1, 2, and 3 roads.

The Forest roads infrastructure application database (INFRA) and GIS) transportation system associated with the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project consists of 387 road segments in the project planning area totaling 210.65 miles, under Forest Service jurisdiction (Table 58). Approximately 1 road totaling 3.82 miles (2 percent) is a Maintenance Level 3 road. Approximately 182 roads totaling 114.97 miles (54 percent) are Maintenance Level 2 roads. Approximately 204 roads totaling 92.39 miles (44 percent) are Maintenance Level 1 roads; these roads were closed to the public under previous NEPA decisions.

Table 58 Transportation system in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project planning area Maintenance level Number of road segments Miles of road Maintenance Level 1 – Closed 204 92.39 Maintenance Level 2 – Open 182 114.97 Maintenance Level 3 – Open 1 3.82 Total 387 210.65

Road maintenance on the Malheur National Forest is based on type of traffic use. Of the three road maintenance levels currently in use, all three levels apply within the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area.

Closed Road – Maintenance Level 1

There are 204 maintenance level (Maintenance Level) 1 road segments shown as being closed in the Forest Service INFRA database. Most of these roads were closed by past NEPA decisions as far back as 1990 and 1992. Approximately 133 of the Maintenance Level 1 roads (66 percent) are closed by either natural vegetation overgrowth or a physical closure. These closures are effective. Approximately 71 of the Maintenance Level 1 roads (34 percent) are open on the ground and being used by the public because there is no physical closure, the existing closure (pole gate) has been damaged, or an earth berm has been breached. When road closure efforts are not effective at eliminating motorized use, it results in detrimental resource impacts and an increase in need for maintenance and associated funding. These roads would be closed as specified in this NEPA decision, and closure could be implemented during this project at any time depending on funding availability.

Maintenance level 1 roads, are roads that have been closed and placed in storage between intermittent uses. The period of storage must exceed 1 year. Basic custodial maintenance is performed to prevent damage to adjacent resources and to perpetuate the road for future resource management needs. Emphasis is normally given to maintaining drainage facilities and runoff patterns. Planned road deterioration may occur at this level. Appropriate traffic management strategies are “prohibit” and eliminate” all traffic. The road is not open to traffic. Roads receiving level 1 maintenance may be of any type, class or construction standard and may be managed at any other maintenance level during the time they are open for traffic. However, while being maintained at level 1, they are closed to vehicular traffic but maybe available and suitable for non-motorized uses. Opening a closed road is normally considered maintenance. The Maintenance Level 1 roads in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project planning area in one of the following three conditions:

 A closed road may have a physical closure, such as an earth berm, pole gate, or be closed naturally by vegetation. These roads are effective closures.

Page 183 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

 A closed road may also be closed with an earth berm or pole gate where the earth berm has been breached or a pole gate has been damaged. These are not effective closures and the roads are being used by the public.  A closed road may have no physical closure or sign indicating the closure. These roads are also being used by the public. Observations on the ground show that most of the maintenance level 1 roads that were temporarily opened and used for fire suppression efforts have been effectively re-closed on the ground. Open Road – Maintenance Level 2

There are 182 Maintenance Level 2 road segments shown as being open in the Forest Service INFRA database. Maintenance level 2 is assigned to roads open for high clearance vehicles. Passenger car traffic, user comfort, and user convenience are not considerations. Traffic is normally minor, usually consisting of one or a combination of administrative, permitted, dispersed recreation or other specialized uses. Motorists should have no expectations of being alerted to potential hazards while driving these roads. Route markers and regulation signs are in place and useable. The road is open to traffic.

The Maintenance Level 2 roads in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project planning area are in either in fair or poor condition as described below:

 Fair condition of the roadbed would have an aggregate, improved, or native surface with good drainage features.  Poor condition of the roadbed would mean there are not enough drainage features and major rutting of the roadway is present. Drainage features such as cross drains and water bars are not always present or not functioning correctly, causing erosion rutting and damaging the road surface.  Poor condition could also be physically closed on the ground by natural vegetation overgrowth or no sign of the designed roadway due to no public or administrative use. Open Road – Maintenance Level 3

There is 1 Maintenance Level 3 road segment shown as being open in the INFRA database. Maintenance level 3 is assigned to roads that are open and maintained for travel by a prudent driver in a standard passenger car. User comfort and convenience are not considered priorities. The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices is applicable. Warning signs and traffic control devices are provided to alert motorists of situations that may violate expectations. Roads in this maintenance level are typically low speed with single lanes and turnouts. Appropriate traffic management strategies are either "encourage" or "accept." "Discourage" or "prohibit" strategies may be employed for certain classes of vehicles or users.

The Maintenance Level 3 road in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project planning area is found to be in the following condition:

 Open, good to fair condition There are 2 private roads accessing 2 forest service roads, totaling 1.5 miles with No Right-Of-Way access. These roads are not needed for this project.

The maintenance needs of local roads (Maintenance Level 2 and 3) are often deferred because funds to maintain roads to standards are unavailable. The overall result is that most of the Forest road system is in a deteriorating condition; this is particularly true for many Maintenance Level 2 roads that remain open despite receiving little maintenance. Most of the roads in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Page 184 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project planning area would need to receive maintenance to meet current road maintenance objectives and classification standards.

Desired Condition The Malheur Forest Plan goal for the transportation system is to plan, design, construct, and maintain a safe and economical transportation system providing efficient access for the movement of people and materials involved in the use and protection of National Forest lands. Maintain roads to the minimum level necessary to meet resource objectives including, but not limited to, objectives for timber harvest and removal, big game habitat needs (including security needs), high quality recreation opportunities, and firewood cutting opportunities.

Forest Service Handbook (FSH) 7709.59 – Road Systems Operations and Maintenance Handbook also provides guidance for road system management and maintenance. Resource management needs are largely based on land resource management plan direction, including management area prescriptions.

Methodology Each road in the project planning area was field checked and the road condition was recorded to reflect existing conditions, immediately post fire. Information sources for transportation analysis include the transportation Geographic Information System (GIS) records which house the spatial data for road locations. An inventory of road attributes for National Forest System roads is maintained on the National Forest through the Infrastructure application (Infra) database. The data is clipped through a process performed by Region 6 Data Resources Management. A complete list of road attributes and definitions of these attributes is located in the project record.

The Forest Level Roads Analysis (2005) and the Forest-wide Travel Analysis (USDA Forest Service 09/2015) analyses were designed to provide the decision-maker with the information needed to develop road systems that are safe and responsive to public needs and desires, are affordable and efficiently managed, have minimal adverse ecological effects on the land, and are more in balance with available funding for needed management actions.

Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis The analysis area for considering the cumulative effects on the transportation system is defined by the project planning area boundary. The existing road system within the project boundary consists of collector, local, and closed roads. The needed transportation system is primarily confined to the project boundary with little or no impact to, on or from adjacent areas. Therefore the project planning area boundary provides a suitable boundary for the analysis of cumulative effects related to the transportation system. In addition there would be a small portion of the existing road system used that is outside the project planning area boundary for log haul.

The time period for measuring cumulative effects is 10 years forward to encompass the time needed to implement and realize the effects of the road actions completed for the project. The time period for measuring cumulative effects includes considerations for the restoration and vegetation of temporary roads and landings. In this report, past activities and events are included in the existing condition description. The current environmental conditions reflect the aggregate impact of all prior human actions and natural events that have affected the environment and might contribute to cumulative effects and are a proxy for the impacts of past actions.

The existing transportation system would facilitate the transportation needs for the project with maintenance and the road actions described under the proposed haul routes (Table 60). Past activities that contributed to the existing condition of the transportation system include timber harvest activities in the

Page 185 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment late 19th and early 20th century and reconstruction over the decades through additional timber harvest and plantation activities. The transportation system as it currently exists has not significantly changed in the past 20 years.

Past, Present, and Foreseeable Activities Relevant to Cumulative Effects Analysis Past, present, and foreseeable activities relevant to the cumulative effects analysis for the transportation system include road closures authorized by past planning decisions and use and maintenance of Forest system roads, which includes road blading, brushing, cleaning ditches, cleaning culverts, etc.

Comparison of Road Activities by Alternatives Several roads-related activities are proposed in the project planning area, including road maintenance, temporary roads, and re-opening closed roads. Table 59 summarizes the effects to the transportation system from implementing these proposed activities.

Table 59 Summary comparison of road activities by alternative Activity Alternative 1 (no action) Alternative 2 (proposed action) Road maintenance for haul 0 miles 50 miles Temporary roads 0 miles 4 miles Closed roads to be temporarily opened for haul 0 miles 10 miles

Environmental Consequences

Alternative 1 – No Action

Direct and Indirect Effects - Open Road – Maintenance Level 2 and 3 Under the no action alternative, all existing maintenance level 2 and 3 (open roads) would remain open and managed in the same condition they are in now. Access would be provided at existing levels, but there would be no opportunity to close or decommission roads or to improve drainage by installing additional drainage dips, waterbars, or cross ditches.

The no action alternative would leave road densities and miles of road unchanged. The road maintenance and motorized access would continue at current levels. This alternative has the least impact on current access but in the future access would be reduced due to funding for road maintenance being spread across a large road system.

Alternative 1 (no action) would not bring this area any closer to meeting the standards and guidelines for road densities, fish habitat, or water quality which is referenced in the Malheur Forest Plan.

Direct and Indirect Effects - Closed Road – Maintenance Level 1 The no action alternative would continue to allow sediment to be delivered into streams at the current level or higher and would remain at the same cost to the federal government to meet road maintenance standards. Alternative 1 would not provide opportunities to do maintenance, which has drastically declined over the past decade.

Cumulative Effects Because there are no direct or indirect effects, there would be no cumulative effects from past and present projects because the no action alternative would not change road densities or miles. The current levels of

Page 186 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project road maintenance and motorized access would continue at current levels. The cumulative effects related to road maintenance costs for the entire road system would remain the same.

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects

Forest Road Activities Roads would be utilized in the project planning area to provide access for treatment activities. Proposed road activities for alternative 2 are as follows:

 4 miles of temporary road construction  40 miles of maintenance level 2 and 3 open roads would be utilized for log haul; see appendix A, maps 4 and 5  10 miles of closed roads (maintenance level 1) would be opened for log haul; roads would be re- closed at completion of project; see appendix A, maps 4 and 5  50 miles of road maintenance on haul routes  7 roads, totaling 7.5 miles, in the project planning area are shown as closed (maintenance level 1) in the road system Infra database; they were closed with previous administrative decisions and a signed decision NEPA document was not found in the project-level research. These roads were discussed by the interdisciplinary team and would remain closed. See Table 62; see appendix A –map 5

Open Road – Maintenance Level 2 and 3 All existing open roads used for log haul would remain open. The condition of haul routes would be improved by maintenance activities associated with timber harvest. Direct beneficial effects from the proposed action would include improved road drainage and surface conditions to provide stable hydrologic function. Maintenance activities would have limited adverse effects on the use of roads, as roads would remain open during project activities. To bring the roads up to a standard needed for commercial haul, road maintenance activities are proposed on approximately 40 miles of road in alternative 2. Access would be provided at existing levels, but there would be no opportunity to decommission roads.

Closed Road – Maintenance Level 1 Implementation of the proposed action would result in a temporary increase in open road densities in and adjacent to the project planning area, during the periods when roads are being used for timber haul and post-harvest/project activities (e.g., silvicultural treatments). Approximately 10 miles of closed roads would be re-opened under this alternative. Closed roads that are opened for project activities would be re- closed long-term with the same type of closure devices that were present before, using earthen berms or gates and roadway slash.

The proposed action would not change road densities or miles. Road maintenance and motorized access would continue at or above current levels.

Temporary Road Construction Temporary road construction would be necessary to access several salvage harvest units. Approximately 4 miles of temporary roads are proposed under alternative 2. All temporary roads would be rehabilitated after use. Rehabilitation would eliminate future use of the road with the objective of restoring hydrologic

Page 187 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment function. Temporary roads would be restored by some combination of the following to ensure that the road has adequate drainage and ground cover to prevent erosion, soil productivity is restored, the road is no longer drivable, and the road is not highly visible after approximately 5 years:

 Waterbarring as needed to restore natural drainage patterns.  Recontouring slopes (removing cut and fill slopes) and pulling berms from the edge of the road back onto the road.  Subsoiling (loosening) compact soils in a “J” pattern to a depth of approximately 16 inches (unless prevented by bedrock or rock content of soils).  Planting or seeding disturbed areas with native species that naturally occur in the project planning area to achieve a minimum of 35 percent ground cover.  Placing slash, boulders, and logs on the roadbed (where available).  Disguising the visible entrance with pieces of cull logs, tops of cut trees, and/or rocks, etc. to prevent vehicle use. There would be no construction of new roads planned.

Open Roads to Be Used for Log Haul

Table 60 Existing open (maintenance level 2 and 3) Forest Service roads to be utilized for log haul Forest Current Service Haul Surface type maintenance Alternative 2 Remarks Road miles level number Passenger No change to 1500000 3.30 Asphalt/ concrete Regular maintenance. vehicle maintenance level This segment of road is outside Passenger No change to 1500000 0.20 Asphalt/ concrete the planning area. Regular vehicle maintenance level maintenance. This segment of road is outside High clearance No change to 1500473 0.21 Native material the planning area. Regular vehicles maintenance level maintenance. This segment of road is outside Crushed aggregate High clearance No change to 1516000 0.02 the project planning area. Regular or gravel vehicles maintenance level maintenance. Crushed aggregate High clearance No change to 1516000 2.01 Regular maintenance. or gravel vehicles maintenance level Crushed aggregate High clearance No change to 1520000 1.36 Regular maintenance. or gravel vehicles maintenance level Crushed aggregate High clearance No change to 1530000 3.39 Regular maintenance. or gravel vehicles maintenance level High clearance No change to 1530072 0.43 Native material Regular maintenance. vehicles maintenance level High clearance No change to 1530499 3.04 Native material Regular maintenance. vehicles maintenance level High clearance No change to 1530500 0.13 Native material Regular maintenance. vehicles maintenance level High clearance No change to 1530501 0.51 Native material Regular maintenance. vehicles maintenance level Regular maintenance. Road does not tie through on the east end, High clearance No change to 1530732 0.32 Native material blocked by category 4 stream and vehicles maintenance level a pile of crushed aggregate rock from Crazy Creek Pit. High clearance No change to 1530733 1.11 Native material Regular maintenance. vehicles maintenance level

Page 188 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Forest Current Service Haul Surface type maintenance Alternative 2 Remarks Road miles level number High clearance No change to 1530734 0.38 Native material Regular maintenance. vehicles maintenance level High clearance No change to 1530737 1.25 Native material Regular maintenance. vehicles maintenance level High clearance No change to 1530754 0.09 Native material Regular maintenance. vehicles maintenance level Crushed aggregate High clearance No change to 3925000 0.02 Regular maintenance. or gravel vehicles maintenance level This segment of road is outside Crushed aggregate High clearance No change to 3925000 0.07 the planning area. Regular or gravel vehicles maintenance level maintenance. This segment of road is outside High clearance No change to 3925000 0.74 Native material the project planning area. Regular vehicles maintenance level maintenance. High clearance No change to 3925000 0.02 Native material Regular maintenance. vehicles maintenance level This segment of road is outside Crushed aggregate High clearance No change to 3925000 0.10 the planning area. Regular or gravel vehicles maintenance level maintenance. Crushed aggregate High clearance No change to 3925000 0.17 Regular maintenance. or gravel vehicles maintenance level Crushed aggregate High clearance No change to 3925000 0.21 Regular maintenance. or gravel vehicles maintenance level This segment of road is outside Crushed aggregate High clearance No change to 3925000 1.00 the planning area. Regular or gravel vehicles maintenance level maintenance. Crushed aggregate High clearance No change to 3925000 0.003 Regular maintenance. or gravel vehicles maintenance level This segment of road is outside High clearance No change to 3925047 0.02 Native material the planning area. Regular vehicles maintenance level maintenance. High clearance No change to 3925047 0.06 Native material Regular maintenance. vehicles maintenance level Crushed aggregate High clearance No change to 3925196 0.03 Regular maintenance. or gravel vehicles maintenance level This segment of road is outside Crushed aggregate High clearance No change to 3925196 0.98 the planning area. Regular or gravel vehicles maintenance level maintenance. Crushed aggregate High clearance No change to 3925196 0.04 Regular maintenance. or gravel vehicles maintenance level This segment of road is outside Crushed aggregate High clearance No change to 3925196 0.40 the planning area. Regular or gravel vehicles maintenance level maintenance. Crushed aggregate High clearance No change to 3925196 0.04 Regular maintenance. or gravel vehicles maintenance level This segment of road is outside Crushed aggregate High clearance No change to 3925196 0.04 the planning area. Regular or gravel vehicles maintenance level maintenance. Regular maintenance, would High clearance No change to 6500194 4.78 Native material need to put in a temporary culvert vehicles maintenance level at milepost 4.7. Improved native High clearance No change to 6500336 3.33 Regular maintenance. material vehicles maintenance level Improved native High clearance No change to 6500840 1.69 Regular maintenance. material vehicles maintenance level Crushed aggregate High clearance No change to 6510000 5.18 Regular maintenance. or gravel vehicles maintenance level Crushed aggregate High clearance No change to 6510812 2.82 Regular maintenance. or gravel vehicles maintenance level

Page 189 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Forest Current Service Haul Surface type maintenance Alternative 2 Remarks Road miles level number Improved native High clearance No change to 6510825 1.01 Regular maintenance. material vehicles maintenance level

Closed Roads to Be Opened For Log Haul Approximately 10 miles of currently closed roads (maintenance level 1) would be opened to facilitate management activities for this project, which meets the intent of these roads’ designation as maintenance level 1 (Table 61). Basic custodial maintenance would be performed to allow for future access and to prevent damage by maintaining adequate drainage. Roads would be re-closed at completion of the project. Currently closed roads that are temporarily opened for project implementation would be closed following project activities. The closures would remain consistent with the intent of the original closure.

Table 61 Existing closed (maintenance level 1) Forest Service roads to be re-opened for log haul Forest Current Service Haul Surface Alternative 2 maintenance Remarks Road miles type (proposed action) level number Native Basic custodial No change to This segment of road is outside the 1500475 0.08 material care (closed) maintenance level planning area. Native Basic custodial No change to Open no physical barrier regular 1500475 0.41 material care (closed) maintenance level maintenance. Native Basic custodial No change to Open no physical barrier, drivable. 1516354 0.15 material care (closed) maintenance level Regular maintenance. Native Basic custodial No change to Open no physical barrier, drivable. 1516370 1.52 material care (closed) maintenance level Regular maintenance. Native Basic custodial No change to Open no physical barrier, drivable. 1516371 1.00 material care (closed) maintenance level Regular maintenance. Native Basic custodial No change to This segment of road is outside the 3925403 0.15 material care (closed) maintenance level planning area. Pulled ditch relief corrugated metal pipes at approximately milepost Native Basic custodial No change to 0.2 and 0.7, no temporary pipe 3925403 0.69 material care (closed) maintenance level needed, natural rolling dip in place. Light to medium reproduction in roadbed, extra brushing (medium). Open, no physical barrier, Native Basic custodial No change to driveable. Regular maintenance. 3925912 0.14 material care (closed) maintenance level This segment of road is outside of the project planning area. Native Basic custodial No change to Open, no physical barrier, 3925912 0.24 material care (closed) maintenance level driveable. Regular maintenance. Pulled corrugated metal pipe at Native Basic custodial No change to approximately milepost 0.2, 6500842 0.51 material care (closed) maintenance level temporary culvert needs to be installed, 24 inch minimum. Native Basic custodial No change to Closed by 6510768 road rock 6510765 0.60 material care (closed) maintenance level berm. Regular maintenance. Closed with rock berm, remove Native Basic custodial No change to 6510768 0.80 and re-install. Regular material care (closed) maintenance level maintenance. Native Basic custodial No change to 6510813 0.07 Closed with earth berm at milepost material care (closed) maintenance level 0.01, remove and re-install after

Page 190 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Forest Current Service Haul Surface Alternative 2 maintenance Remarks Road miles type (proposed action) level number using the remaining portion as a temporary road. Closed with earth berm, remove Native Basic custodial No change to 6510816 0.20 and re-install. Regular material care (closed) maintenance level maintenance. Closed with earth berm, remove Native Basic custodial No change to and re-install. Minor realignment at 6510826 0.22 material care (closed) maintenance level milepost 0.1. The road is only being planned for 0.2 miles of use. Native Basic custodial No change to Open no physical barrier, drivable. 6510827 0.40 material care (closed) maintenance level Regular maintenance. Closed with earth berm, remove Native Basic custodial No change to 6510842 1.32 and re-install. Regular material care (closed) maintenance level maintenance. Native Basic custodial No change to Open no physical barrier, drivable. 6510843 0.57 material care (closed) maintenance level Regular maintenance. Native Basic custodial No change to Open no physical barrier, drivable. 6510844 0.38 material care (closed) maintenance level Regular maintenance. Native Basic custodial No change to Open no physical barrier, drivable. 6510846 0.50 material care (closed) maintenance level Regular maintenance. Improved Basic custodial No change to Open no physical barrier, drivable. 6510847 0.20 native care (closed) maintenance level Regular maintenance. material

Proposed haul roads are subject to change through implementation. Any roads that are added to haul during implementation would have work done as listed in the road maintenance/reconstruction description. Any road work needed that's not listed in the description would be consulted on with Forest Service Specialists. Roads not listed that are to be used would follow all project design criteria outlined in the decision document.

