DEPOSITORY

A 13.92:

K 66/2x/REC. ..I )d States GRIDER FIRE Department of RECOVERY PROJECT Agriculture KLAMATH NATIONAL Forest Service RECORD OF DECISION Pacific Oak Knoll Ranger District Southwest Siskiyou County, California Region

AII'

~~~LP0 ~~~~~I.~~~~~~B;1' RECORD OF DECISION

GRIDER FIRE RECOVERY PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

Klamath National Forest Oak Knoll Ranger District Siskiyou County, California

INTRODUCTION

Between August and October, 1987, fires burned approximately 260,000 acres of land on the Klamath National Forest. Of that, 7,283 acres burned in the unroaded portion of the Grider Creek drainage on the Oak Knoll Ranger District. The aftermath of these catastrophic fires demanded a prompt and massive recovery effort.

Development and implementation of a project plan for the Grider Fire Recovery Area is part of that massive effort. In order to develop and select an effective recovery plan for the project area, two questions had to first be answered: (1) what recovery actions would most benefit the project area in terms of both short- and long-term recovery from fire impacts, and (2)what opportunities existed for the prompt recovery of fire-killed, stressed and dying timber.

Since the project area is currently unroaded, additional data were necessary to determine the type of access options available for salvage and other recovery projects. The level of fire recovery and salvage activities would vary, depending on the kind and amount of access into the project area.

To determine the environmental consequences of implementing the range of recovery project options available to the Forest Service, an environmental analysis was conducted in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). This interdisciplinary analysis has been utilized as the basis for the difficult decision of selecting a project plan from the array of alternative proposals for the Grider Recovery Project. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) documenting this analysis process and the 8 alternatives considered in detail was prepared and released on September 15, 1988. After the public review and comment period, which lasted until October 31, 1988, the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) was prepared. In response to public and management concerns, an additional alternative was developed and analyzed. The FEIS fully considers and discloses the consequences of 9 