Road Maintenance/Reconstruction The condition of haul routes would be improved by maintenance activities associated with timber harvest. Direct beneficial effects from the proposed action would include improved road drainage and surface conditions. Maintenance activities would have limited adverse effect on the use of roads, as roads would remain open during project activities. Haul routes would include some roads that are currently closed, which would be temporarily opened to accommodate timber haul and other post fire activities, and closed again after post-harvest reforestation activities are completed.

Forest roads used for thinning and product extraction would have road maintenance activities to varying degrees, dependent upon severity of road damage, erosion and sediment production, and designated maintenance level. Because the maintenance work would be commensurate with use, the amount actually accomplished would vary depending on existing road conditions, season of use, and other factors.

Road maintenance activities would bring the roads up to a standard needed for commercial haul. Road maintenance activities are proposed on approximately 48 miles of road, commensurate with commercial use. All of the work needed on proposed haul routes inside and outside of the project planning area is defined as maintenance under 36 CFR 212.1. The following work is included in the maintenance requirements for roads:

Page 191 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

 Blade and shape road including existing drain dips and grade sags  Constructing water bars/cross ditches  Roadside brushing  Removing danger trees  Seeding  Spot rocking in wet area of the roadway  Snow removal  Minor realigning of road junctions  Clean culverts and catch basins  Ditch cleaning  Removing excess material from roadway  Placing fill material for major rutting in the roadway  Installation of minor drainage features  Watering roadway for dust abatement  Clearing and Grubbing of roadway

In addition, reconstruction requirements would be used for roads requiring the following work:

 Major realignment or repair  Constructing drain dips  Construct and install wood pole gate or steel gate closure devices  Widening of road bed to meet safety standards

Rock Pit Material Sources Some roads may require rock for spot rocking wet areas, rocking stream crossings and regular road maintenance. Rock pit material sources are located at, but not limited to:

 Crazy Creek (Township 15 South, Range 33 East, Section 33); Forest Service Road 1530733  Starr Ridge (Township 15 South, Range 31 East, Section 20); Forest Service Road 4920464

Confirmation of Road Closures The following road activities would occur to update the road system in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area. There are no known RS2477 claims for any roads proposed for access changes in the project planning area.

Seven roads, totaling 7.5 miles, in the project planning area are shown as closed (maintenance level 1) in the road system, but do not have an associated signed NEPA decision regarding their closure. These would be closed by this project (Table 62). Closure of roads desired to be kept on the system would occur, but road use would be limited to infrequent management and other permitted activities. Closure may be by a physical barrier or gate, or by regulation. Basic custodial maintenance would be performed for future

Page 192 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project resource access, to prevent damage. Closed roads are to be left in a stable hydrologic state and are to be periodically maintained.

Table 62 Confirmation of road closures Miles in Current Alternative 2 FS Road Beginning Ending Comments/rationale for road planning Maintenance (proposed Number Mile post mile post system changes area Level action) No previous NEPA decision; 1-basic road to be officially closed 1500722 0.00 1.13 1.13 custodial care Close (1) under this decision (closed) document. Prevent damage to vegetation No previous NEPA decision; 1-basic road to be officially closed 1530034 0.00 2.51 2.51 custodial care Close (1) under this decision (closed) document. Prevent damage to vegetation No previous NEPA decision; 1-basic road to be officially closed 1530740 0.00 1.60 1.60 custodial care Close (1) under this decision (closed) document. Prevent damage to vegetation No previous NEPA decision; 1-basic road to be officially closed 1530741 0.00 0.40 0.40 custodial care Close (1) under this decision (closed) document. Prevent damage to vegetation No previous NEPA decision; 1-basic road to be officially closed 1530743 0.00 0.30 0.30 custodial care Close (1) under this decision (closed) document. Prevent damage to vegetation No previous NEPA decision; road to be officially closed 1-basic under this decision 6500839 0.31 1.49 1.18 custodial care Close (1) document. Private; no right (closed) of way access, 2010 MVUM, reduce user conflicts. No previous NEPA decision; road to be officially closed 1-basic under this decision 6510763 1.37 1.79 0.42 custodial care Close (1) document. Private; no right (closed) of way access, 2010 MVUM, reduce user conflicts.

All maintenance level 1 roads that have been previously closed with NEPA, are being reaffirmed to document their closure here now in this document.

Potential Temporary Closure for Cross-Country Travel During the first year of project implementation, Forest Service staff, including researchers from the Rocky Mountain Research Station, would monitor cross-county motor vehicle use within and adjacent to the control areas, proposed study units and treatment units during the period between April 1st and August 30th. If it is determined that cross-country motor vehicle use is impacting woodpecker species within the control/study/treatment units and effecting the research proposals, a temporary forest closure order prohibiting cross-country motor vehicle use within the project control/study/treatment units may be implemented between April 1st and August 30th for up to four years.

Page 193 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Cumulative Effects The direct and indirect effects of the proposed action when combined with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable activities would result in a more effective and better maintained transportation system throughout the entire project boundary.

The cumulative effects of the proposed road maintenance and roads to re-open, combined with foreseeable annual road maintenance activities and road closures would be fewer roads to maintain, less money needed for maintenance, and improved road conditions on open roads for all forest users.

Approximately 92.39 miles of roads in the project planning area are currently designated in the transportation system as closed to vehicular travel based on prior planning decisions. These roads would be closed, as specified in prior NEPA decisions. Current decision and closures would occur during implementation of this project. There would be 92.39 miles of closed roads in the project planning area following implementation under this alternative.

If the temporary cross-country travel closure is implemented, then there could be social effects on the public.

There are no other actions currently occurring or planned within the analysis area that contribute to or appreciably contribute to transportation.

The direct and indirect effects of the proposed action, when combined with past, present and reasonable foreseeable activities, would not significantly impact the Forest Transportation System.

Conclusion

The proposed action alternative is consistent with existing direction, it would include beneficial road management action, and would not significantly impact the Forest Transportation System. It would improve user safety, and provide for a more efficient transportation network. The no action alternative does not comply with existing direction and Forest Wide Travel Analysis recommendations.

Compliance with Forest Plan and Other Relevant Laws, Regulations, and Policies

Alternative 2 would meet Malheur Forest Plan standards for road maintenance. Specific Malheur Forest Plan standards and desired future conditions are:

 Forest-Wide Standard 157: Plan, design, construct and maintain roads and trails to the minimum level required to meet integrated land management objectives (i.e., the needs of all resources). Minimize tie-through roads (Forest Plan, p. IV-42). Recreation and Scenic Values This section contains an analysis of existing recreation and scenery conditions in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project planning area and an analysis of effects from proposed activities on recreation facilities, recreation activities, and scenery.

Indicators for Assessing Effects The resource indicators in this recreation and scenic values report are: recreation opportunity spectrum, recreation opportunities, public access to recreation, and scenic integrity.

Page 194 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Table 63 Resource elements, indicators and measures for assessing effects to recreation and scenic values Resource element Resource indicator Measure Source Malheur Forest Plan Management Area 10 Recreation opportunity Recreation Impacts to ROS classes Standard 1; Malheur Forest spectrum Plan Management Area 11 Standard 1 Changes to recreation opportunities in the Canyon Malheur Forest Plan Forest Recreation Recreation opportunities Creek Complex Fire Salvage Goals 1-7 Project planning area Public access to Temporal changes to Malheur Forest Plan Forest Recreation recreation recreation access Goals 1-7 Malheur Forest Plan Forest Scenic quality and Changes to scenic integrity Scenic integrity Goals 9-10; Forest Service visual resources level Manual 2380.3.4

Affected Environment - Recreation

Methodology The Malheur National Forest uses recreation opportunity spectrum (ROS) classes to develop management direction for recreation on the Forest. This analysis would use the ROS classes defined by the Malheur Forest Plan as the basis of this assessment. Geographic information system (GIS) information was used to query and analyze data and create maps displaying location of dispersed campsites, trails, management units, fuelwood gathering, and analysis of Malheur Forest Plan ROS mapping and proposed treatments. In addition, field work and observed visitor activities from the recreation specialist are incorporated to confirm GIS analysis, and to provide perspective on local forest activities.

Existing Condition

Special Features

Strawberry Mountain Wilderness

The Strawberry Mountain Wilderness was designated under the Wilderness Act of 1964. It was more than doubled to 69,350 acres in 1984 as part of the Oregon Wilderness Act. The 1964 Wilderness Act (Section 2c) defines wilderness as “an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain without permanent improvements or human habitation, which is protected and managed so as to preserve its natural conditions and which generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of man's work substantially unnoticeable, and has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation.”

The rugged Strawberry Mountain Wilderness ranges in elevation from 4,600 to 9,038 feet at the top of Strawberry Mountain. The ecologically diverse Strawberry Mountain Wilderness contains five of the seven major life zones of North America. It is home to native wildlife populations of Rocky Mountain elk, mule deer, antelope, big horn sheep, mountain goat, black bear, cougar, and bald eagle. The headwaters of several important watersheds begin within the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness. An east- west hydrologic divide separates the Strawberry Mountain range into two distinct parts. Canyon Creek, Pine Creek, Indian Creek, Strawberry Creek, and Roberts Creek drain into the John Day River, while Big Creek, Lake Creek, and Bear Creek drain into the Malheur and Silvies rivers. Numerous wildfires have occurred within the eastern portion of this wilderness over the past 25 years. The western half of the

Page 195 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment wilderness remained largely unburned before the Canyon Creek Complex Fire swept across it, which accounts for the more severe burning in the western portion.

For recreation, the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness offers dense forest, open ridges with scenic vistas, alpine lakes, and waterfalls. Recreationists enjoy a variety of experiences through hunting, fishing, day hiking, backpacking, and camping. The wilderness contains a network of trails throughout that provide access to these activities. Approximately 20,114 acres of the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness overlaps the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project planning area.

Wildlife Management Unit

The Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project planning area lies within the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Wildlife Management Unit of Murderer’s Creek (Unit 46). Hunting is one of the primary recreation uses in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project planning area.

Recreational Seasons of Use The typical peak use period in the summer is late May to early September. For hunting, peak use is September through November. Outside of summer, the usage patterns are impacted by the presence or absence of snow and its limitations on access. Camping, fishing, and other dispersed activities such as woodcutting, will often continue beyond the typical seasons unless snow makes motorized access impractical to the area. Recreational use generally declines in the project planning area after the summer season, except during deer and elk hunting seasons. During hunting season, hunting and related camping becomes the dominant recreational activity in the project planning area. In the winter season, snowmobiling becomes the dominant recreational activity.

Recreation Facilities and Activities Like most recreational activities in the Blue Mountains, recreation on the Malheur National Forest is focused around where there is water or access to trails or dispersed recreation. The most popular recreation activities on the Malheur National Forest are driving for pleasure, hunting, hiking and walking, viewing wildlife, relaxing, primitive camping, and viewing natural features (National Visitor Use Monitoring [NVUM] 2009). All of these activities have been available within the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project planning area.

Approximately 62 miles of designated trail exists within the project planning area. This mileage includes both dedicated trail, and trail that is codesignated with a road. There are several recreation sites, campgrounds, and trailheads and numerous trails within the project planning area. Damage to recreation sites and trails from the Canyon Creek Complex Fire varied from no impact to high severity fire that damaged recreation facilities and trail treads, removing organic matter within and outside the trail prism. Each of the recreation sites, with the exception of Starr campground, experienced some level of damage requiring removal of hazard trees and replacement of sign boards; and each has received a sign that warns the public of post-fire hazards in the area. The following is a list of recreation sites and trails that are either entirely or partially within, or adjacent to the project planning area:

 Starr Campground, located on the western project boundary; the campground’s facilities were not affected by the Canyon Creek Complex fire.  Starr Bowl Snow Play Area, which is adjacent to the western project boundary, contains a sledding hill, some fencing, signage, two toilet buildings and a warming cabin. The fire burned up to the edge of the site with low severity. Hazard tree dangers have been mitigated. The fence, damaged by the fire and suppression activities, has been repaired.

Page 196 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

 Canyon Meadows Campground was heavily burned with mostly high severity fire by the Canyon Creek Complex. The campground contained two toilet buildings, four campsites, signage, picnic tables, and fire rings. The signage and both toilet buildings completely burned. The toilet vaults have been filled in as a part of BAER hazard mitigation. The one surviving picnic table and the fire rings have been removed for use in other locations. As a flood potential mitigation measure, the Canyon Meadows dam was removed, completely eliminating the reservoir that the campground was historically built around. The fire that burned through the campground was intense. It is unlikely that more than just a few trees will survive. Most of the trees would need to be removed in order to make the campground safe for visitors. The suitability of the site as a campground location is now low.  Wickiup Campground is within the fire corridor along FSR 1500000. Although the campsites themselves did not burn, the fire burned down the hill into the campground with low and moderate severity on the south side. The results of the fire are evident, as many hazard trees were removed from the south edge of the campground. The facilities at Wickiup campground are all intact.  Joaquin Miller Trailhead sustained low to moderate severity fire damage to much of the surrounding vegetation. However the facilities, which consist of the parking area and the trailhead sign, remain intact.  East Fork Canyon Creek Trailhead was completely burned with moderate severity by the Canyon Creek Complex fire. The trailhead contained a large parking area, a set of horse corrals, hitching posts, and trailhead signage. The facilities were all completely burned. Post-fire hazard tree mitigation has taken place at the trailhead.  Table Mountain Trailhead was partially burned with moderate severity. The trailhead contained a small parking area, two horse corrals, a retaining wall, and trailhead signage. One horse corral remains, as well as part of the retaining wall and the trailhead signage. There are a few hazard trees to mitigate before re-opening the site to public access.  Buckhorn Meadows Trailhead was within a low severity burn area. The trailhead facilities, which consist of a parking area, a horse corral, and trailhead signage, remain intact.  Snowmobile trails (15 total miles within the project boundary): o Snowmobile S-5100 trail which goes over FSR 4920000 on the west end of the project planning area, weaving in and out of the project planning area 8 times for a total of 1.9 miles within the project boundary. o Snowmobile S-5096 trail which goes over FSR 3925196 on the west end, FSR 1530000 on the east end, and FSR 3925000, FSR 1500000, FSR 1520000 in between. The trail weaves in and out of the project boundary 29 times for a total of 11.1 miles within the project boundary. o Snowmobile S-5220 trail which goes over FSR 1516000 from Wickiup campground to the southern project boundary for 2.0 miles o Snowmobile S-5103 trail which goes over FSR 3925000 from its junction with FSR 3925196 to the southern project boundary. It is 0.02 miles long within the project planning area. Summer motorized use for both highway legal and non-highway legal vehicles (OHVs) is currently allowed on most Maintenance Level 2 roads within the project planning area.

Cross-country Ski trails (0.3 miles within the project boundary):

o Starr Ski (XC-5085) trail: 0.02 miles within the project boundary. o Eagle Ski (XC-5088) trail: 0.12 miles within the project boundary.

Page 197 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

o Tenderfoot Ski (XC-5091) trail: 0.16 miles within the project boundary. Short segments of these three cross-country ski trails fall within the project boundary. All three are in the vicinity of Starr campground and Starr Bowl snow play area. All three of these cross-country ski trails follow over roads.

 Bicycle trails (15.6 miles within the project boundary): o Table Mountain Loop (B-5042) trail is a loop bicycle trail that follows over FSR 1500000, FSR 1518000, and FSR 1518663, which leads back to FSR 1500000. The entire loop trail lies within the project boundary. o Crazy Creek Loop (B-5043) trail follows over FSR 1500000, FSR 1520000, and FSR 1530000 within the project boundary for 6.8 miles. o Starr Ridge (B-5044) trail follows over FSR 3925196 on the west end and FSR 3925000 on the east end. The trail weaves in and out of the project boundary 22 times for a total of 4.3 miles within the project boundary. All three of these bicycle trails are co-designations of bicycle riding routes that follow along forest roads. The bicycle trail mileage that comes from open and closed roads co-designated as trail was not designed for, nor improved, for bicycle use. There is no on site indication that the trails exist.

 Strawberry Mountain Wilderness foot/horse trails (30.7 miles within the project boundary): o Pine Creek (201) Trail lies within the project boundary for 2.8 miles across 6 segments. o Tamarack Creek (202) Trail: the entire 1.7 mile length of Tamarack Creek Trail lies within the project boundary. o Buckhorn Meadows (205) Trail: the entire 2.6 mile length of Buckhorn Meadows Trail lies within the project boundary. o East Fork Canyon Creek (211) Trail: the entire 9.5 mile length of East Fork Canyon Creek Trail lies within the project boundary. o Table Mountain (217) Trail: the entire 6.2 mile length of Table Mountain Trail lies within the project boundary. o Canyon Mountain (218) Trail: 2.7 miles of the Canyon Mountain Trail lies within the project boundary across 3 segments. o Joaquin Miller (219) Trail: 4.3 miles of the Joaquin Miller Trail lies within the project boundary across 16 segments. o Table Mountain A (5000) Trail: the entire 0.9 mile length of Table Mountain A Trail lies within the project boundary. In addition to the developed recreation sites, the project planning area includes 59 known dispersed recreation campsites. Of those 59 dispersed sites, 42 are in the Wilderness. The remaining 17 sites are along roads. All but one of the 17 are in the southeast portion of the project planning area, along roads, and set in a Roaded Natural Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) area.

Recreational Opportunity Spectrum The Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) is a description of various attributes that contribute to a particular recreational setting. The ROS describes recreational settings in terms of the “combination of physical, biological, social, and managerial conditions that give value to a place” (Clark and Stankey

Page 198 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

1979). ROS categories are not binding direction for the area, but are, instead, guidance for the development of future recreational facilities. Changes in ROS settings may occur over time as a result of Forest Management Practices, and should be monitored for this. The ROS settings that apply to the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project include:

 Roaded Natural – Visual Corridors (Management Area 14) are to be managed as roaded natural: this is the setting for 45 percent of the project planning area (23,989 acres). The “area is characterized by predominately natural-appearing environment with moderate evidences of the sights and sounds of humans. Such evidences usually harmonize with the natural environment. Interaction among users may be low to moderate, but with evidence of other users prevalent. Resource modification and utilization practices are evident, but harmonize with the natural environment. Conventional motorized use is provided for in construction standards and design of facilities.” (USDA Forest Service 1982)  Roaded Modified – General Forest and Rangeland (Management Area 1 and 2) and the majority of Big-Game Winter Range Maintenance (Management Area 4A) are to be managed as roaded modified; this is the setting for 19 percent of the project planning area (10,231 acres). This “area is characterized by a setting that is heavily modified by human activity. Access is generally easy for highway vehicles. The setting is generally the result of intensive commodity production. There are no size criteria. Concentration of users is low, but there is considerable evidence of others. Users have a moderate degree of isolation from the sights and sounds of other people.” (USDA Forest Service 1982)  Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized – This ROS setting is primarily in the wilderness portion of the project planning area, making up 36 percent of the project planning area (18,973 acres). This “area is characterized by a predominately natural or natural-appearing environment of moderate to large size. Interaction between users is low, but there is often evidence of other users. The area is managed in such a way that minimum on-site controls and restrictions may be present, but are subtle. Motorized use is not permitted.” (USDA Forest Service 1982).

Wilderness Recreation Opportunity Spectrum The wilderness as a whole, is managed for two Wilderness Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (WROS) classes. The “Pristine” class, which encompasses approximately 6,870 acres north of Berry Creek around Canyon Mountain, is not part of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project. The remaining 62,480 wilderness acres offer “Primitive” wilderness opportunities. Each WROS class has distinct management goals and standards in terms of physical/biological objectives, social setting objectives, and the desired managerial setting (USDA Forest Service 1990). Due to its distance from urban population centers, opportunities for solitude in the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness are numerous in each of the two WROS classes.

Desired Condition For recreation, the goal of the Malheur National Forest is to encourage public participation and partnerships, provide interpretation, information, and education on land management and ecological principles, and to provide a range of high quality opportunities and settings which are consistent with public demand for a variety of activities and compatible with a forest environment, including safe and accessible developed recreation facilities and a diverse system of trails.

Wilderness  Manage the Strawberry Mountain… wilderness to preserve the wilderness character in conformance with the Wilderness Act of 1964 and the Oregon Wilderness Act of 1984 (USDA Forest Service 1990, page IV-16).

Page 199 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Dispersed Recreation  Construct, reconstruct, and manage trails to protect the resources and meet the objectives of each ROS class (USDA Forest Service 1990, page IV-13).

Developed Recreation  Manage the following 20 campgrounds as developed facilities: Canyon Meadows, Starr, and Wickiup… (USDA Forest Service 1990, page IV-14).  Where the need is identified, upgrade, replace, and add facilities. Consider expansion or addition of new facilities where recreation demand and environmental concerns warrant (USDA Forest Service 1990, page IV-14).

Forest-Wide Standards  Forest-wide Standard 7: Recognize undeveloped campsites, hunter camps, or areas where concentrated recreation use occurs as being significant in providing dispersed recreation opportunities in a roaded setting. Manage these areas for partial retention (USDA Forest Service 1990, page IV- 25).  Forest-wide Standard 11: Construct, relocate, or protect designated system trails and facilities during management activities (USDA Forest Service 1990, page IV-25).  Forest-wide Standard 157: Plan, design, construct and maintain roads and trails to the minimum level required to meet integrated land management objectives (i.e., the needs of all resources). Minimize tie-through roads (USDA Forest Service 1990, page IV-42).  Forest-wide Standard 166: Prepare and update the Forest travel map annually. Update and reprint the travel map as necessary (USDA Forest Service 1990, page IV-43).

Environmental Consequences

Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis The spatial context for this analysis of direct, indirect, and cumulative effects is the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project planning area. The effects to the recreation resources can be short-term and long-term. Short-term is usually less than 5 years, and long-term is 5 to 50 years.

Past, Present, and Foreseeable Activities Relevant to Cumulative Effects Analysis Past, present and reasonably foreseeable activities that are relevant to recreation are in Table 11 at the beginning of this chapter.

Alternative 1 – No Action

Direct and Indirect Effects Recreational access would have a slight improvement in the short-term by not taking action, as there would not be any recreation facility closures due to treatment activity. Recreational safety would be negatively affected for both the short-term and long-term due to higher risks associated with danger trees. As mortality due to fire damage would increase over time, so too would the risk to the public. Dispersed recreation in the areas of the treatment units would continue to be at risk due to abundance of standing dead trees.

The negative safety effects of the no action alternative are lessened by the following factors:

Page 200 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

 Except for Joaquin Miller and East Fork Canyon Creek trailheads, the developed recreation facilities are not located within treatment units. Therefore, the treatments would not affect the immediate surroundings of most developed recreation facilities.  Some of the danger tree hazards have already been mitigated through the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Hazard Tree Mitigation Project. The area around Canyon Meadows campground and Buckhorn Meadows trailhead have received a considerable amount of hazard tree removal through the project.

Cumulative Effects In evaluating the action on Table 11, chapter 3, it is anticipated that no action would not create a cumulative effect.

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects Salvage Treatment and Logging System Activities

Under alternative 2 approximately 1,210 acres would be treated across 34 treatment units. This alternative would have a direct effect on recreation due to activities such as cutting, skidding, and decking logs, distributing non-commercial woody material and logging slash, and the operation of heavy machinery within the vicinity of developed recreation sites, trails, and dispersed campsites. Recreation use across the Forest often involves using travel routes while exploring more than one location. Therefore, it is expected that the typical visitor may be exposed to some degree of harvest and treatment activity while traveling through the area. Visitors to the area could experience increased noise levels from machinery and logging activities, and delays due to traffic flaggers as well as an increase in road traffic. In periods following the treatment of units, visitors could experience the presence of stumps and slash piles until removed. Ground disturbance from activities such as skid trails and temporary roads would be much less evident after 2 to 5 years. Visual signs of slash piles at landings would mostly go unnoticed within the backdrop of a fire burned landscape such as that within the Canyon Creek Complex Fire planning project.

There often is increased dispersed visitor use in burned areas for harvesting mushrooms for both personal and commercial use. If yields are noticeably productive, increased dispersed and developed recreation sites may experience higher than normal occupancies. Facilities such as Starr and Wickiup campgrounds would be particularly accommodating for parking and access to desirable mushroom harvests. Maintaining open public access to these campgrounds would potentially benefit more visitors. Although the developed facilities at Canyon Meadows campground were destroyed by the fire, if opened it could accommodate mushroom harvesters as a dispersed camping site. August 27, 2016, is the opening day of archery season. There could be a short-term displacement of deer and elk due to the activities. If treatment activities extend near or past the opening of archery season, there could be a decrease in hunting opportunities within the vicinity of the treatment units.

Users of Joaquin Miller, East Fork Canyon Creek, Table Mountain, and Buckhorn Meadows trailheads could be inconvenienced by the treatment activities while traveling to the trailheads. Users of the Joaquin Miller Trailhead and the East Fork Canyon Creek Trailhead would experience a temporary displacement during treatment activities on units 1 through 11, due to temporary safety closures. The direct effects of the treatment activities and associated noises, the immediate evidence of ground disturbances, and recreation area closures could detract from the recreation experience. Noise and visibility of treatment activities adjacent to the wilderness (several treatment units in study units 1 and 2) could impact opportunities for solitude and isolation from sights and sounds of humans. Nearby wilderness recreation experiences may be changed in the short-term by the proposed activities.

Page 201 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Treatment would improve public safety, reducing danger trees by treating units that are near high density use associated with developed recreation facilities. Some dispersed site users may be temporarily displaced due to loss of access during the treatment activities. This could increase camping use at other dispersed sites. Visual evidence of treatment activities may be apparent to the casual forest visitor at or near some of these camping areas.

All of the treatment units fall within land classified as either Roaded Modified or Roaded Natural in the Recreation Opportunity Spectrum. Roaded Modified is characterized by a setting that is heavily modified by human activity and generally the result of intensive commodity production. The proposed treatment activities fall below that threshold, and therefore remain compatible with the Roaded Modified setting. Roaded Natural is characterized by a predominately natural-appearing environment with moderate evidences of the sights and sounds of humans, where resource modification and utilization practices are evident, but harmonize with the natural environment. The project design criteria for alternative 2 (see appendix B) were created in part, to ensure that the treatment activities would harmonize with the natural environment, and remain compatible with the Roaded Natural setting. There would be no treatment activities within the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness. The wilderness recreation opportunity spectrum (WROS) class for this area would not be affected.

Tree planting would minimally affect recreational experience in the short-term, it could affect the recreational experience in the long-term as the trees grow.

Forest Road Activities

Recreational use of forest roads would be minimally affected by forest road activities in the project planning area. No currently open roads would be closed as part of the project, however 7.5 miles of currently closed roads, without prior NEPA documentation, would be confirmed as closed under this project. Recreational driving and access would benefit due to road maintenance that would be needed for haul routes. Road maintenance for hauling would occur on 50 miles of maintenance level 2 and 3 open roads. Additional road activities for treatment activities would be 4 miles of temporary road construction and 10 miles of closed road that would be temporarily opened for hauling. Those temporary actions would have minimal impact on recreation.

Research Activities

Recreational cross-country motor vehicle use could be affected by the research within the project planning area. A temporary forest closure order prohibiting cross-country motor vehicle use within the project study and control units would be implemented between April 1st and August 30th for four years, which would limit motorized recreational use of the affected area. There would not be any other effects to recreation from the research proposals within the project planning area.

Conclusion

All of the potential negative effects to recreation due to the proposed activities in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage planning project would be short-term. However, there would be long-term benefits and perceived benefits to safety due to a reduction in danger trees, and benefits to access due to road maintenance.

Page 202 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Cumulative Effects Access and Dispersed Recreation

Reasonably foreseeable future activities in the project planning area that have a potential to affect recreationists include road closures. Road closures would reduce motorized access to areas where visitors could drive, view scenery, and participate in other dispersed recreation activities. Once the Travel Management Plan is implemented, motorized cross country travel may be prohibited across a portion of the project planning area, where it is not already prohibited. The distance that cross-country travel may be allowed from open routes to existing dispersed camp sites would vary by alternative considered in the travel management analysis. Existing dispersed sites in riparian areas may also have a setback distance from the stream where motorized access may be restricted. As the project planning area changes over time, visitor demographics and the activities they pursue may change along with it. It is likely that dispersed camping sites would change over time along with visitor patterns. New sites are likely to be created, while existing sites become less used. With travel management plan implementation, access would be maintained to developed recreation sites and trailheads.

Hunting

Due to Canyon Creek Complex fire suppression activities and related closures during the 2015 hunting season, the proposed treatment activities would make it the second year in a row that hunting was impacted in the area. Hunting in the area could decrease in the short-term due not only to treatment activities, but to lack of forage for big game animals. As ground cover grows, it would provide more forage for big game animals, and hunting would become more desirable as the big game animals return. For that reason, hunting is likely to increase in the burned areas over the next several years. Mushroom hunting is expected to increase in the near short-term. Tree planting would have minimal cumulative effects to hunting, potentially decreasing forage and increasing cover in the long-term.

Recreation Facilities

The dam at Canyon Meadows campground was removed in 2015, permanently altering the recreational environment at Canyon Meadows campground. However, restoration of Canyon Meadows campground is likely to occur. The vault toilet would likely be replaced with a fire resistant concrete structure, and sites with picnic tables and fire rings would be reestablished. A re-vegetation plan would likely be included in the restoration. Renovation of trailheads and trailhead facilities within the project planning area is a foreseeable future activity. Recreation site and wilderness trail maintenance is ongoing. Through the Canyon Creek Complex Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) project, funding has been provided for erosion control work on the Joaquin Miller, East Fork Canyon Creek, and Table Mountain trails in 2016. The proposed activities within the project planning area are distinctly separate from and would not compound with the effects of the above potential recreation related actions. Therefore, in the absence of other unforeseen actions or events, recreation opportunities would continue to be available within the project planning area at current levels, and existing ROS classes would remain the same.

Conclusion

Cumulative effects of the proposed actions are not likely to have adverse or substantial effects to the recreation opportunities or experiences. There may be some short-term changes to recreational activities while treatments are performed, but there are many alternative locations for forest visitors to seek opportunities. Displacement of recreation activities would be short-term and minimal. Removal of danger trees and keeping road access open would have the greatest positive effect for the majority of public visitors.

Page 203 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Affected Environment – Scenic Quality and Visual Resources

Methodology The Malheur National Forest uses scenic integrity objectives and sensitivity levels to manage the scenic quality of the landscape within visual corridors. The Malheur Forest Plan defines visual corridors and outlines the scenic integrity objectives and sensitivity levels for each of them. The indication of effects of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project on scenery is determined by an analysis of changes to scenic integrity. To determine these effects, the Forest Service’s Scenery Management System principles are applied to indicate direct, indirect, and cumulative changes to the project planning area’s scenic landscape character as a result of the proposed actions. These changes are measured using criteria established by the Forest Service’s Landscape Aesthetics, A Handbook for Scenery Management, Agriculture Handbook 701 (USDA Forest Service 1995) and National Forest Landscape Management Volume 2, Agriculture Handbook Number 462 (USDA Forest Service 1974). Geographic information system (GIS) information was used to query and analyze data and create maps displaying location of viewsheds, management areas, fire boundaries, and analysis of Forest Plan visual corridor mapping and proposed treatments. In addition, field work and observed visitor activities from the recreation specialist are incorporated to confirm GIS analysis, and to provide perspective on local forest activities.

Existing Condition People are concerned about the quality of their environment, including aesthetic values of landscapes, particularly scenery and spiritual values. Research has shown that high-quality scenery, especially scenery related to natural-appearing forests, enhances people's lives and benefits society. Research findings support the logic that scenic quality and naturalness of the landscape directly enhance human well-being, both physically and psychologically, and contribute to other important human benefits. Specifically, these benefits include people's improved physiological well-being as an important by-product of viewing interesting and pleasant natural appearing landscapes with high scenic diversity. The benefits of high- quality scenery are numerous despite the fact that a dollar value is seldom assigned to it (USDA Forest Service 1995). Viewing scenery is one of the most popular recreation activities on the Malheur National Forest (National Visitor Use Monitoring [NVUM] 2009).

This section addresses the existing post-fire scenic quality of the Canyon Creek Fire Salvage Project planning area. Ecological unit descriptions, known as corridor viewsheds or visual corridors in the Malheur Forest Plan, consist of the visible and potentially visible landscapes along major travel routes where the traveling public has a medium to high sensitivity to the scenery. They are to be managed with primary consideration given to their scenic quality and the growth of large diameter trees (USDA Forest Service 1990). The visual corridors include all of the foreground (up to ½ mile from the viewer) and middleground (up to 4 miles from the foreground) areas visible and potentially visible from the primary roads that go through and define them.

Scenery Management System In 1995, the Forest Service adopted the Scenery Management System for the inventory and analysis of the aesthetic value of National Forest Lands. The Scenery Management System (SMS) evolved from and replaces the Visual Management System (VMS), which was published in 1974 (USDA Forest Service 1974). While the essence of the system remains essentially intact and still supported by current research, terminology has changed and the system has been expanded to incorporate updated research findings (USDA Forest Service 1995). The Malheur Forest Plan, published in 1990, uses outdated VMS terminology. Therefore, while writing this report in SMS terminology, for congruence of meaning, reference has been made to VMS terminologies where the differing terminologies directly correlate.

Page 204 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

The Effects of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire on Scenic Quality Fire is considered a natural ecological process. Due to fire suppression and lack of a realistic low intensity fire regime, some of the pre-Canyon Creek Complex fire stands in the visual corridors were dense and the shade-tolerant understories were over-stocked, suppressing the growth of larger trees such as ponderosa pine, western larch, and Douglas-fir. The depth of view for those traveling through the visual corridors was limited in places to the immediate foreground of the landscape due to vegetation density. Generally, areas previously burned in recent history experienced lower burn severity or were unburned. The patchwork burning pattern that the Canyon Creek Complex fire took has left some areas with the pre-fire conditions intact. In high and moderate severity burn areas, the fire resulted in a change in structural stage composition, and a loss of key components of the ecosystem and dominant scenic attributes such as stands of large ponderosa pine. In those areas, the effects of the fire have significantly altered the landscape. Visible in the foreground and middleground are burned trees, blackened soil, and a lack of understory. The foreground view has been opened up, but to a view of dead and dying trees. In some middleground locations, rock outcrops and other interesting features have become visible. Increased erosion has occurred and will continue for several years. The watershed response of the Canyon Creek Complex fire has included rill and gully erosion in drainages and on steep slopes within the burned areas, and allows higher chance of flash floods with increased peak flows and sediment deposition (Kwan et al. 2015).

Landscape Character and Scenic Integrity Landscape character (characteristic landscape in VMS) is a combination of the scenic attributes that make each landscape identifiable or unique. Landscape character creates a "sense of place," and describes the image of an area. The landscape character description is used as a reference for the scenic integrity of all lands. Scenic integrity indicates the degree of intactness and wholeness of the landscape character; conversely, scenic integrity is a measure of the degree of visible disruption of the landscape character. Human alterations can sometimes raise or maintain integrity. More often it is lowered, depending on the degree of deviation from the character valued for its aesthetic appeal (USDA Forest Service 1995).

Scenic Integrity Levels and Scenic Integrity Objectives A landscape with very minimal visual disruption is considered to have high scenic integrity. Those landscapes having increasingly discordant relationships among scenic attributes are viewed as having diminished scenic integrity. Visual corridors are managed to meet specific scenic integrity levels and scenic integrity objectives (visual quality levels and visual quality objectives in VMS). The fire did not change the scenic integrity levels (and objectives) because they are tied to management areas and resource features. Upon adoption of a management plan, the landscape character description becomes the goal and the scenic integrity levels become scenic integrity objectives (USDA Forest Service 1995). They are ranked on a scale ranging from Very High Scenic Integrity to Unacceptably Low Scenic Integrity (See Table 64). The following scenic integrity objective levels are present in the visual corridors of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project:

 High Scenic Integrity (Retention): These objectives are met when the valued landscape character “appears intact”. Deviations may be present but must repeat the form, line, color, texture, and pattern common to the landscape character so completely and at such scale that they are not evident.  Moderate Scenic Integrity (Partial Retention): These objectives are met when valued landscape character "appears slightly altered”. Noticeable deviations must remain visually subordinate to the landscape character being viewed.  Low Scenic Integrity (Modification): These objectives are met when valued landscape character "appears moderately altered”. Deviations begin to dominate the valued landscape character being

Page 205 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

viewed but they borrow valued attributes such as size, shape, edge effect, and pattern of natural openings, vegetative type changes or architectural styles outside the landscape being viewed. They should not only appear as valued character outside the landscape being viewed but compatible or complimentary to the character within (USDA Forest Service 1995).

Table 64 Scenic integrity levels, visual quality levels, and scenic integrity objectives Scenic integrity U.S. Highway 395 Wilderness Loop Canyon Creek Visual quality level level visual corridor visual corridor visual corridor Very high Preservation (unaltered) High (appears Retention Foreground Foreground unaltered) Moderate (slightly Partial Retention Middleground Middleground Foreground altered) Low (moderately Modification Middleground altered) Very low (heavily Maximum

altered) Modification Unacceptably low

Constituent Analysis and Concern Level (Sensitivity Level in VMS) Concern or Sensitivity Levels are a measure of people's concern for the scenic quality of the National Forests (USDA Forest Service 1974). Constituent analysis serves as a guide to perceptions of attractiveness, helps identify special places, and helps to define the meaning people give to the subject landscape. Constituent analysis leads to a determination of the relative importance of aesthetics to the public; this importance is expressed as a concern level. Sites, travel routes, special places, and other areas are assigned a concern level value of 1, 2, or 3 to reflect the relative High, Medium, or Low importance of aesthetics (USDA Forest Service 1995). In the Malheur Forest Plan, visual corridors are ranked by these concern (sensitivity) levels. The U.S. Highway 395 and Wilderness Loop visual corridors are sensitivity level 1. The Canyon Creek visual corridor is sensitivity level 2.

Ecological Unit Descriptions (Visual Corridors) There are three visual corridors located within the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area. Between the three visual corridors, the project planning area contains 9,070 acres of foreground and 9,422 acres of middleground. The following descriptions of the visual corridors pertain to the portions of the corridors that lie within the project boundary.

The U.S. Highway 395 visual corridor surrounds U.S. Highway 395 from the Malheur National Forest boundary on the north end, to the project boundary at Starr campground on the south end. It contains 2,403 acres of foreground and 4,349 acres of middleground. The foreground scenic integrity level is high (retention), and the middleground scenic integrity level is moderate (partial retention). The scenic integrity objective (desired visual condition in the Forest Plan) is moderate (slightly altered). The emphasis is to maintain and enhance the scenery for travelers along U.S. Highway 395 and to maintain the large tree appearance. Visitor concern (sensitivity) is high along U.S. Highway 395 because it is a major travel route between John Day and Burns. The U.S. Highway 395 visual corridor was highly impacted by the fire. Much of the corridor’s foreground and middleground within the project planning area experienced the burn conditions that are described above. The immediate foreground has already been moderately altered by roadside salvage and hazard tree removal. In the middleground, alterations to the landscape are highly evident due to a lack of vegetation screening.

The Wilderness Loop visual corridor surrounds County Road 65 and FSR 1500000 from U.S. Highway 395 to the southeast project boundary. It contains 4,349 acres of foreground and 7,136 acres of

Page 206 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project middleground. The foreground scenic integrity level is high (retention), and the middleground scenic integrity level is moderate (partial retention). The scenic integrity objective (desired visual condition in the Forest Plan) is moderate (slightly altered). The emphasis is to maintain and enhance the scenery for travelers along County Road 65 and FSR 1500000, and to maintain the large tree appearance. Visitor concern (sensitivity) is high through this corridor because it is a major travel route from U.S. Highway 395 into the Malheur National Forest, Logan Valley, and the south side of the Strawberry Mountain wilderness. This Wilderness Loop visual corridor was highly impacted by the fire. The fire followed a patch-work pattern through much of the corridor, but a significant portion of the corridor’s foreground experienced high tree mortality. The immediate foreground has already been slightly altered by roadside salvage and hazard tree removal. In the middleground, alterations to the landscape are highly evident due to a lack of vegetation screening.

The Canyon Creek visual corridor surrounds FSR 1520000 from 1500000 to Buckhorn Meadows trailhead. It contains 2,608 acres of foreground and 0 acres of middleground, and is completely contained within the project planning area. The foreground and middleground scenic integrity levels are moderate (partial retention) and low (modification), respectively. The scenic integrity objective (desired visual condition in the Forest Plan) is low (moderately altered). The emphasis is to maintain and enhance the scenery for travelers through the Canyon Creek visual corridor and to maintain the large tree appearance. Visitor concern (sensitivity) is medium along the Canyon Creek visual corridor because it is an access road for Canyon Meadows campground, Buckhorn Meadows trailhead, and numerous dispersed recreation activities, but is not along a primary access road. The Canyon Creek visual corridor was highly impacted by the fire. The fire followed a patch-work pattern through much of the corridor, but a significant portion of the corridor’s foreground experienced high tree mortality. From a scenic value standpoint, this is especially evident around Canyon Meadows campground, where the fire devastated the foreground’s landscape character. The immediate foreground throughout the corridor has already been moderately altered by roadside salvage and hazard tree removal, and heavily altered by the removal of Canyon Meadows dam. In the middleground, alterations to the landscape are highly evident due to a lack of vegetation screening.

Desired Condition

Federal, State and County Road Visual Corridors Emphasize visual quality along all of the State and Federal highway corridor viewsheds. Manage as major corridor viewsheds …the 15 and 16 roads as they loop around the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness. Manage lands within view of these scenic routes under foreground retention and middleground partial retention visual quality objectives. Manage other specified forest and county roads with a lower emphasis on maintaining visual quality. Meet the visual quality objectives of foreground partial retention and middleground modification in these corridor viewsheds. The effects of management activities will be obvious in these middlegrounds (USDA Forest Service 1990, page IV-15).

Scenic Diversity Emphasize horizontal diversity in the visual corridors. This will be experienced as one moves through the corridor, not as vertical diversity on every acre. The effect is to have a multi-aged appearance in the corridor utilizing group selection and even-aged management. Manage unroaded areas and wilderness with sensitivity for the visual resource (USDA Forest Service 1990, page IV-16).

Forest-Wide Standards Manage (remaining land) under modification and maximum modification visual quality objectives. The appearance of these lands as viewed from forest roads will be altered to heavily altered. Even though

Page 207 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment management activities may dominate the landscape, they are still to be designed to borrow from the natural character of the land (USDA Forest Service 1990, page IV-16).

Environmental Consequences

Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis The spatial context for this analysis is the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area. The effects to the scenic quality and visual resources can be short-term and long-term. Short-term is usually less than 5 years, and long-term is 5 years to 50 years.

Past, Present, and Foreseeable Activities Relevant to Cumulative Effects Analysis Past, present and reasonably foreseeable activities that are relevant to recreation can be found in Table 11 at the beginning of chapter 3.

Alternative 1 – No Action

Direct and Indirect Effects The no action alternative would result in no immediate changes to the scenic integrity of the landscape within the project planning area. However, the pre-fire dense mosaic has resulted in high tree mortality that has now resulted in danger trees. It is foreseeable that short- and long-term changes would contribute to increased public danger, which could limit public access. There also would not be any reforestation of desired tree species that could have benefited both the human and natural environment and provide a speedier vegetative recovery, particularly where higher fire intensities resulted in loss of seed banks. As dead and dying trees fall, they will likely be removed by public fire wood cutters that can travel off of a road with their vehicles and trailers any time of the year that their permit allows. This activity will be ongoing for years and will include all days of the week and season, regardless of any other human planned or natural activities.

Cumulative Effects In evaluating the action on Table 11, chapter 3, it is anticipated that no action would not create a cumulative effect.

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects

Introduction

Due to the Canyon Creek Complex fire, the landscape character in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Project planning area has changed dramatically, as the landscape has deviated from the character valued for its aesthetic appeal. Many factors affect the character of the landscape. Attributes such as landform, vegetative pattern and species makeup, water characteristics, and architectural elements all contribute to the aesthetic character of the landscape within the project planning area. Scenic integrity objectives establish limits of acceptable human alterations as the landscape moves toward a landscape character goal. The scenic integrity levels and objectives remain the same, but the short-term and long-term scenic quality of the landscape has been diminished due to the fire.

Page 208 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Salvage Treatment and Logging System Activities Under alternative 2, approximately 1,210 acres would be treated across 34 treatment units. Treatment activities would occur primarily within visual corridor middlegrounds with a scenic integrity objective of moderate (slightly altered). Treatment units 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 27 slightly overlap visual corridor foregrounds with a scenic integrity objective of high (appears unaltered). However, except for unit 21, the closest any of the treatment units come to one of the primary roads that the visual corridors are based around is 0.4 miles. The Forest visitor could potentially see stumps, blackened woody debris, and hand piles from the harvest activity. But, with fewer standing snags and dying trees, field of view could be slightly enhanced, allowing for the observance of more natural features. There would not be any immediate change in scenic integrity around developed recreation sites, due to the project design criteria. Scenic integrity and ecological health objectives are expected to enhance the natural setting in the long- term.

Forest Road Activities Road activities that could affect scenic integrity would be the construction of 4 miles of temporary road. The design criteria for the project states that temporary roads shall be restored to their natural profile. Therefore, changes to scenic integrity in the project planning area due to road activities would be temporary, and minimal.

Research Activities The proposed research activities would not alter the landscape at all. Therefore, no direct or indirect effects to scenic integrity would occur due to the proposed research activities of the project.

Conclusion The proposed activities of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project would not change the scenic integrity level of any of the three visual corridors contained within the project planning area. All of the potential negative effects to scenic integrity due to the proposed activities within the planning area would be short-term. The short-term scenic quality within the treatment areas may improve slightly over the existing condition. Out of a 57,800 acre project planning area, 1,210 acres (2 percent) are proposed for treatment. Treatment units near visual corridor foregrounds are sparse and would not be visually dominant to the surrounding landscape viewsheds. Though harvest and salvage activities would be noticeable to those present during treatments, the activity would be of relatively short duration. Stumps and slash may be visible until forbs, brush, and understory become established, likely one to five years. Planting of desirable species in treated units will establish the historical range of variability faster, while providing aesthetic and ecological advantages over non treatment.

Cumulative Effects All of the activities listed in Table 11, chapter 3, affected fuels across the landscape, and therefore played a role in the outcome of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire. Before the fire, any future fuels management activities would have had effects that are cumulative with the activities listed in the table. The fire has reset the landscape, so that the proposed treatment activities in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project are not cumulative with the activities that took place previous to the fire. There are currently no other foreseeable future actions that would have cumulative effects on scenery and visual resources within the project planning area.

Page 209 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Compliance with Forest Plan and Other Relevant Laws, Regulations, and Policies

Recreation Alternative 1 – No Action

Alternative 1 is consistent with the Malheur Forest Plan as it pertains to recreation because there are no direct or indirect effects. The recreation goals of the Malheur National Forest would therefore not be affected.

Alternative 2 - Proposed Action

Alternative 2 is consistent with the Malheur Forest Plan as it pertains to recreation. Under alternative 2, the potential changes to recreation opportunities and access by the proposed actions are limited in time and scope to the degree that there would not be any impacts to ROS classes (roaded natural and roaded modified) of the affected management areas, and the potential impacts would remain compatible with the recreation goals of the Malheur National Forest.

Scenic Quality and Visual Resources Alternative 1 – No Action

Alternative 1 is consistent with the Malheur Forest Plan as it pertains to scenic quality and visual resources because there are no direct or indirect effects. The visual resources goals of the Malheur National Forest would therefore not be affected.

Alternative 2 - Proposed Action

Alternative 2 is consistent with the Malheur Forest Plan as it pertains to scenic quality and visual resources. Under alternative 2, the potential changes to scenic quality are limited in time and scope to the degree that there would not be any impacts to scenic integrity, and the potential impacts would remain compatible with the visual resources goals of the Malheur National Forest. The forest’s visual resources goals, as listed in the Malheur Forest Plan are:

 Maintain and enhance the scenic character of the Forest through integration of the principles of landscape architecture and environmental design arts into forest land management practices  Provide and maintain pleasant visual experiences for Forest visitors consistent with public demand and natural landscape capabilities (USDA Forest Service 1990). In addition, the potential impacts of the proposed actions are compatible with FSM 2380.3.4, which says to apply scenery management principles routinely in all National Forest System activities. Agency direction is to apply Agriculture Handbook #701, Landscape Aesthetics in project planning and decision making (Bedwell and Dillard 2007). Utilization of the handbook during the planning of this project has assured the routine application of scenery management principles.

Heritage The purpose of this report is to analyze the effects of the proposed activities on cultural resources in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area. The Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project includes all National Forest System lands administered by the Blue Mountain Ranger District that are within the designated boundary for this project.

Page 210 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Indicators for Assessing Effects The resource element used in analyzing the effects of the proposed alternatives on cultural resources is the assessment of potential natural and cultural impacts agents affecting the qualities of an archaeological site that contribute to its eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The affected resources to be measured are those archaeological sites known to exist within the project planning area. Analysis methods are described in the Malheur National Forest Archaeological Site Monitoring Plan (Jenevein 2012). This plan directly addresses the Malheur National Forest protection and preservation responsibilities for historic properties under Section 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) by identifying and evaluating potential threats to archaeological sites located within the Forest that are eligible or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places.

Table 65 Resource elements, indicators and measures for assessing effects to Heritage resources Resource element Resource indicator Measure Source Avoidance and/or mitigation to resolve Malheur National Forest Cultural resource site Extent of observable affected qualities Archaeological Site condition impacts contributing to Monitoring Plan eligibility for listing on (Jenevein 2012) the NRHP.

Information Sources

 Existing site records and inventory reports from previous Section 106 inventories in the project planning area.  Results from site inspection and surveys conducted in support of the current Section 106 inventory

Affected Environment

Existing Condition The Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area encompasses approximately 57,800 acres in the East Fork Canyon Creek, Upper Canyon Creek, and Middle Canyon Creek subwatersheds which drain into the John Day River. Under the National Historic Preservation Act, the Area of Potential Effect for this undertaking encompasses the 1,210 acres of National Forest System lands designated for commercial salvage.

Following the methodology discussed below, the predictive model was applied which divided the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area into high, moderate, and low probability zones. The majority of the project planning area falls within low probability (506 acres) and medium probability (506 acres) because of steep terrain. The model identified 200 acres of high probability, those areas with the greatest likelihood of locating archaeological sites. In general, sites previously identified are located within these high probability areas. They are predominately pre-contact lithic scatter sites. Lithic scatters are surface assemblages that contain debitage (waste flake from stone tool manufacturing) and/or formed stone tools (e.g., projectile points or bifaces) and occasionally ground stone. These sites range from very small lithic scatters, indicative of expedient tool manufacture or reworking, to large sites with heavy lithic concentrations, which could suggest heavy and long-term use. Diagnostic projectile points identified suggest that human use of the area began during the Early Holocene.

There have been three cultural resource inventories previously conducted within the boundary of this project. Twenty-six cultural resource sites have been documented in the project planning area of which 15 have been determined eligible for listing on the NRHP and 8 have an undetermined eligibility. Twenty-

Page 211 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment one (21) of these are prehistoric American Indian lithic scatter sites containing waste flakes and occasional tool fragments related to stone tool manufacturing. Two sites possess both prehistoric and historic components. Three of the recorded sites are historic and have been determined not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. In additional, there are 8 prehistoric isolates documented within the project planning area.

In the project planning area, land use during the historic period was primarily associated with livestock grazing and the administration of public land use by Forest Service personnel.

The condition of archaeological sites within the project planning area varies. The integrity of historic sites, such as log troughs, are affected by weathering and wild fires. Many pre-contact sites within the project planning area have experienced disturbances ranging from historic livestock grazing, logging, road building, modern recreation infrastructure construction and activity, and artifact collecting.

The Cultural Resource Inventory Report for the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area is in the process of being completed and will be sent to the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office for review.

Desired Condition Federal land managers are responsible for the protection and enhancement of significant heritage resources under 36 CFR 800 as per sections 106 and 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended. These include both physical manifestations of past human activities, as well as specific locations that are traditionally important to interested tribes. Federal agencies are charged with avoiding or minimizing impacts to significant archaeological and historic sites, as well as traditional cultural properties. To achieve this, the location, nature, and condition of existing heritage resources are identified and documented prior to implementing any Federal undertaking. Significant resources are protected either through project avoidance, or through various mitigation measures developed by the agency in consultation with the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office and the Advisory Council on Historic Places. The National Historic Preservation Act, the American Indian Religious Freedom Act, as well as various other laws and regulations require that agencies consult with culturally affiliated tribes to determine the effects of the projects on sites and areas culturally significant to the tribes.

The archaeological sites within the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area that are eligible or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places are protected from adverse impacts caused by salvage treatments and Forest road activities. Site avoidance is the preferred method of protecting the integrity of sites eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places and those sites with undetermined National Register of Historic Places eligibility. Effective coordination between Heritage professionals and those professionals implementing management actions may preserve or enhance attributes of a site which make them eligible or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Other management actions that may have potential to adversely impact archaeological sites will be assessed on a case by case basis. A report will be generated and submitted to the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office for concurrence.

Environmental Consequences This section of the report consists of a non-quantitative analysis of the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of the proposed salvage treatments and Forest road activities on cultural properties and resources in the project planning area.

A project is considered to have an adverse effect on cultural properties when it results in the alteration of characteristics that qualify the property for the National Register of Historic Places. The cultural

Page 212 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project properties that have been identified within the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area are eligible or potentially eligible (unevaluated for the National Register of Historic Places on the basis of their ability to yield scientific information that is important to studies of prehistory and history). Therefore, proposed activities that modify the patterning of surface or buried archaeological deposits are considered to result in an adverse effect.

Methodology Cultural resource identification efforts in the vicinity of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area have focused on two primary types of resources: pre-contact archaeological sites and historic archaeological sites. Places that may support resources of contemporary tribal interest (i.e., culturally significant plant locations) were also considered.

In accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, Executive Order 11593, and Forest Service Manual chapters 2361 and 2363, a pre-field investigation and subsequent archaeological survey was performed for the proposed Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project in an attempt to locate all visible cultural resource sites that may be eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places and could potentially be impacted by the undertaking.

The Malheur National Forest Inventory Plan stipulates that a survey design will be completed for inventories using the stratified probability zones. The Forest uses a GIS-based probability based on the criteria provided in the inventory plan.

Assessments / Process Cultural resource surveys are designed to evaluate those areas most likely to contain historic properties. Those areas are identified through predictive modeling (Thomas 1991). The ability to identify archaeological sites can be limited by environmental factors and ground visibility. In addition, the model cannot account for all past human behavior, and archaeological sites are occasionally found in low probability areas. There likely are cultural resources within the project planning area that have not been identified. If these archaeological sites are identified during project implementation they will be documented, evaluated, and protected.

Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis Under the National Historic Preservation Act, the Area of Potential Effect for this undertaking includes the entire planning area. The Area of Potential Effect will be used as the boundary for analysis of direct, indirect and cumulative effects. Cultural resources are localities within the Forest utilized by people both in the past, present, and future. Due to the nature of cultural resources the temporal context for direct, indirect and cumulative effects analysis is long-term.

Past, Present, and Foreseeable Activities Relevant to Cumulative Effects Analysis

All of the past, present and reasonably foreseeable activities disclosed on the master list have or had the potential to effect cultural resources in the planning area. Past activities with the most impact on cultural resources include grazing, logging and fire suppression projects which occurred before the implementation of the National Historic Preservation Act and the National Environmental Policy Act in the mid-1970s.

Page 213 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Alternative 1 – No Action

Direct and Indirect Effects If the no action alternative is pursued, there will be no direct effect on the existing conditions of the heritage resources identified within the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area.

Cumulative Effects In evaluating the action on Table 11, chapter 3, it is anticipated that no action would not create a cumulative effect.

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects A project is considered to have an adverse effect on cultural properties when it results in the alteration of characteristics that qualify the property for the National Register of Historic Places. The cultural properties that have been identified within the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area are eligible or potentially eligible (unevaluated for the National Register of Historic Places on the basis of their ability to yield scientific information that is important to studies of prehistory and history). Therefore, proposed activities that modify the patterning of surface or buried archaeological deposits are considered to result in an adverse effect.

The majority of the proposed activities are expected to have no, or extremely minor, direct effects on all known heritage sites within the project planning area. Eligible or unevaluated sites would be avoided or properly mitigated throughout the lifetime of any of the proposed activities.

Under alternative 2, salvage treatments and Forest road activities may have the potential to cause effects to previously undocumented heritage resources. If during project activities cultural material is encountered, all activities would cease immediately and a Forest Service Heritage specialist would be contacted to evaluate the discovery.

Unanticipated discoveries and/or known sites may be protected before implementation occurs by rerouting if it is determined there is potential to adversely affect the hypothetical historic property. Consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office, Indian tribes, and other interested parties is required to determine measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate the adverse effect according to the Programmatic Agreement or 36 CFR Part 800 regulations.

Some habitat for plants that are of historic importance to regional groups of Native Americans may be enhanced by the salvage treatments. As the fuel load is reduced via specific salvage treatments, habitat of native plant populations like huckleberry would potentially be improved.

By reducing the accumulations of fuels through commercial harvest and other proposed fuel reduction activities associated with this project the severity of potential wildfires would decrease and enhance the long-term stability of archaeological and historic resources within areas adjacent to the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project.

Cumulative Effects It is anticipated there would be no or minimal adverse direct or indirect effect to documented historic properties (eligible and unevaluated sites would be avoided with activities). Therefore, there would be no or minimal cumulative or additive impact from past, ongoing, or foreseeable activities.

Page 214 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Compliance with Forest Plan and Other Relevant Laws, Regulations, and Policies The legal framework that mandates the Forest to consider the effects of its actions on cultural resources is wide-ranging. In this case, Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (amended in 1976, 1980, and 1992) is the foremost legislation that governs the treatment of cultural resources during project planning and implementation. Implementing regulations that clarify and expand upon the National Historic Preservation Act include 36 CFR 800 (Protection of Historic Properties), 36 CFR 63 (Determination of Eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places), and 36 CFR 296 (Protection of Archaeological Resources). The Pacific Northwest Region of the Forest Service, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office signed a programmatic agreement regarding the management of cultural resources on National Forest System lands in 2004. The 2004 Programmatic Agreement outlines specific procedures for the identification, evaluation, and protection of cultural resources during activities or projects sponsored by the Forest Service. It also establishes the process that the State Historic Preservation Office utilizes to review Forest Service undertakings for National Historic Preservation Act compliance.

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) is also a cultural resource management directive, as it calls for agencies to analyze the effects of their action on socio-cultural elements of the environment. Laws such as the National Forest Management Act of 1976, the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990, and Executive Order 13007 (Indian Sacred Sites) also guide Forest Service decision making as it relates to heritage resources. The American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978 requires that federal agencies consider the impacts of their projects on the free exercise of traditional Indian religions.

Other Relevant Mandatory Disclosures Many of the previously described laws, regulations, and directives instruct the Forest Service to consult with American Indian tribes, the state, and other interested parties on cultural resource management issues. This consultation is ongoing through the NEPA process and under the terms of existing agreements with American Indian Tribes. To date, there have been no concerns raised during scoping regarding the effects of project activities. Documentation of compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act is currently being prepared for referral to the Oregon SHPO in accordance with the 2004 Programmatic Agreement, and consultation with that agency will be completed prior to project implementation.

Wilderness and Other Undeveloped Lands This report discloses the affected environment and environmental consequences for the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness and other undeveloped lands within the project planning area.

The Malheur National Forest contains approximately 83,000 acres of wilderness (5 percent) and approximately 189,000 acres of inventoried roadless areas (11 percent).

The Blue Mountain Ranger District is approximately 707,000 acres in size and contains approximately 37,000 acres of wilderness (5 percent) and 95,000 acres of inventoried roadless areas (13 percent). The Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area is located in the southern portion of the Blue Mountain Ranger District. The Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area includes approximately 20,100 acres of the 69,500 acre Strawberry Mountain Wilderness (38 percent of the project planning area), no inventoried roadless areas (IRAs) or areas with wilderness characteristics, and approximately 5,700 acres of other undeveloped lands (11 percent of the project planning area).

Page 215 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Indicators for Assessing Effects

Table 66 Resource elements, indicators and measures for assessing effects to wilderness and other undeveloped lands Resource Key issue or Resource indicator Measure Source element Analysis Issue Untrammeled Analysis Issue Wilderness Act of Natural Analysis Issue 1964; Oregon Undeveloped Analysis Issue Wilderness Act of Wilderness Opportunities for solitude 1984; Forest Plan (IV- (Wilderness or primitive and unconfined Analysis Issue 76 through IV-84); Character) recreation Forest Service Manual Other features 2300 chapter 2320 – (unique/supplemental Analysis Issue Wilderness values) Management Acres of existing other undeveloped Change in acres of other lands impacted by Analysis Issue n/a undeveloped lands proposed activities (e.g., logging, Other temporary roads) undeveloped Intrinsic physical and lands biological resources (soil, Analysis Issue n/a water, wildlife, recreation, fisheries, etc.) Intrinsic social values (apparent naturalness, Analysis Issue n/a solitude, remoteness)

Affected Environment - Wilderness

Methodology The effects to wilderness character was based on a review of existing conditions (which consisted of a review of the Malheur Forest Plan and geographic information systems (GIS) database review) and the potential for proposed activities to impact and/or degrade wilderness character.

Existing Condition The Strawberry Mountain Wilderness, designated by Congress in the Wilderness Act of 1964, with additions under the Oregon Wilderness Act of 1984, comprises approximately 68,700 acres of National Forest System public lands in the Blue Mountain and Prairie City ranger districts. Approximately 20,100 acres (29 percent of the entire wilderness) of the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness are located within the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area. See appendix A, map 1.

Wilderness is an area designated by Congress and defined by the Wilderness Act of 1964 as a place that (1) generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature with the imprint of man’s work substantially unnoticeable; (2) has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation; (3) has at least five thousand acres of land or is of sufficient size as to make practicable is preservation and use in an unimpaired condition; and (4) may also contain ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historical value. Wilderness characteristics are described as: untrammeled, natural, undeveloped, having outstanding opportunities for solitude or primitive and unconfined recreation, and unique/supplemental value.

The rugged Strawberry Mountain Wilderness ranges in elevation from 4,600 feet to 9,038 feet at the top of Strawberry Mountain. The Wilderness is ecologically diverse and contains five of the seven major life

Page 216 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project zones of North America. It is home to native wildlife populations of Rocky Mountain elk, mule deer, antelope, big horn sheep, mountain goat, black bear, cougar, and bald eagle. The headwaters of several important watersheds begin within the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness. An east-west hydrologic divide separates the Strawberry Mountain range into two distinct parts. Canyon Creek, Pine Creek, Indian Creek, Strawberry Creek, and Roberts Creek drain into the John Day River, while Big Creek, Lake Creek, and Bear Creek drain into the Malheur and Silvies rivers. The eastern-portion of the Wilderness has experienced numerous wildfires over the past 25 years, while the western half of the Wilderness remained largely unburned prior to the Canyon Creek Complex Fire.

Untrammeled A trammel is a modern human control or manipulation that hinders and restricts the components or ecological processes functioning within wilderness. Trammeling activities that have occurred within the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness include, but are not limited to, the suppression of wildfire, removal of vegetation along trails, grazing of domestic livestock, and mining. Historic trammels in the area include livestock grazing, construction of fences and water developments, suppression of wildfires, stocking of lakes with fish, and mining. Portions of the Wilderness were adversely affected in the past by grazing of sheep and cattle.

Current, ongoing trammels within the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness include: livestock grazing, stocking of fish in Strawberry Lake by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, and fire suppression.

Trammels associated with the Canyon Creek Complex Fire include the suppression of wildfire, felling of trees and removal of vegetation to create fire lines, aerial placement of fire retardant, aerial application of mulch for erosion control, and placement of log-jams to control post-fire runoff.

Natural The natural character of the Wilderness is mostly preserved; however, some changes in vegetation have occurred, most notably the introduction of non-native invasive plants and alterations in native vegetation species distribution and composition due to fires, historic grazing practices, seeding of non-native species, old vehicle routes, and vehicle incursions. Additionally, non-native brook trout were historically stocked in Strawberry Lake (this no longer occurs) and are still present in the lake and associated streams. Some stocking of fish still occurs in the Wilderness, primarily Strawberry Lake; however, stocking is currently limited to native species, including rainbow trout.

Approximately 48,000 acres of the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness (70 percent of the entire wilderness) burned during the Canyon Creek Complex Fire, including all 20,100 acres of wilderness located within the project planning area.

Undeveloped The Strawberry Mountain Wilderness is mostly undeveloped. There are approximately 125 miles of designated trails within the entire wilderness, with approximately 30 miles of designated trail in the portion of the wilderness located within the project planning area. Other developments in the Wilderness include trail features (e.g., wooden bridge, signs) and water developments for livestock.

Opportunities for Solitude or Primitive and Unconfined Recreation Opportunities for solitude are generally outstanding throughout the majority of the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness. This is due in part to the topographic variability including steep, broken slopes, as well as the diversity of vegetation which enhances visual screening. However, due to the shape of the Wilderness and its location, views of the populated John Day Valley are readily visible from most scenic vistas. Visitor

Page 217 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment use levels are higher during the summer and fall months of the year, generally May through November, following snowmelt.

The wilderness also provides opportunities for a variety of primitive and unconfined types of recreation including hiking, equestrian use, hunting, camping, fishing, backpacking, photography, and viewing scenery and wildlife. The bulk of recreation use in the wilderness occurs in the lakes basin area (i.e., Strawberry Lake), which accounts for an estimated 80 percent of use in the Wilderness. Most recreational use occurs during the summer months, with July being the heaviest use month. During October and November, the Wilderness receives use by deer and elk hunters. Winter and spring recreation is typically limited to skiing and snowshoeing due to snowpack. Use within the portion of the Wilderness located within the project planning area is minimal, with fall hunting being the primary use type.

The only agency provided recreation facilities within the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness include approximately 125 miles of designated trails, trail features (e.g., wooden bridges), and directional signage. User-created recreation facilities include dispersed campsites and user-trails (unofficial trails). There are approximately 42 known dispersed campsites in the wilderness portion of the project planning area.

There are two wilderness recreation opportunity spectrum (WROS) classes within the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness: pristine and primitive. Approximately 6,870 acres of the wilderness is managed for pristine wilderness opportunities, with the remaining 61,830 acres managed for primitive wilderness opportunities. Portion of the wilderness that lie within the project planning area fall in the primitive wilderness recreation opportunity spectrum class.

The following restrictions on recreation, in addition to those imposed by the Wilderness Act of 1964, are identified in the Malheur Forest Plan:

 Pristine Areas (WROS): Maximum party size will be 6 people. Livestock limits should be based on vegetation and soil impacts, and in all cases must not exceed 9 head total.  Primitive Areas (WROS): Party size limits will range from 6 to 12 people depending on the actual number of encounters in an area. Livestock limits will be based on vegetation and soil impacts, and in all cases must not exceed 18 head total.  Camping in excess of 30 days within a 45 day period is prohibited. Use of a campsite by more than 12 people and/or 18 head of livestock is prohibited.  Hitching or tethering a horse or other saddle or pack animal to a tree or other vegetation except for loading, unloading, or watering is prohibited. At present, portions of the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness and surrounding non-wilderness Forest lands are under a temporary Forest Closure Order due to the Canyon Creek Complex Fire, including the portion located in the project planning area, due to public safety concerns. It is unknown at this time when the closure order will be rescinded for this area.

Unique/Supplemental Values or Features No other unique or supplemental values or features of the wilderness area exist that are not already accounted for in the above qualities.

Desired Condition Designated wilderness areas exhibit primitive qualities. Opportunities for research, exploration, solitude, risk, challenge, and primitive recreation are widespread. On the trail system, opportunities for solitude are

Page 218 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project moderate to high, with few human encounters expected. Opportunities for solitude are high when traveling cross-country with almost no human encounters expected. Campsites may be visible at popular destinations along water features and at major trail junctions. These sites accommodate moderate use. Directional and regulatory signs are primarily found at trailheads outside of this management area but some signs may be present within these areas along trails and junctions. Buildings are rare within this management area; however, the preservation of historical features or retention of facilities for administrative use may occur. Ecosystems are influenced by natural processes with little or no human intervention. Geological and ecological processes, such as wildfire and insects and disease, operate relatively free from the influence of humans. Any influences upon these processes by humans is intended to protect human life; protect adjacent private property or private in-holdings; and reduce impacts to Federal facilities, historic or cultural structures, and threatened and endangered plant or animal species or species included in the regional forester’s sensitive species list. Predominately diverse, native vegetation results from natural succession and disturbance processes, while nonnative vegetation is rare. The recreation opportunity spectrum is primitive.

Environmental Consequences

Methodology This analysis focuses not only on the effects to the portion of the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness located within the project planning area, but also the effects to the wilderness character of the entire Strawberry Mountain Wilderness. The analysis of effects focuses on impacts to the five characters of wilderness: untrammeled, natural, undeveloped, having outstanding opportunities for solitude or primitive and unconfined recreation, and unique/supplemental value.

Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis The scale of analysis for wilderness character is the entire Strawberry Mountain Wilderness. The spatial contexts for this analysis are the portions of the Wilderness located within the project planning area and the located of proposed treatment and control units. The temporal context for the effect analysis is short- term (1-5 years).

Past, Present, and Foreseeable Activities Relevant to Cumulative Effects Analysis Past actions in or near the project planning area include timber management, wildland fuels management, fire suppression, dispersed camping, recreation development (e.g., campgrounds, trails), firewood cutting, livestock grazing, and road and facilities construction and maintenance. Within the Strawberry Mountains Wilderness, past actions include fires suppression, livestock grazing, and recreational use and development. Current and reasonably foreseeable actions include recreation, livestock grazing, and control of wildfire. All activities have affected current forest composition, structure, and overall management infrastructure and developed lands of the area. Therefore, these activities are still reflected (with individual variances) in the current condition of the area’s natural resource and human environment values.

Alternative 1 – No Action

Direct and Indirect Effects Under the no-action alternative, there would be no new direct or indirect impacts to wilderness character as no actions would be implemented. Existing trammels, impacts to naturalness, and developments would continue to impact wilderness character. Opportunities for solitude and primitive recreation would continue to be outstanding throughout most of the Wilderness.

Page 219 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Cumulative Effects In evaluating the action on Table 11, chapter 3, it is anticipated that no action would not create a cumulative effect.

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects

Untrammeled There would be no direct or indirect effects on the untrammeled character of the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness as a result of the proposed action. No ground disturbing actions are proposed within the wilderness under the proposed action.

Natural There would be no direct or indirect effects on the natural character of the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness as a result of the proposed action. No ground disturbing actions are proposed within the wilderness under the proposed action.

Undeveloped There would be no direct or indirect effects on the undeveloped character of the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness as a result of the proposed action. No developments or ground disturbing actions are proposed within the wilderness under the proposed action.

Opportunities for Solitude or Primitive and Unconfined Recreation Salvage logging (harvest) in units adjacent to the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness may result in indirect, short-term effects on solitude within portions of the Wilderness located adjacent to proposed treatment units (study units 1 and 2). Potential indirect effects include increased sights and sounds of logging machinery, people, and equipment adjacent to portions of the wilderness boundary during salvage logging activity, along with other management activities associated with the proposed action. However, these effects would be limited to areas where salvage logging is located adjacent to the wilderness boundary and only for the duration of salvage operations.

Section 6 of the Oregon Wilderness Act of 1984 (Public Law 98-328) specifically states that “Congress does not intend that designation of wilderness areas in the State of Oregon lead to the creation of protective perimeters or buffer zones around each wilderness area. The fact that nonwilderness activities or uses can be seen or heard from the areas within the wilderness shall not, of itself, preclude such activities or uses up to the boundary of the wilderness area”.

Additionally, The East Fork Canyon Creek trailhead may be temporarily inaccessible during salvage operations for public safety reasons. However, these temporary effects would be limited to areas where salvage logging operations area actively at or adjacent to a wilderness trailhead and the effects would only last for the duration of salvage operations.

One of the proposed control units (Control Unit 1) is entirely located within the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness. No treatments or ground disturbing activities are proposed within the control unit (or the Wilderness); the control unit is to be used as a research control to monitor natural, unmanaged post-fire processes. There may be a temporary increase in the number of people in the portion of the Wilderness where the control unit is located while researchers collect field data that could impact solitude; however, the impact would be localized, short-term, and negligible.

Page 220 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Overall, opportunities for primitive and unconfined recreation would remain outstanding throughout the majority of the Wilderness.

Unique/Supplemental Values or Features Because no other unique or supplemental values or features of the wilderness area have been identified, there would be no direct or indirect effects as a result of the proposed action.

Cumulative Effects Because there would be no direct or indirect effects to the untrammeled, natural, undeveloped, and unique/supplemental values of wilderness character under the proposed action, there would be no cumulative effects to these wilderness characteristics.

The proposed action would have short-term, indirect effects on solitude limited to areas where salvage logging is located adjacent to the wilderness boundary and/or short-term direct effect where researchers would be monitoring Control Unit 1. However, each of these effects are short-term, localized, and would have a negligible impact. When combined with past actions, and those that are reasonably foreseeable in the future, the proposed action has a negligible contribution to cumulative impacts for solitude.

The proposed action may have a temporary, localized impact to the East Fork Canyon Creek trailhead and other dispersed access points within the project planning area. Currently, a temporary forest closure order for public safety is in place for most of the project planning area, including the portion of the wilderness within the project planning area. Combined, these two effects would have a temporary cumulative impact on opportunities for unconfined recreation for the duration of the temporary forest closure. However, portions of the wilderness outside of the temporary closure order and project planning area, including the popular Strawberry Basin, would continue to be open and provide opportunities for unconfined recreation. Because the cumulative effect is temporary and other portions of the wilderness would be available for recreation, the overall cumulative impact would be negligible.

Overall, in combination with past and present actions, and those that are reasonably foreseeable in the future, the proposed action has a negligible contribution to cumulative impacts.

Compliance with Forest Plan and Other Relevant Laws, Regulations, and Policies

Wilderness Act of 1964 The no-action alternative is compliant with the Wilderness Act of 1964 and the Oregon Wilderness Act of 1984 because no action would be taken and there would be no impact to the untrammeled, natural, undeveloped, and opportunities for solitude or primitive and unconfined recreation character of the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness.

The proposed action is compliant with the Wilderness Act of 1964 and the Oregon Wilderness Act of 1984 because implementation of proposed activities would have no impact to the untrammeled, natural, and undeveloped character of the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness. Additionally, opportunities for primitive and unconfined recreation would remain outstanding throughout the majority of the Wilderness and potential impacts to solitude would be short-term and localized.

Malheur Forest Plan The no-action alternative and the proposed action both comply with Malheur Forest Plan standards for Management Area 6A (Strawberry Mountain Wilderness, see Forest Plan pages IV-76 to IV-84).

Page 221 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Other Relevant Mandatory Disclosures None.

Affected Environment – Other Undeveloped Lands

Methodology The effects to other undeveloped lands were based on maps and polygons created using agency inventory procedures. These maps and polygons were created utilizing geographic information systems (GIS). The project planning area was evaluated for evidence of roads (open or closed, including a 300-feet buffer on each side of the road), prior timber harvest, mining, or developments such as campgrounds.

Individual polygons of other undeveloped lands less than 1 acre were eliminated from further study because no special or unique resource values were identified and the description of effects to individual pieces of land less than 1 acre are better disclosed as part of the other resource effects sections in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project Environmental Assessment.

Existing Condition These acres of land have no history of harvest activity, do not contain forest roads, and are not designated as a wilderness area or identified as an inventoried roadless area. They are areas that have no obvious previous activity and are “leftover” areas from other analysis. For example, but not limited to, these areas may have been too steep, in between roads and harvest areas, or too wet. These areas may have values associated with them such as scenery, cultural resource values, and unfragmented habitat because of the lack of evidence of harvest or roads.

Table 67 displays the acres of other undeveloped lands within the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area (see appendix A, map 1). In the 57,800 acre project planning area, approximately 5,700 acres have been identified as isolated polygons of other undeveloped lands, 20,100 acres are within the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness, and the remaining 27,700 acres of National Forest System public lands are developed and managed (e.g., contain evidence of past harvest, mining, and/or forest roads). Additionally, there are 4,300 acres of privately owned lands which were not included in this analysis.

Individual polygons of other undeveloped lands less than 1 acre were eliminated from further study because no special or unique resource values were identified and the description of effects to individual pieces of land less than 1 acre are better disclosed as part of the other resource effects sections in the project environmental assessment.

Table 67 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area inventory for other undeveloped lands Land area Acres Acres inventoried for other undeveloped lands within the project planning area 57,800 acres Lands within the project planning area with evidence of past harvest, mining, developed 27,700 acres recreation sites, and/or forest roads (including land within 300 feet of a forest road1). Lands within the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness 20,100 acres Other undeveloped lands (remaining acres with no evidence of past harvest and forest roads1 5,700 acres and/or not contained within an inventoried roadless area). Private lands within the project planning area boundary 4,300 acres 1This includes roads of any maintenance level (i.e., maintenance level 1 or higher).

Table 68 displays the number, size class, and approximate acres of undeveloped lands present within the project planning area. Approximately 89 percent of the polygons are in the 1- to 100-acre size class. For

Page 222 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project perspective, one square mile is about 640 acres and the closest designated wilderness area (Strawberry Mountain) is over 68,700 acres. The residual shape of each undeveloped polygon is the result of boundaries created by past harvest, mining, developed recreation sites, and road building. The largest polygon of other undeveloped lands is approximately 667 acres.

Table 68 Size class and acres of other undeveloped lands in the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage project planning area Size class Number of polygons Approximate acres 1 to 20.0 acres 74 (62 percent) 503 acres 20.1 to 100 acres 32 (27 percent) 1,505 acres 100.1 to 200 acres 8 (7 percent) 1,144 acres 200.1 to 400 acres 4 (3 percent) 1,242 acres 400.1 to 1,000 acres 2 (2 percent) 1,300 acres >1,000.1 acres 0 0 acres

The majority of the 5,700 acres of other undeveloped lands are allocated to Malheur Forest Plan management areas (MAs) 1 and 2 General Forest and Range, Foreground and Middleground Visual Corridors (MAs 14F/14M), and Big Game Winter Range Maintenance (MA 4A). These management areas allow for salvage logging within Malheur Forest Plan standards and guidelines. See chapter 1 of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Environmental Assessment for a brief description of goals, standards, and guidelines associated with each Forest Plan management area allocation located within the project planning area. A small number of acres of other undeveloped lands in the project planning area are allocated to management areas Old Growth (MA 13) and Riparian Areas/Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (MA3B/RHCA).

Other undeveloped lands include soils, water, fish and wildlife habitat that have not been directly impacted by past harvest, mining, and road building, or the impacts are not readily evident. Indirect impacts have and continue to occur due to fragmentation of vegetation. The current condition of soil; water; air quality; plant and animal communities; habitat for threatened, endangered, and sensitive species; noxious weeds; recreation; and cultural resources within the project planning area, including other undeveloped lands, are described elsewhere in chapter 3 of the project environmental assessment.

Human influences have had limited impact to long-term ecological processes within the other undeveloped lands. Disturbance by insects and fire has been and most likely would continue to be the factors with the most potential to impact the area. Opportunities for primitive recreation are limited to hiking, mostly cross-country, and hunting. Ongoing firewood gathering and removal of danger trees along forest roads that border each polygon changes the vegetation, leaves stumps, and presents a managed appearance within a developed transportation corridor.

Opportunities for a feeling of solitude, the spirit of adventure and awareness, serenity, and self-reliance are limited by the size and shape of the polygon. Distance and topographic screening are also factors. The optimum shape and location to retain solitude and a sense of isolation from noise and sights of other humans and their activities would be at the center of a circle. Areas greater than or equal to 5,000 acres or about 8 square miles may have sufficient size to offer a sense of solitude, yet this may vary by individual. Long narrow shapes provide less distance from noise at their midpoint. Nearby, non-conforming sights and sounds of roads and timber harvest can be heard and often seen from within the 120 polygons of other undeveloped lands because all but two of the polygons are less than one square mile in size (640 acres) and/or none are a perfect circle in shape. The two largest areas of other undeveloped lands are approximately 630 and 670 acres in size; however, they are not complete polygons and have evidence of

Page 223 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment past management within them, with small “slivers” of other undeveloped lands connecting pieces of these polygons.

The existing condition of the remaining 27,700 acres of land in the project planning that are not found within the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness or other undeveloped lands and affected by the project presents a landscape that has been managed and is generally developed in nature; these lands contain evidence of past harvest, active mining, and forest roads. Past management actions and current conditions within the 27,700 acres reflect the multiple-use intent and decisions made in the Malheur Forest Plan, and reflect consistency with management area allocations.

Desired Condition There are no specific desired conditions for other undeveloped lands and there is no specific management direction for other undeveloped lands. The desired condition and management direction for soil; water; air quality; plant and animal communities; habitat for threatened, endangered, and sensitive species; noxious weeds; recreation; and cultural resources within the project planning area, including other undeveloped lands, are described elsewhere in chapter 3 of the project environmental assessment and other specialist reports for this project.

Environmental Consequences

Methodology This analysis focuses on the effects to the approximately 5,700 acres of other undeveloped lands within the project planning area that have no evidence of past harvest or forest roads, and are not located within a designated wilderness or inventoried roadless area.

Other undeveloped areas have intrinsic ecological and social values because they do not contain roads and evidence of past timber harvest. These values are used as indicators of comparison to display effects between alternatives. Values and features that often characterize an inventoried roadless area (36 CFR 294) were specifically avoided as indicators of comparison to reduce confusion as described in the introduction to this section. That is, other undeveloped areas are not inventoried roadless areas and therefore are described using different indicators of comparison.

 Intrinsic physical and biological resources (soil, water, wildlife, recreation, fisheries, etc.)  Intrinsic social values (apparent naturalness, solitude, remoteness) The change in acres of other undeveloped lands will also be analyzed to further differentiate the alternatives.

Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis The scale of analysis for other undeveloped lands is the project planning area. The spatial contexts for this analysis are unit boundaries and the areas with the associated road activities. The temporal context for the effect analysis is long-term, 5 to 50 years. Salvage logging treatments would have a long-term effect and may result in less other undeveloped lands.

Past, Present, and Foreseeable Activities Relevant to Cumulative Effects Analysis Past actions in or near the project planning area include timber management, wildland fuels management, fire suppression, dispersed camping, recreation development (e.g., campgrounds, trails), firewood cutting, and road and facilities construction and maintenance. All activities have affected current forest composition, structure, and overall management infrastructure and developed lands of the area. Therefore,

Page 224 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project these activities are still reflected (with individual variances) in the current condition of the area’s natural resource and human environment values.

Alternative 1 – No Action

Direct and Indirect Effects Under alternative 1, there would be no direct or indirect effects to undeveloped lands because no activities would occur in these areas. The existing condition would remain unchanged, except by natural processes and ongoing management activities. Biological and ecosystem functions in a large post-fire environment would continue and large acres of blackened landscapes would exist. All polygons of other undeveloped lands would continue to not be an inventoried roadless area or a designated wilderness area.

Cumulative Effects In evaluating the action on Table 11, chapter 3, it is anticipated that no action would not create a cumulative effect.

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects

Changes in acres in other undeveloped areas Under the proposed action, all acres of other undeveloped lands would continue to not be an inventoried roadless area or a designated wilderness area. Based on GIS calculations of other undeveloped lands, there would be no change in the acres of other undeveloped lands as a result of proposed salvage treatments there would continue to be approximately 5,700 acres of other undeveloped lands within the project planning area. See appendix A, map 2.

Intrinsic physical and biological resources (soil, water, wildlife, recreation, fisheries, etc.) Project activities would not occur within other undeveloped lands. However, for other undeveloped lands adjacent to treatment areas the impacts to soil, water quality, air quality, forage; plant and animal communities; habitat for threatened, endangered, and sensitive species; recreation; noxious weeds; and cultural resources are essentially the same as disclosed for areas of proposed project activity in described in other resource sections in chapter 3 of the EA and other resource reports and are not reiterated here.

Intrinsic social values (apparent naturalness, solitude, remoteness) Human influences have had limited impact to long-term ecological processes within these other undeveloped lands. Disturbance by insects and fire has been and would likely continue to be the factors with the most potential to impact these other undeveloped lands. The most apparent visual change resulting from implementation in the six treatment units would be the number of stumps visible. The overall burned landscape and high basal mortality (generally greater than 90 percent) within, and surrounding the treatment units, would negate the visual impact of open forest structure as a result of harvesting salvaged trees.

The sounds, smells, and possible sighting of mechanical activities occurring in areas adjacent to other undeveloped lands would reduce the sense of solitude and remoteness in the short-term, during project activities, but would not persist in the long-term. Other sights and sounds of ongoing and previously approved activities in areas adjacent to other undeveloped lands polygons would continue to have short- term effects on opportunities for solitude and remoteness. In the long-term there would be no change to the current availability of solitude or primitive recreation on other undeveloped lands.

Page 225 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Other undeveloped lands with no proposed activities would still be classified as other undeveloped lands and would retain their intrinsic social values as described in the affected environment. They would remain free of developments such as forest roads or timber harvest stumps. All acres of other undeveloped lands within the project planning area would still not be considered an inventoried roadless areas or a designated wilderness area. These undeveloped lands would remain as small scattered areas detached from each other by terrain, roads, and harvest activities.

Cumulative Effects For other undeveloped lands in which project activities would occur when combined with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, cumulative effects to soils; water quality; air quality; plant and animal communities; habitat for threatened, endangered, and sensitive species; recreation; noxious weeds; and cultural resources are essentially the same as disclosed in the chapter 3 of the EA and specialist reports and are not reiterated here.

Apparent naturalness, solitude, and remoteness would be cumulatively impacted by grazing, dispersed camping, and motorized vehicle use on open system roads and trails under all action alternatives. Effects associated with recreational use, including non-native invasive plant spread, hunting, fishing, erosion, litter, and evidence of fire rings, are expected to remain cumulatively minor. Ongoing removal of hazard trees along forest roads would continue to occur but does not change the overall sense of naturalness or sense of solitude along an existing developed transportation corridor. Overall, cumulative effects from these activities, when combined with the direct and indirect effects of the proposed action described above, on apparent naturalness, solitude, and remoteness is negligible (not measurable/indistinguishable).

Compliance with Forest Plan and Other Relevant Laws, Regulations, and Policies There are no Forest-wide or management area standards specific to other undeveloped areas in the Malheur Forest Plan, as amended. All lands, including other undeveloped areas, are managed consistent with Forest-wide standards and guidelines and by designated Forest Plan management area allocations.

Other Relevant Mandatory Disclosures None.

Climate Change There is no stand-alone report for this section; this section was written directly to the final environmental assessment.

Affected Environment

Methodology The Forest Service does not have a national policy or guidance for managing carbon, and the tools for estimating carbon and sequestration are not fully developed. Current direction for addressing climate change issues in project planning and the NEPA process is provided in the document Climate Change Considerations in Project Level NEPA Analysis (USDA Forest Service 2009). This document outlines the basic considerations for assessing climate change in relation to project-level planning. Two types of climate change effects will be considered for this analysis:

 Effect of the proposed project on climate change, specifically effects to greenhouse gas emissions and carbon cycling. Examples include: pyrogenic emissions caused by prescribed burning, changes in biogenic emissions through thinning and forest management, avoidance of

Page 226 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

large pyrogenic emissions associated with wildfire through forest management, and carbon cycle alterations through reforestation and forest management.  Effect of climate change on the proposed project. Examples include: effects of climate change on the seed stock selection for reforestation, potential changes in natural forest regeneration, and effects of decreased snow fall on recreation or stream flows.

Existing Condition Climate change projections for the Pacific Northwest include year-round warming temperatures, increased winter precipitation, and drier summers. In the next century, average annual temperature is expected to increase from between 3.3 to 9.7 degrees Fahrenheit, depending on global emissions scenarios, and is expected to increase the most during summer months (Mote et al. 2013). There is considerable disagreement across various climate models on the magnitude and direction of changes in precipitation regionally, but mean precipitation in the Pacific Northwest is generally projected to increase in the winter, spring, and fall, while summer precipitation is projected to decrease (Karl et al. 2009). Due to increased temperatures and seasonal changes in precipitation, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC 2007) projects that worldwide, more areas will be affected by drought and precipitation will increasingly fall in the form of heavy rainfall events.

In the Pacific Northwest, snowpack is projected to decrease in extent and duration, particularly at lower elevations (OCCRI 2010). Hydrologic response to climate change in watersheds with significant snowpack may be the most drastic; as warming would increase winter flows and advance the timing of spring snowmelt. By 2050, snowmelt is projected to shift 3 to 4 weeks earlier than the 20th century average (Barnett et al. 2005), and summer flows will be lower (Mote et al. 2013).

With earlier onset of summer conditions (due to warming temperatures, earlier snowmelt, and decreased summer precipitation), increased occurrence and severity of drought and fires, as well as greater vulnerability to insects and diseases can be expected (Mote et al. 2003). Warming is expected to encourage northward expansion of southern insects and longer growing seasons would allow more insect generations per season.

Environmental Consequences

Methodology See above under affected environment for the methodology utilized for assessing climate change.

Alternative 1 - No Action

Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects

Effect of the proposed project on climate change Under the no action alternative, all aboveground dead coarse woody debris, or necromass, would remain on site. While the majority of trees in the project planning area are already dead, a large portion of carbon is still stored in their intact boles. Over time, the carbon would slowly be released to the atmosphere as dead trees begin to decay and decompose.

Brush response cannot be precisely predicted, but from experience with other fires in Central Oregon and literature suggesting a positive correlation between fire severity and non-tree vegetation (Meigs et al. 2009) it is likely that brush establishment would be high. Brush competition with tree seedlings may slow forest regeneration, and may cause the treatment units in the project planning area to act as a carbon

Page 227 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment source for several decades before carbon sequestration from tree growth exceeds carbon emissions from decomposition.

Effect of climate change on the proposed project The effect of climate change on the project planning area is uncertain and depends on future emission scenarios. Predicted changes of warmer and drier summers may affect forest regeneration by causing drought stress on seedlings and saplings (Hanson et al. 2000). Under this alternative, planting may not occur as quickly as desirable and natural regeneration may incur more natural mortality due to changing climate. Lack of regeneration (artificial or natural) may cause prolonged periods of a brush-dominated successional stage.

Alternative 2 - Proposed Action

Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects

Effect of the proposed project on climate change The scope and degree of change from the proposed action is minor. The total area proposed for salvage (up to 1,800 acres) is a fraction of the forestland in the project planning area and on the Malheur National Forest as a whole. A project of this magnitude would contribute minimally to regional greenhouse gases. Furthermore, at the global scale, the proposed action’s direct and indirect contribution to climate change would be negligible, and therefore the project’s cumulative effects on greenhouse gasses and climate change would also be negligible.

Climate change is a global phenomenon because major greenhouse gasses mix well throughout the planet’s lower atmosphere (IPCC 2013). Considering emissions of greenhouse gasses in 2010 was estimated at 49 ± 4.5 gigatonnes globally (IPCC 2014) and 6.9 gigatonnes nationally (USEPA 2015), a project of this magnitude makes an infinitesimal contribution to overall emissions. Therefore, at the global and national scales, this proposed action’s direct and indirect contribution to greenhouse gasses and climate change would be negligible. In addition, because the direct and indirect effects would be negligible, the proposed action’s contribution to cumulative effects on global greenhouse gasses and climate change would also be negligible.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has summarized the contributions to climate change of global human activity sectors in its Fifth Assessment Report (IPCC 2014). In 2010, anthropogenic (human-caused) contributors to greenhouse gas emissions came from several sectors:

 Industry, transportation, and building – 41 percent  Energy production – 35 percent  Agriculture – 12 percent  Forestry and other land uses – 12 percent

There is agreement that the forestry sector contribution has declined over the last decade (IPCC 2014; Smith et al. 2014; FAOSTAT 2013). The main activity in this sector associated with greenhouse gasses emissions is deforestation, which is defined as removal of all trees, most notably the conversion of forest and grassland into agricultural land or developed landscapes (IPCC 2000).

This salvage project does not fall within any of these main contributors of greenhouse gas emissions. Forestland would not be converted into a developed or agricultural condition; instead, salvage treatment units would be replanted to encourage and hasten successful regeneration of forest. The utilization of

Page 228 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project timber for lumber and other durable wood products should also be accounted for in the carbon budget. Life cycle analyses of wood, from forest to final product, show that carbon can be stored in wood products for hundreds of years (Hennigar et al. 2010). Additionally, the use of wood products for construction rather than fossil fuel intensive concrete and steel has positive carbon implications (Perez- Garcia et al. 2005). This alternative aims to positively affect regional carbon pools by sequestering carbon in the form of new forests (reforestation) and the utilization of dead timber for wood products. Some fossil fuel emissions associated with heavy equipment and vehicles would occur, but not to the extent and degree that would contribute to global carbon pools.

Effect of climate change on the proposed project Though the effects of climate change to this project are difficult to predict, general trends and predictions show warmer, drier summers and increasing occurrence and severity of wildfires. This alternative may have short-term effects on fuel quantity and arrangement. Salvage logging has been shown to immediately increase fine woody debris above the level of debris in unsalvaged stands, due to logging activity and slash (Donato et al. 2006, Monstano et al. 2007). Most scientific literature related to salvage logging studies short-term effects, including most literature on re-burn potential in fire-salvaged stands. Monsanto and Agee (2008) used a chronosequence of fire in eastern Washington to demonstrate the longer term effects of salvage logging on fuels. After about 10 years, the level of coarse woody debris in unsalvaged stands exceeded that of debris in salvaged stands (ibid). While the initial increase in fine fuels after salvage may seem risky, perhaps the more important determinant of re-burn potential is the dense early successional vegetation (young trees and dense shrubs) that will dominate the project planning area for several decades. Reforestation after salvage may increase the ability of a forested stand to establish more quickly.

Compliance with Malheur Forest Plan and Other Relevant Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Plans The Forest Service Strategic Framework for Responding to Climate Change, states, “[t]he Forest Service will need to build consideration of climate change into virtually all aspects of agency operations including consideration of life cycle analysis of activities” (USDA 2008).

Forest Service Chief’s January 16, 2008 letter of direction transmitting the January 13, 2009, Climate Change Considerations in Project Level NEPA Analysis, applies general NEPA direction and regulation to the consideration of the appropriateness and degree of climate change and greenhouse gas emissions analysis for a given project. This guidance frames climate change analysis by discussing the answers to two fundamental challenges: how our management may influence climate change mainly through incremental changes to global pools of greenhouse gases and how climate change may affect our forests and grasslands.

Other Laws, Regulations, and Policies Several laws and executive orders that require project-specific findings or other disclosures are included in this section. The project complies with the following and other relevant legal requirements and coordination regulations.

Compliance with Malheur Forest Plan Direction The alternatives are consistent with the goals, objectives, and direction contained in the Malheur National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Malheur Forest Plan), and its accompanying Final Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision, as amended.

Page 229 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Other Considerations

Civil Rights and Environmental Justice There have been no issues or concerns raised regarding the interests of Native American Tribes.

There are no known direct, indirect or cumulative effects to Native Americans, minority groups, women, or civil rights beyond effects disclosed in the Malheur Forest Plan.

Executive Order 12898 on environmental justice requires federal agencies to identify and address any disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority and low income populations. The action alternatives would have no disproportionately high or adverse effects to minority or disadvantaged groups qualifying under the environmental justice order. Scoping raised no issues or concerns related to the principles of environmental justice. Implementation of either action alternative would not cause disproportionately high and adverse human health effects, high or adverse environmental effects, substantial environmental hazard or effects to differential patterns of consumption of natural resources. All interested parties will continue to be involved with commenting on the project and the decision making process.

Clean Air Act The proposed action is designed to be consistent with the Clean Air Act. The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality is responsible for assuring compliance with the Clean Air Act. In 1994, the Forest Service, in cooperation with the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, the Oregon Department of Forestry, and the BLM signed a Memorandum of Understanding to establish a framework for implementing an air quality program in northeast Oregon. The Memorandum of Understanding includes a prescribed fire emission limit of 15,000 tons of PM-10 per year for the Malheur, Ochoco, Umatilla, and Wallowa-Whitman National Forests. All prescribed burning on these forests is coordinated with Department of Environmental Quality through the State of Oregon smoke management program. No prescribed burning is proposed as a part of the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project.

Clean Water Act, Floodplains, and Wetlands

Clean Water Act This project is consistent with the Clean Water Act and Forest Service responsibilities under the Clean Water Act as described in a Memorandum of Understanding with the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (2014) because it would not measurably increase watershed impacts, including stream temperature, over the existing condition.

The Memorandum of Understanding also directs that the Forest Service cannot further degrade water quality impaired streams, although short-term adverse impacts that occur with long-term benefits are allowed. Several streams in the project planning area were on the Oregon 303(d) list for above normal stream temperatures, prior to the total maximum daily load being finalized. All alternatives comply with the Clean Water Act, because none raise stream temperatures, and because all follow best management practices as specified in Forest Service R6 General Water Quality Best Management Practices (1988) and National Best Management Practices for Water Quality Management on National Forest System Lands (2012).

The Forest Service is directed to comply with State requirements in accordance with the Clean Water Act for protection of waters of the State of Oregon (OAR chapter 340-41) through planning, application, and

Page 230 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project monitoring of best management practices, which are recognized as the primary means to control non- point source pollution on National Forest lands.

Best management practices would be monitored by the Blue Mountain Ranger District hydrologists, fish biologist, sale administrators, and harvest inspectors. The Memorandum of Understanding also directs that the Forest Service cannot further degrade water quality impaired streams.

Floodplains (Executive Order 11988) Executive Order 11988 says that Federal agencies shall avoid adverse effects to floodplains or minimize potential harm. Floodplains several to hundreds of feet wide occur in the project planning area. The floodplains are primarily contained within riparian habitat conservation areas. The proposed action would minimize adverse effects to the floodplains, and thus be consistent with Executive Order 11988.

Wetlands (Executive Order 11990) Executive Order 11990 says that Federal agencies shall avoid management practices that would adversely affect wetlands. The project does not proposes activities that would adversely impact wetlands and is consistent with the Executive Order protecting Wetlands.

Conflicts with Plans, Policies, or Other Jurisdictions There are no known conflicts with plans or policies of other jurisdictions associated with the alternatives.

Congressionally Designated Areas See chapter 3 for disclosure of environmental effects of the project on the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness. There are no other Congressionally-designated areas (e.g., Wild and Scenic Rivers) in or adjacent to the project planning area.

Ecologically Critical Areas There are no ecologically critical areas in the project planning area.

Endangered Species Act The proposed action is consistent with the Endangered Species Act. Biological evaluations and the biological assessment have been completed for all threatened, endangered, and sensitive plant, aquatic, and terrestrial wildlife species. All biological evaluations and the biological assessment are located in the project record for the Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project.

On June 2, 2016, the Malheur National Forest received a Letter of Concurrence from the National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service stating that we are in agreement with the finding that this project will have No Effect for Columbia River bull trout and their designated critical habitat, and May Affect, but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect (NLAA) Mid-Columbia River steelhead and their designated critical habitat, based on the rationale that this project occurs outside of bull trout designated critical habitat and the project is consistent with the Blue Mountain Expedited Process Instrument II Project Design Criteria Section 7 Consultation Process. The completed biological assessment and consultations are located in the project record.

Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments Irreversible commitments of resources are those that cannot be regained, such as the extinction of a species or the removal of mined ore. Irretrievable commitments are those that are lost for a period of time

Page 231 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment such as the temporary loss of timber productivity in forested areas that are kept clear for use as a power line rights-of-way or road.

Irreversible commitments are decisions affecting nonrenewable resources such as soils, wetlands, roadless areas, and cultural resources. Such commitments are considered irreversible because the resource has deteriorated to the point that renewal can occur only over a long period of time or at great expense or because the resource has been destroyed or removed.

Removing aggregate (gravel) from mineral material sources would result in an irreversible commitment of resources. Once aggregate is removed from material source sites and placed on roads, it cannot be renewed except over long periods of time.

Irretrievable commitments of natural resources involve the loss of production or use of resources. This represents opportunities foregone for the period of time that the resource cannot be used.

Fire-killed timber that is not proposed for salvage at this time presents an irretrievable loss of potential economic recovery.

Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 The purpose of this Act is to establish an international framework for the protection and conservation of migratory birds. The Act makes it illegal, unless permitted by regulations, to “pursue, hunt, take, capture, deliver for shipment, ship, cause to be carried by any means whatever, receive for shipment, transportation or carriage, or export, at any time, or in any manner, any migratory bird, including in this Convention…for the protection of migratory birds…or any part, nest, or egg of any such bird” (16 USC 703). The original 1918 statute implemented the 1916 Convention between the United States and Great Britain (for Canada). Later amendments implemented treaties between the Unites States and Mexico, Japan, and the Soviet Union (now Russia).

Effects to bird species listed under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act are described in the “Terrestrial Wildlife” section of this environmental assessment. The project is in compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.

Multiple-Use Sustained Yield Act of 1960 The Multiple Use-Sustained Yield Act of 1960 authorizes and directs the Secretary of Agriculture to develop and administer the renewable resources of timber, range, and water, recreation and wildlife on the national forests for multiple use and sustained yield of the products and services. The proposed action meets the intent of the Multiple Use-Sustained Yield Act. Proposed management of the lands in the project planning area are consistent of the goals and objectives of the Malheur Forest Plan and would continue to provide for the needs of the American people to enjoy multiple uses associated with water resources, recreation, and wildlife.

National Environmental Policy Act NEPA establishes the format and content requirements of environmental analysis and documentation. The entire process of preparing the environmental assessment was undertaken to comply with NEPA.

National Forest Management Act Requirements of the National Forest Management Act of 1976 (P.L. 94-588), including amendments to the Forest and Range Renewable Resource Planning Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-378) would be met.

Page 232 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

National Historic Preservation, Treaty Rights, Executive Order 12875, Executive Order 13287 and American Antiquities Act of 1906 Cultural and Tribal interests are regulated by Federal laws that direct and guide the Forest Service in identifying, evaluating, and protecting cultural resources. All of the alternatives would comply with federal laws. The Malheur Forest Plan tiers to these laws, therefore the proposed action would meet Forest Plan Standards. With the completion of the Cultural inventory under the terms of the 2004 Programmatic Agreement with Oregon State Historic Preservation Office, and by providing the interdisciplinary team with appropriate input as per NEPA, all relevant laws and regulations have been met.

Potential and Unusual Expenditures of Energy There are no potential or unusual expenditures of energy expected with this project.

Prime Farm Lands, Rangelands, Forest Lands and Parklands Prime Farmlands: The project planning area is not located in or adjacent to prime farmlands; therefore, there would be no impact to Prime Farmlands.

Prime Rangelands: The project does not contain prime rangelands because of soils, climate, and none of the proposed activities in the project planning area would convert rangelands to other uses. Therefore, there would be no negative impacts on Prime Rangelands.

Prime Forestland: The project would not convert forestlands to other uses. All lands designated as forested would be retained and managed as forested; therefore, there would be no negative impacts on Prime Forestlands.

Relationship between Short-Term Use and Long-Term Productivity NEPA requires consideration of “the relationship between short-term uses of man’s environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity” (40 CFR 1502.16). As declared by the Congress, this includes using all practicable means and measures, including financial and technical assistance, in a manner calculated to foster and promote the general welfare, to create and maintain conditions under which man and nature can exist in productive harmony, and fulfill the social, economic, and other requirements of present and future generations of Americans (NEPA Section 101).

Unavoidable Adverse Effects All of the alternatives considered result in some adverse effects. Many of these adverse effects would be minimized through implementation of design criteria and resource protection measures identified in this environmental assessment or through mitigation measures. Even with implementing these measures, there would still be adverse effects that cannot be avoided.

Consideration of Scientific Controversy The potential for controversy surrounding this proposed action was evaluated within our consultation and coordination process.

Some commenters described the negative environmental consequences that can result from post-fire management, and other comments discussed the positive environmental and economic consequences from this activity. Salvage harvest and reforestation are standard practices in forest management. A measure of disagreement about the desirability of these standard practices exists, but opposing science from commenters has been addressed in the Response to Comments received during the scoping period within the analysis process.

Page 233 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Chapter 4 – Consultation and Coordination Preparers and Contributors

Forest Service Interdisciplinary Team (Malheur National Forest) Name Title Resource Current Team Members Eric Amstad Recreation Technician Recreation / Visuals Janet Braymen GIS Specialist GIS Teresa Dixon Recreation Program Manager Recreation / Visuals Robert Dickenson Archaeologist Heritage Daniel DuShey Transportation Planner Transportation / Roads Jonna DuShey GIS Specialist GIS Ryan Falk Environmental Coordinator NEPA Review Team Lead, NEPA, Wilderness and Other Sasha Fertig NEPA Planner Undeveloped Lands Kate Goossens Writer Editor NEPA Writer Editor Bob Hassmiller Hydrologist Hydrology / Watershed Dustin Hollowell Wildlife Biologist Terrestrial Wildlife Pete LaDuke Forestry Technician (Timber) Logging Systems / Timber / Economics Brandy Langum Fisheries Biologist Fisheries Consultation Anna McGovern Forestry Technician (Timber) Logging Systems / Timber / Economics Robert McNeil Soil Scientist Soils Mark Mosley Forestry Technician (Timber) Logging Systems / Timber / Economics Nathan Poage Forest Analyst Silviculture/Remote Sensing Joe Rausch Botanist Botany / Invasive Species Clark Reames Wildlife Program Manager Terrestrial Wildlife Dana Skelly Fuels Specialist Fuels / Fire Nick Stiner Rangeland Management Specialist Rangeland Resources Lori Stokes Silviculturist Forest Vegetation Allen Taylor Fisheries Biologist Fisheries Biologist Allison Torres Soil Scientist Soils Lisa VanTieghem Biological Science Technician Botany / Invasive Species Former Team Members Larry Amell Forest Silviculturist (retired) Forest Vegetation Krystal Cates Forestry Technician (Timber) Logging Systems / Timber/ Economics Team Lead, NEPA, Wilderness and Other Randy Kyes NEPA Planner Undeveloped Lands

Page 234 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Forest Service Research Team (Rocky Mountain Research Station) Victoria Saab, Research Biologist/Principal Investigator Jonathan Dudley, Ecologist Jessica Haas, Ecologist Quresh Latif, Research Ecologist Jamie Sanderlin, Ecologist

Oregon State University Research Team Chris Dunn, James Johnston Consultation and Coordination An invitation to provide scoping comments was sent to the following Federal, State and local agencies, Tribal governments, businesses, organizations, and individuals: American Forest Resource Council, Back Country Horsemen, Blue Mountains Biodiversity Project, Blue Mountains Forest Partners, Cascadia Wildland Project, Dakom Logging, Inc., DOGAMI, DR Johnson Lumber, Freshwater Trust, Gander Ranch LLC, Grant County Commissioners, Grant County Court, Grant County Forest Commission, Grant County Public Access Advisory Board, Grant County Road Department, Grant Soil & Water Conservation District, Holliday Land and Livestock Company, Iron Triangle, J&M Coombs Ranch, LLC, King, Inc., Malheur Lumber Company, Moore and Hueckman, Morning Hill Forest Farm, National Wild Turkey Federation, Native Fish Society, North Fork John Day Watershed Council, Ochoco Lumber Company, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Oregon Department of Forestry, Oregon Department of Transportation, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, Oregon Natural Desert Association, Oregon State Snowmobile Association, Oregon Trail Electric Consumers Co-op, Oregon Wild, O’Rorke Logging Inc., Prairie Wood Products, Randy Scott Logging, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Sierra Club–Oregon Chapter, South Fork John Day Watershed Council, The Nature Conservancy, Watermaster- District 4, Windy Point Cattle Company, Inc., Dick Artley, Larry Baughman, Cheri Bellmore, Larry Blasing, Mark Cerny, Mike Cosgrove, David Evans, Billie Jo George, Allen Gillette, Ben Holliday, Jason and Clair Kehrberg, Judy Kerr, Chris Labhart, Tom McHatton, Len Parsons, Steve A. Parsons, Mark Pengelly, Ronald Phillips, Christy Rheu Waldner, Brooks Smith, Jim Spell, Jim Sproul, Kathy Stinnett, Christy Sweet, Bill Wilcox, and Eric Wunz.

The following Federal, State and local agencies, Tribal governments, businesses, organizations, and individuals provided comments during the development of this final environmental assessment.

Federal, State, and Local Agencies No comments were received from federal, state, or local agencies during public scoping for this project.

Advisory Groups, Boards, and Organizations Blue Mountains Biodiversity Project (Paula Hood) Grant County Public Forest Commission (Dave Traylor) Oregon State University (James Johnston) Oregon Wild (Pam Hardy) Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation (Bill Richardson)

Tribes No comments were received from tribes during public scoping for this project.

Page 235 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Businesses Iron Triangle LLC (Zach Williams) King Inc (King Williams) Ochoco Lumber Company (Bruce Daucsavage)

Individuals Dick Artley Larry Blasing Judy Kerr

Page 236 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

References Agee, J.K. 1993. Fire ecology of Pacific Northwest Forests. Island Press, Washington D.C.

Agee, J.K. 1996. Fire ecology of Pacific Northwest forests. Washington, DC: Island Press.

Altman, Bob. 2000. Conservation Strategy for Landbirds in the Northern Rocky Mountains of Eastern Oregon and Washington. American Bird Conservancy, Corvallis, OR

Anderson, H.E. 1982. Aids to determining fuel models for estimating fire behavior. General Technical Report INT-122. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 28p.

AOU (American Ornithologists’ Union). 1983. Checklist of North American Birds. 6th Edition. Am. Ornithology Union. Washington D.C.

Bacon, C.R. 1983. Eruptive history of Mount Mazama and Crater Lake Caldera, Cascade Range, U.S.A. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 18: 57-115.

Barrett, S., D. Havlina, J.A. Jones. 2010. Interagency fire regime condition class guidebook version 3.0. Homepage of the Interagency Fire Regime Condition Class website, USDA Forest Service, US Department of the Interior, and The Nature Conservancy. Available online: http://www.fire.org/niftt/released/FRCC_Guidebook_2010_final.pdf

Beche, L.A., S.L. Stephens, and V.H. Resh. 2005. Effects of prescribed fire on a Sierra Nevada (California, USA) stream and its riparian zone. Forest Ecology and Management 218: 37-59.

Bedwell, J., and D. Dillard. 2007. Scenery Management System – appendix J. File Code 2300/2060. Washington, DC: USDA Forest Service.

Beschta, R.L., and R.L. Taylor. 1988. Stream temperature increases and land use in a forested Oregon watershed. Water Resources Bulletin 24:19-25.

Beschta, R.L., J.J. Rhodes, J.B. Kauffman, R.E. Gresswell, G.W. Minshall, J.R. Karr, D.A. Perry, F.R. Hauer, C.A. and Frissell. 2004. Postfire management on forested public lands of the western United States. Conservation Biology 18(4): 957-967.

Binkley, D., and R.F. Fisher. 2013. Ecology and management of forest soils. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley- Blackwell.

Boerner, R.E.J. (1982). Fire and nutrient cycling in temperate ecosystems. BioScience 32(3): 187-192.

Brooks, M. and M. Lusk. 2008. Fire management and invasive plants: a handbook. Arlington, VA: United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 27 pp.

Brown, J.K., E.D. Reinhardt, and K.A. Kramer. 2003. Course woody debris: managing benefits and fire hazards in recovering forest. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-105. Fort Collins, CO: USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Brown, M. 2010. The big comeback: prefire understory plants return after the Hayman fire. U.S. Joint Fire Science Program Briefs. Paper 84. Available online: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/jfspbriefs/84

Page 237 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Buchanan, D.V., M.L. Hanson, R.M. Hooton. 1997. Status of Oregon’s bull trout. Portland, OR: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Bull, E.L. and R.C. Beckwith. 1993. Diet and foraging behavior of Vaux’s swifts in northeastern Oregon. Condor 95:1016-1023.

Bull, E.L. Richard S. Holthausen, and Mark G. Henjum. 1992. Roost Trees Used by Pileated Woodpeckers in Northeastern Oregon. Journal of Wildlife Management Vol. 56 No. 4 pp 786- 793.

Bull, E.L., and R.S. Holthausen. 1993. Habitat use and management of Pileated Woodpeckers in northeastern Oregon. J. Wildl. Manage. 57: 335-345.

Bull, E.L., C.G. Parks, and T.R. Torgerson. 1997. Trees and logs important to wildlife in interior Columbia River basin. USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report PNW-GTRp391. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, 55p.

Bull, Evelyn L. and T.W. Heater. 2000. Resting and denning sites of American martens in Northeastern Oregon. Northwest Science 74(3):179-185

Bull, Evelyn L., Thad W. Heater, and Jay Shepherd. 2005. Habitat selection by the American marten in northeastern Oregon. Northwest Science 79(1): 37-43

Cahall, R.E. and J.P. Hayes. 2009. Influences of postfire salvage logging on forest birds in the Eastern Cascades, Oregon, USA. Forest Ecology and Management 257: 1119-1128.

Campbell, S, D.L. Azuma, and D. Weyermann. 2004. Forests of eastern Oregon, an overview. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-578. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 19 pages.

Carlson, G. 1974. Malheur National Forest Soil Resource Inventory. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. Full text available online at: http://hdl.handle.net/2027/umn.31951d02527546l

Certini, G. 2005. Effects of fire on properties of forest soils: a review. Oecoligia 143(1): 1-10.

Clark, R.N. and G.H. Stankey. 1979. The Recreation Opportunity Spectrum: a framework for planning, management, and research. General Technical Report PNW-98. Seattle, WA: USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station.

Clip INFRA Road data to project planning area. O:\NFS\R06\Program\ResourceInfoMgmt\CustomerServices\CSA4\Tips&Tricks\ArcGIS\ArcMap

Conner, R.N., et. al. 1975. Woodpecker Nesting Habitat in Cut and Uncut Woodlands in Virginia. The Journal of Wildlife Management Vol. 39, No. 1 (Jan., 1975), pp. 144-150

D’Antonio, C.M. 2000. Fire, plant invasions, and global changes (Vol. 65). Washington, DC: Island Press.

Dahms, W.G. 1949. How long do ponderosa pine snags stand? Research Notes, No. 57. Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. Deschutes Branch.

DeGraaf, Richard M. and John H. Rappole. 1995. Neotropical Migratory Birds: Natural History,Distribution, and Population Change. Cornell Univ. Press. 676 pp.

Page 238 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Dixon, R.D. 1995. Density, nest-site and roost-site characteristics, home-range, habitat-use, and behavior of White-headed Woodpeckers: Deschutes and Winema National Forests, Oregon. Oregon Dept. Fish and Wildl. Nongame Rep 93-3-01

Dodge, R.S., P.Z. Fulé, C. and Hullsieg. 2008. Dalmatian toadflax (Linaria dalmatica) response to wildfire in a southwestern USA forest. Ecoscience 15(2): 213-222.

Donato, D.C., J.B. Fontaine, J.B. Kauffman, W.D. Robinson, and B.E. Law. 2013. Fuel mass and forest structure following stand-replacement fire and post-fire logging in a mixed-evergreen forest. International Journal of Wildland Fire 22: 652–666.

Dunham, J.B., M.K. Young, R.E. Gresswell, and B.E. Rieman. 2003. Effects of fire on fish populations: landscape perspectives on persistence of native fishes and nonnative fish invasions. Forest Ecology and Management 178: 183-196.

Dunn, C.J., and J.D. Bailey. 2012. Temporal dynamics and decay of coarse wood in early seral habitats of dry-mixed conifer forests in Oregon’s eastern Cascades. Forest Ecology Management 276: 71–8.

Dunn, C.J., and J.D. Bailey. 2015. Modeling the direct effects of salvage logging on long-term temporal fuel dynamics in dry-mixed conifer forests. Forest Ecology and Management 341: 93–109.

Edwards, C.A., and D. Pimentel. 1989. Impact of herbicides on soil ecosystems. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 8(3): 221-257.

Endangered Species Act of 1973. Title 16 United State Code, Sections 1531-1544.

Everest, F.H., and R.D. Harr. 1982. Influence of forest and rangeland management on anadromous fish habitat in western North America; 6. Silvicultural Treatments. General Technical Report PNW- 134. Portland, OR: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 19 pages.

Everett, R., J. Lehmkuhl, R. Schellhaas, P. Ohlson, D. Keenum, H. Riesterer, and D. Spurbeck. 1999. Snag dynamics in a chronosequence of 26 wildfires on the east slope of the Cascade Range in Washington state, USA. International Journal of Wildland Fire 9(4): 223-234.

Ferguson, D.E. and C. L. Craig. 2010. Response of six non-native plant species to wildfires In the northern Rocky Mountains, USA. Research Paper RMRS-RP-78. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 12 p.

Flitcroft, R.L., J.A. Falke, G.H. Reeves, P.F. Hessburg, K.M. McNyset, and L.E. Benda. 2016. Wildfire may increase habitat quality for spring Chinook salmon in the Wenatchee River subbasin, WA, USA. Forest Ecology and Management 359: 126-140.

Franklin, J.F. et. al. 1981. Ecological characteristics of old-growth Douglas-fir forests. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-118, USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region, Portland, Oregon

Freeman, J.P., T.J. Stohlgren, M.E. Hunter, P.N. Omi, E.J. Martinson, G.W. Chong, and C.S. Brown. 2007. Rapid assessment of postfire plant invasions in coniferous forests of the western United States. Ecological Applications 17(6): 1656-1665.

Frost, C. 1998. Presettlement fire regimes of the United States, a first approximation. In: Fire in ecosystem management: shifting the paradigm from suppression to prescription. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference Proceedings, No. 20. Tall Timbers Research Station.

Page 239 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Furniss, M.J., T.D. Roelofs, and C.S. Yee. 1991. Road construction and maintenance. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 19: 297-323.

Furniss, M.J., T.D. Roelofs, and C.S. Yee. 1991. Road construction and maintenance. Influences of forest and rangeland management on salmonid fishes and their habitats. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 19: 297-323.

Geist, J.M., and P.H. Cochran. 1999. Influences of volcanic ash and pumice deposition on productivity of western interior forest soils. Retrieved December 31, 2015 from the USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station’s Soil Quality Monitoring and Long Term Ecosystem Sustainability (SoLo) website: http://forest.moscowfsl.wsu.edu/ smp/solo/documents/GTRs/INT_280/GeistCochran_INT-280.php

Haggard, M. and W. L. Gaines. 2001. Effects of stand-replacement fire and salvage logging on a cavity- nesting bird community in eastern Cascades, Washington.

Hann, W.J. 2004. Mapping fire regime condition class: a method for watershed and project scale analysis. In: Proceedings of the 22nd Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference: Fire in Temperate, Boreal, and Montane Ecosystems. Tall Timbers Research Station, Tallahassee, FL.

Hargis, C.D., J.A. Bissonette, and D.L. turner. 1999. The influence of forest fragmentation and landscape pattern on American martens. Journal of applied Ecology, 36(1): 157-172

Haynes, R.W.; Horne, A.L. 1997. Economic assessment of the Basin. In: Quigley, T.M.; Arbelbide, S.J. tech. eds. An assessment of ecosystem components in the Interior Columbia Basin and Portions of the Klamath and Great Basins: volume IV. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-405. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station.

Hejl, S. and M. McFadzen. 2000. Maintaining fire-associated bird species across forest landscapes in the northern Rockies. Summary Report. Missoula, MT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 14p.

Hemmingsen, A.R. 1999. Middle Fork John Day bull trout sampling, 1999 draft summary. Unpublished draft report. Corvallis, OR: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Hessberg, P.F., D.J. Churchill, A.J. Larson, R.D. Haugo, C. Miller, T.A. Spies, M.P. North, N.A. Povak, R. T. Belote, P.H. Singleton, W.L. Gaines, R.E. Keane, G.H. Aplet, S.L. Stephens, P. Morgan, P.A. Bisson, B.E. Rieman, R.B. Salter, G.H. Reeves. 2015. Restoring fire-prone Inland Pacific landscapes: seven core principles. Landscape Ecology 30(10): 1805-1835.

Hessburg, P.F., J.K. Agee, and J.F. Franklin. 2005. Dry forests and wildland fires of the inland Northwest USA: Contrasting the landscape ecology of the pre-settlement and modern eras. Forest Ecology and Management 211: 117-139.

Heyerdahl, E.K., and J.K. Agee. 1996. Historical fire regimes of four sites in the Blue Mountains, Oregon and Washington. University of Washington, College of Forest Resources.

Heyerdahl, E.K., L.B. Brubaker, and J.K. Agee. 2001. Spatial controls of historical fire regimes: a multiscale example from the interior West, USA. Ecology 82(3): 660-678.

Hollenbeck, J.P., V.A. Saab, and R.W. Frenzel. 2010. Habitat suitability and nest survival of white- headed woodpeckers in unburned forests in Oregon. J. Wildl. Manage 75(5):1061-1071.

Page 240 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Jackman, S.M. 1974. Woodpeckers of the Pacific Northwest: their characteristics and their role in the forests. M.S. thesis, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon

Jenevein, S.A. 2012. Archaeological site monitoring plan for the Malheur National Forest. Document on file at the Malheur National Forest Supervisor’s Office, John Day, OR.

John Day Subbasin Revised Draft Plan (JDSRDP), March 15, 2005.

Johnson, C.G. and R.R. Clausnitzer. 1992. Plant Associations of the Blue and Ochoco Mountains. R6- ERW-TP-036-92. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region.

Johnson, Jr., C.G. 1994. Forest health in the Blue Mountains: an ecologist’s perspective on ecosystem processes and biological diversity. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-339. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 23 p. (Quigley, T.M., ed.; Forest health in the Blue Mountains: science perspectives).

Keen, F.P. 1929. How soon do yellow pine snags fall? Journal of Forestry 27:735-737

Keller, E.A., and F.J. Swanson. 1979. Effects of large organic material on channel form and fluvial processes. Earth Surface Processes 4: 361-380.

Keyser, T.L., F.W. Smith, and W.D. Shepperd. 2009. Short-term impact of post-fire salvage logging on regeneration, hazardous fuel accumulation, and understorey development in ponderosa pine forests of the Black Hills, SD, USA. International Journal of Wildland Fire 18: 451-458.

Kotliar, N.B., S.J. Hejl, R.L. Hutto, V.A. Saab, C.P. Melcher, and M.E. McFadzen. 2002. Effects of fire and post-fire salvage logging on avian communities in conifer-dominated forests of the western United States. Studies in Avian Biology 25:49-64.

Kozma, J.M. 2011. Composition of forest stands used by white-headed woodpeckers for nesting in Washington. Western North American Naturalist 71(1):1-9.

Kurulok, S.E. and S.E. Macdonald. 2007. Impacts of postfire salvage logging on understory plant communities of the boreal mixedwood forest 2 and 34 years after disturbance. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 37(12): 2637-2651.

Kwan, H., J. Van Sickle, and B. Hassmiller. 2015. Canyon Creek Fire Burned Area Emergency Response Hydrology and Watershed Specialist Report. John Day, OR: USDA Forest Service, Malheur National Forest.

Lindenmayer, D.B., P.J. Burton, and J.F. Franklin. 2008. Salvage logging and its ecological consequences. Island Press, 227.

Linder, K.A. and S.H. Anderson. 1998. Nesting habitat of Lewis’ woodpeckers in southeastern Wyoming. J. Field Ornithol. 69(1):109-116.

Lindstrand III, L. and M. Humes. 2009. White-headed woodpecker occurrences in Sun Pass State Forest, south-central Oregon. Northwestern Naturalist 90:212-216.

Liquori, M., and C.R. Jackson. 2001. Channel response from shrub dominated riparian communities and associated effects on salmonid habitat. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 37(6): 1639-1651.

Page 241 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Luce, C., P. Morgan, K. Swire, D. Isaak, Z. Holden, and B. Rieman. 2012. Climate change, forests, fire, water, and fish: building resilient landscapes, streams, and managers. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-290. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Luce, C.H., and T.A. Black. 2001. Effects of traffic and ditch maintenance on forest road sediment production. In: Proceedings of the Seventh Federal Interagency Sedimentation Conference, March 25 to 29, 2001, Reno, Nevada. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Inter-agency Committee on Water Resources, Subcommittee on Sedimentation: V-67-V-74.

Management After Wildfires: What can landowners do to manage property after a wildfire? http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_001731.pdf

Marshall D. B., M.G. Hunter, and A.L. Contreras (editors). 2003, 2006. Birds of Oregon: a general reference. Oregon state University Press, Corvallis, OR 768 pp.

Martin, Kathy, Kathryn EH Aitken, and Karen L. Wiebe. 2004. "Nest sites and nest webs for cavity- nesting communities in interior British Columbia, Canada: nest characteristics and niche partitioning." The condor 106.1 (2004): 5-19.

Maxwell, W.G., and F.R. Ward. 1980. Photo series for quantifying natural forest residues in common vegetation types of the Pacific Northwest. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-105. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 229 p.

McCallum, D.A. and F.R. Gehlbach. 1988. Nest-site preferences of flammulated owls in western New Mexico. Condor 90:653-661.

McDaniel, P.A., and M.A. Wilson. 2007. Physical and chemical characteristics of ash-influenced soils of inland northwest forests. In: Volcanic-ash-derived forest soils of the inland northwest: Properties and implications for management and restoration (pp. 31-46). 9-10 November 2005; Coeur d’Alene, ID. Proceedings RMRS-P-44. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 220 p.

McGinnis, T.W., J.E. Keeley, S.L. Stephens, and G.B. Roller. 2010. Fuel buildup and potential fire behavior after stand-replacing fires, logging fire-killed trees and herbicide shrub removal in Sierra Nevada forests. Forest Ecology and Management 260: 22–35.

McIver, J.D., and R. McNeil. 2006. Soil disturbance and hill-slope sediment transport after logging of a severely burned site in northeastern Oregon. Western Journal of Applied Forestry 21(3): 123-133.

McNeil, R.C. 2005a. Effect of tractor logging on soil in unit 34 of Flagtail Fire Salvage. Unpublished report available from soil scientists at Malheur National Forest.

McNeil, R.C. 2005b. Soil erosion on Flagtail Fire Salvage. Unpublished report available from soil scientists at Malheur National Forest.

McPherson, G.R., D.D. Wade, and C.B. Phillips. 1990. Glossary of wildland fire management terms. Bethesda, MD: Society of American Foresters.

Melgoza, G., R.S. Nowak, and R.J. Tausch. 1990. Soil water exploitation after fire: competition between Bromus tectorum (cheatgrass) and two native species. Oecologia 83(1): 7-13.

Page 242 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

Mellen-McLean, 2012. MIS Information sheets: Primary Cavity Excavators. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region, Portland, OR

Mellen-McLean, K. 2015. DecAID Advisor: the decayed wood advisor for managing snags, partially dead trees, and down wood for biodiversity in forests of Washington and Oregon. Version 2.20. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region and Pacific Northwest Research Station; USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, Oregon State Office; Portland, Oregon. http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/wildlife/decaid/index.shtml

Migratory Bird Management, Arlington, Virginia. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Miller, D., C. Luce, and L. Benda. 2003. Time, space, and episodicity of physical disturbance in streams. Forest Ecology and Management 178 (1-2): 121-140.

Miller, J.D., and A.E. Thode. 2007. Quantifying burn severity in a heterogeneous landscape with a relative version of the delta Normalized Burn Ratio (dNBR) (PDF, 2.3 MB). Remote Sensing of Environment 109: 66-80.

Minshall, G.W. 2003. Responses of stream benthic macroinvertebrates to fire. Forest Ecology and Management 178: 155-161.

Monsanto, P.G., and J.K. Agee. 2008. Long-term post-wildfire dynamics of coarse woody debris after salvage logging and implications for soil heating in dry forests of the eastern Cascades, Washington. Forest Ecology and Management 255: 3952–3961.

Mosgrove, J.L. 1980. The Malheur National Forest: an ethnographic history. John Day, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Region 6, Malheur National Forest. 253 p.

Najafi, A., A. Solgi, and S.H. Sadeghi. 2014. Effects of skid trail slope and ground skidding on soil disturbance. Caspian Journal of Environmental Sciences 8(1): 13-23.

Napper, C., D.S. Page-Dumroese, and S. Howes. 2009. Soil-Disturbance Field Guide. San Dimas, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, San Dimas Technology and Development Center. Retrieved February 11, 2016 from the USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station’s Soil Quality Monitoring and Long Term Ecosystem Sustainability (SoLo) website: http://www.fs.fed.us/t-d/pubs/pdf/08191815.pdf

National Drought Mitigation Center: Grazing Systems: Flash Grazing: Managing Drought Risk on the Ranch: http://drought.unl.edu/ranchplan/BeforeDrought/GrazingStrategy

National Wildfire Coordinating Group, Incident Operations Standards Working Team. 2007. Glossary of wildland fire terminology. PMS 205. Boise, ID: National Interagency Fire Center. 186 pages.National Wildfire Coordinating Group. 2004. NWCG fireline handbook. Document number NWCG Handbook 3, PMS 410-1, NFES 0065, March. 437 pages.

Natureserve. 2014. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life (web application). NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available online: http://explorer.natureserve.org

Nelson, R.L., M.L. McHenry, and W.S. Platts. 1991. Mining. In: Influences of forest and rangeland management on salmonid fishes and their habitats, pages 425-457. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 19. Bethesda, MD.

Page 243 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Ohmann, J. L., M. J., Gregory. 2002. Predictive mapping of forest composition and structure with direct gradient analysis and nearest-neighbor imputation in coastal Oregon, USA. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, Vol. 32, No. 4 pp. 725-741.

Olson, D.L. 2000. Fire in riparian zones: a comparison of historical fire occurrence in riparian and upslope forests in the Blue Mountains and southern Cascades of Oregon. Thesis for Master of Science, University of Washington.

Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA). 2015. Noxious Weed Policy and Classification System 2015. Available online: http://www.oregon.gov/ODA/shared/Documents/Publications/Weeds/NoxiousWeedPolicyClassifi cation.pdf

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2007. Middle Fork John Day River Subbasin ODFW Steelhead Redd Counts 1964 – 2007. Unpublished survey records. John Day, OR: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, John Day Fish District.

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2014. Middle Fork John Day River Subbasin ODFW Steelhead Redd Counts 1990 – 2014. Unpublished survey records. John Day, OR: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, John Day Fish District.

Oregon Employment Department. 2016. 2nd quarter employment and unemployment in Oregon’s counties. Available online at: http://www.qualityinfo.org/ed

Ottmar, R.D., S.J. Prichard, R.E. Vihnanek, and D.V. Sandberg. 2006. Modification and validation of fuel consumption models for shrub and forested lands in the Southwest, Pacific Northwest, Rockies, Midwest, Southeast, and Alaska. Final report. JFSP Project 98-1-9-06. 97 pages.

Page-Dumroese, D., A.M. Abbott, and T.M. Rice. 2009. Forest soil disturbance monitoring protocol, volume II: Supplementary methods, statistics, and data collection. GTR WO-82b, United States Department of Agriculture – Forest Service. Retrieved January 15, 2016 from the USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station’s Soil Quality Monitoring and Long Term Ecosystem Sustainability (SoLo) website: http://forest.moscowfsl.wsu.edu/smp/ solo/documents/GTRs/WO_82/SoilMonProtocol_GTR-WO-82b.pdf

Page-Dumroese, D., M. Jurgensen, W. Elliot, T. Rice, J. Nesser, T. Collins, and R. Meurisse. 2000. Soil quality standards and guidelines for forest sustainability in northwestern North America. Forest Ecology and Management 138: 445-462.

Parks, C.G., D.A. Conklin, L. Bednar, H. Maffei. 1999. Woodpecker use and fall rates of snags created by killing ponderosa pine infected with dwarf mistletoe. Res. Pap. PNW-RP-515. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 11pp.

Parsons, A., P.R. Robichaud, S.A. Lewis, C. Napper, and J.T. Clark. 2010. Field guide for mapping post- fire soil burn severity. RMRS-GTR-243, United States Department of Agriculture – Forest Service. Retrieved February 23, 2016 from the USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station’s Publications website: http://www.fs.fed.us/rm/pubs/ rmrs_gtr243.pdf

Peterson, D.L., M.C. Johnson, J.K. Agee, T.B. Jain, D. McKenzie, and E.D. Reinhardt. 2005. Forest structure and fire hazard in dry forests of the Western United States. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-628. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 30 pages. Peterson, D.W., E.K. Dowdson, and R.J. Harrod. 2014. Post-fire

Page 244 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

logging reduces surface woody fuels up to four decades following wildfire. For Ecology and Management 338: 84-91.

Phillips, B.G. and D. Crisp. 2001. Dalmatian toadflax, an invasive exotic noxious weed, threatens Flagstaff pennyroyal community following prescribed fire. In Southwestern rare and endangered plants: proceedings of the third conference (pp. 200-205). Fort Collins, CO: USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-23.

Phillips, R.W., R.L. Lantz, E.W. Claire, and J.R. Moring. 1975. Some effects of gravel mixtures on emergence of coho salmon and steelhead trout fry. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 104: 461-466.

Pickett, S.T.A., and P. S. White (eds.). 1985. The ecology of natural disturbance and patch dynamics. New York, NY: Academic Press, pages 3-13.

Poff, N.L., and J.V. Ward. 1990. Physical habitat template of lotic systems: recovery in the context of historical pattern of spatiotemporal heterogeneity. Environmental Management 14(5): 629-645.

Powell, D.C. 1998. Historical range of variability for forest structural classes. File Code: 2430, Route to: 2600. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Umatilla National Forest. 7 pages.

Powell, D.C. 2001. Description of composite vegetation database. Umatilla National Forest. 20 pages.

Powers, R.F., D.A. Scott, F.G. Sanchez, R.A. Voldseth, D. Page-Dumroese, J.D. Elioff, and D.M. Stone. 2005. The North American long-term soil productivity experiment: Findings from the first decade of research. Forest Ecology and Management 220: 31-50.

Purdon, M., S. Biais, Y. and Bergeron. 2004. Initial response of understory vegetation to fire severity and salvage‐logging in the southern boreal forest of Québec. Applied Vegetation Science 7(1): 49- 60.Quigley, T.M., R.W. Haynes, R.T. Graham (tech. eds.). 1996. Integrated scientific assessment for ecosystem management in the interior Columbia basin and portions of the Klamath and Great Basins. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-382. Portland, OR.

Reeves, G.H., L.E. Benda, K.M. Burnett, P.A. Bisson, and J.R. Sedell. 1995. A disturbance-based ecosystem approach to maintaining and restoring freshwater habitats of evolutionarily significant units of anadromous salmonids in the Pacific Northwest. American Fisheries Society Symposium. 17: 334-349.

Riccardi, C.L., R.D. Ottmar, D.V. Sandberg, A. Andreu, E. Elman, K. Kopper, and J. Long. 2007. The fuelbed: a key element of the fuel characteristic classification system. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 37(12): 2394‐2412.

Rinne, J.N. 1996. Short-term effects of wildfire on fishes and aquatic macroinvertebrates: Southwestern United States. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 16: 653-658.

Ritchie, M.W., E.E. Knapp, and C.N. Skinner. 2013. Snag longevity and surface fuel accumulation following post-fire logging in a ponderosa pine dominated forest. Forest Ecology and Management 287: 113–122.

Romain-Bondi, K.A. 2009. Wildlife Species and Habitat Assessment of Proposed Trails in Mount Spokane State Park. Pacific Biodiversity Institute, Winthrop, Washington. 64 p.

Page 245 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

Rose, C.L., B. G. Marcot, T. K. Mellen, J. L. Ohmann, K. l. Waddell, D. L. Lindley, and B. Schreiber. 2001. Decaying wood in Pacific Northwest forests: concepts and tools for habitat management. Wildlife-habitat relationships in Oregon and Washington. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, 580-623

Rosgen, D. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Pagosa Springs, CO: Wildland Hydrology.

Saab, V.A. and J.G. Dudley. 1998. Responses of cavity-nesting birds to stand replacement fire and salvage logging in ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir forests of southwestern Idaho. Res. Pap. RMRS- RP-11. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 17 p.

Saab, V.A., J. Dudley, and W.L. Thompson. 2004. Factors influencing occupancy of nest cavities in recently burned forests. Condor 106:20-36.

Saab, V.A., R. Brannon, J. Dudley, L. Donohoo, D. Vanderzanden, V. Johnson, and H. Lachowski. 2002. Selection of fire-created snags at two spatial scales by cavity-nesting birds. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-181. Pacific Southwest Research Station, USDA Forest Service. 14 pp.

Saab, V.A., Russell, and J.G. Dudley. 2007. Nest densities of cavity-nesting birds in relation to postfire salvage logging and time since wildfire. Condor 109-97-108.

Sanderson, H.R., T.M. Quigley, E.E. Swan, and L.R. Spink. 1990. Specifications for structural range improvements. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-250. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, Oregon.

Scott, D.N., D.R. Montgomery, and E.E. Wohl. 2014. Log step and clast interactions in mountain streams in the central Cascade Range of Washington State, USA. Geomorphology 216: 180-186.

Scott, J. H., and R.E. Burgan. 2005. Standard fire behavior fuel models: a comprehensive set for use with Rothermel’s surface fire spread model. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-153. Fort Collins, CO: USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 80 pages.

Sharp, B.E. 1992. Neotropical Migrants on National Forests in the Pacific Northwest.Unpublished. USFS Portland, Oregon.

Suffling, R. and A.H. Perera. 2004. Characterizing natural forest disturbance regimes: concepts and approaches. In: Emulating natural forest landscape disturbances: concepts and applications. New York, NY: Columbia University Press, pages 43-54.

Sugihara, N.G., J.W. van Wagtendonk, and J. Fites-Kaufman. 2006. Fire as an ecological process. In: Fire in California’s ecosystems. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, pages 58-74.

Thomas, J.W. et. al. 1979. Wildlife Habitats in Managed Forests: the Blue Mountains of Oregon and Washington. USDA Forest Service Agriculture Handbook No.553.

Thomas, S.C. 1991. Cultural resources inventory plan for the Malheur National Forest. Document on file at the Malheur National Forest Supervisor’s Office, John Day, OR.U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2014. Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Blue Mountains Land Management Plan, V.1. USDA, Forest Service, Pendleton, OR. 346 pp. Available online at: http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprd3792954.pdf

Torgersen, T.R. and E.L. Bull. 1995. Down logs as habitat for forest-dwelling ants – the primary prey of pileated woodpeckers in northeastern Oregon. Northwest Science. 69:294-303

Page 246 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA); David Evans and Associates; and Duck Creek Associates. 2003. Canyon Creek watershed analysis: ecosystem analysis at the watershed scale. USDA Forest Service, Malheur National Forest. 296 pages. Available online: https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1794/7129/Canyon_Creek_Watershed_ Analysis.pdf?sequence=1 (accurate as of 3/31/14).

U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Department of Interior, and Sonoma Technology, Inc. (n.d.). Fire Behavior Fuel Models and Their Environments. Retrieved April 01, 2016, from http://iftdss.sonomatech.com/documentation/Content/10-Reference/RefFuelModels.htm

United States Census Bureau. 2014. American fact finder [Electronic Database]. Available online at: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml.

United States Department of Commerce-National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration-National Marine Fisheries Service: Endangered Species Act Biological Opinion and Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat Response for Administration of the Dark Canyon and Fawn Springs Allotments. 2012-2016

United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. Federally listed, proposed, candidates species, and species of concern within Grant County, OR. Available online: http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/reports/species-by-current-range-county?fips=41025

USDA Forest Service [FSM]. 2010. Forest Service Manual 2550 – Watershed and Air Management: Chapter 2550 – Soil Management. Retrieved February 25, 2016 from the Forest Service Manual website: http://www.fs.fed.us/cgi-bin/Directives/get_dirs/fsm? 2500

USDA Forest Service 2015. Canyon Creek Complex Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) Hydrology Report. John Day, OR: USDA Forest Service, Malheur National Forest.

USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management. 1995. Environmental Assessment and Decision Notice for the Implementation of Interim Strategies for Managing Anadromous Fish- producing Watersheds in Eastern Oregon and Washington, Idaho and Portions of California.

USDA Forest Service, 1991. External Relations, Forest Service Manual (FSM) 1500 series. USDA Forest Service. Available online: http://www.fs.fed.us/im/directives/

USDA Forest Service, 2014. Travel Management Directives, Forest Service Manual & Forest Service Handbook (FSM & FSH) 7700 series. USDA Forest Service. Available online: http://www.fs.fed.us/im/directives/

USDA Forest Service, 2015. Landownership, Forest Service Manual (FSM) 5400 series. USDA Forest Service. Available online: http://www.fs.fed.us/im/directives/

USDA Forest Service. 1990a. Malheur National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. USDA Forest Service, Malheur National Forest, John Day, Oregon. Available on line at: http://www.fs.usda.gov/main/malheur/landmanagement/planning

USDA Forest Service. 2002. Regional Forester Letter to Forest Supervisors: Reforestation Requirements following Salvage Sales. Dated November 19. On-file at the Malheur National Forest, John Day, OR

Page 247 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

USDA Forest Service. 2014. Rapid Assessment of Vegetation Condition after Wildfire (RAVG). Pacific Northwest Region. Portland, OR

USDA Forest Service. 2015. Update of the Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species Lists and Transmittal of Strategic Species List. July 13, 2015. Pacific Northwest Region. Portland, OR.

USDA Forest Service. 09/2015. Forest Roads Analysis Supplement to the 2004 Forest Roads Analysis. Malheur National Forest, John Day, OR. Available online: http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/malheur/landmanagement/?cid=FSEPRD486397

USDA Forest Service. 1974. National Forest Landscape Management Volume 2, Chapter 1 The Visual Management System, Agriculture Handbook Number 462. USDA Forest Service.

USDA Forest Service. 1982. ROS Users Guide. Washington, DC: USDA Forest Service.

USDA Forest Service. 1988. General Water Quality Best Management Practices. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region.

USDA Forest Service. 1990. Malheur National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. John Day, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Malheur National Forest. Available online at: http://www.fs.usda.gov/main/malheur/landmanagement/planning.

USDA Forest Service. 1990a. Malheur National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. USDA Forest Service, Malheur National Forest, John Day, Oregon. Available online at: http://www.fs.usda.gov/main/malheur/landmanagement/planning

USDA Forest Service. 1990b. Malheur National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, Final Environmental Impact Statement, USDA Forest Service, Malheur National Forest, John Day, Oregon. Available online at: http://www.fs.usda.gov/main/malheur/landmanagement/planning

USDA Forest Service. 1990c. Malheur National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, Record of Decision. USDA Forest Service, Malheur National Forest, John Day, Oregon. Available online at: http://www.fs.usda.gov/main/malheur/landmanagement/planning

USDA Forest Service. 1995. Decision Notice for the Revised Continuation of Interim Management Direction Establishing Riparian, Ecosystem and Wildlife Standards for Timber Sales. (Eastside Screens). USDA Forest Service, Region 6: Colville, Deschutes, Fremont, Malheur, Ochoco, Okanogan, Umatilla, Wallowa-Whitman and Winema National Forests in Oregon and Washington. Available online at: http://www.fs.usda.gov/main/malheur/landmanagement/planning

USDA Forest Service. 1995. Landscape aesthetics a handbook for scenery management. USDA Forest Service.

USDA Forest Service. 1995. Regional Foresters Eastside Forest Plans Amendment 2

USDA Forest Service. 2000. Landbird Strategic Plan. Washington D.C.

USDA Forest Service. 2001. A Practical Approach to Adaptive Management: With a Specific Focus on Livestock Management NEPA Based Decisions: Chuck Quimby

USDA Forest Service. 2002. Reforestation requirements following salvage sales. Regional Forester Letter, File Code 2470/2430, November 19, 2002. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region.

Page 248 of 250 Canyon Creek Complex Fire Salvage Project

USDA Forest Service. 2003. Post Fire Interim Grazing Guidelines, Malheur National Forest. Unpublished Report. USDA Forest Service, Malheur National Forest, John Day, Oregon.

USDA Forest Service. 2004. The Malheur National Forest Roads Analysis Report. John Day, OR: Malheur National Forest.

USDA Forest Service. 2005. Pacific Northwest Region Invasive Plant Program Final Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service.

USDA Forest Service. 2008. Forest Service Manual (FSM 2670, Section 2672.4).

USDA Forest Service. 2008. Forest Service Manual (FSM 2670, Section 2672.42).

USDA Forest Service. 2008. Forest Service Manual (FSM 2670, Section 2081.03).

USDA Forest Service. 2010. National visitor use monitoring results. John Day, OR: USDA Forest Service, Malheur National Forest.

USDA Forest Service. 2012. National Best Management Practices for Water Quality Management on National Forest System Lands Volume 1: National Core BMP Technical Guide (FS-990a); April 2012.

USDA Forest Service. 2014. Decision Notice for Aquatic Restoration Project. USDA Forest Service, Malheur National Forest, John Day, Oregon. Available online at: http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprd3820599.pdf.

USDA Forest Service. 2015a. Draft Specialist Report: Biological Evaluation for Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Plants and Invasive Plant Risk Assessment for the Bailey Butte Salvage Project. Written by Krista Farris, District Botanist, Ochoco National Forest.

USDA Forest Service. 2015b. Field Guide to Sensitive Plants of the Malheur National Forest. Unpublished book developed using publically available information and photos.

USDA Forest Service. 2015c. Natural Resource Manager (NRM) database. National Forest Service database for sensitive plant data management. Formerly known as NRIS.

USDA Forest Service. 2015d. Pacific Northwest Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species List. Available online: http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/sfpnw/issssp/agency-policy/

USDI Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS]. (2013). Programmatic Biological Opinion for Aquatic Restoration Activities in the States of Oregon, Washington and portions of California, Idaho and Nevada (ARBO II). [FWS reference: 01EOFW00-2013-F-0090]. Portland, OR: Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office. 465 p.

USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002. Birds of conservation concern. Division of Migratory Bird Management, Arlington, Virginia. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. 2004. U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan. Division of

Valley, S. 2010. Founder: Oregon Dragonfly Survey, Insect Imaging Specialist, Oregon Dept of Agriculture- Plant Division. In Scheuering, E. 2006. Columbia Clubtail (Gomphus lynnae) (dragonfly) species fact sheet. Interagency Special Status/ Sensitive Species Program (ISSSSP)

Page 249 of 250 Final Environmental Assessment

webpage. USDA Forest Service/ USDI Bureau of Land Management, Oregon and Washington. Available Online (http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/sfpnw/issssp/species-index/fauna-invertebrates.shtml).

Water Quality, Habitat, and Organisms: A Literature Review. Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA) 50(3): 560-584.

Wemple, Beverly. 1994. Hydrologic Integration of Forest Roads with Stream Networks in Two Basins, Western Cascades, Oregon. 88 p.

Wightman, C.S., V.A. Saab, C. Foristal, K. Mellen-McLean, and A. Markus. 2010. White-headed woodpecker nesting ecology after wildfire. J. Wildl. Manage. 74(5): 1098-1106.

Wikipedia. 2008. Soil Horizon. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soil_horizon. (Accessed June 2016).

Wisdom, M.J., R.S. Holthausen, B.C. Wales, C.D. Hargis, V.A. Saab, D.C. Lee, W. Hann, T. D. Rich, M.M. Rowland, W.J. Murphy and M. R. Eames. 2000. Source habitats for terrestrial vertebrates of focus in the Interior Columbia Basin: broad-scale trends and management implications. Gen. Tech Rep. PNW-GTR-485 May 2000. USDA Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR

Wolfson, B.A.S., T.E. Kolb, C.H. Sieg, and K.M. Clancy. 2005. Effects of post-fire conditions on germination and seedling success of diffuse knapweed in northern Arizona. Forest Ecology and Management 216(1): 342-358.

Zdanowicz, C.M., G.A. Zielinksi, and M.S. Germani. 1999. Mount Mazama eruption: Calendircal age verified and atmospheric impact assessed. Geology 27(7): 621-624.

Page 250 of 250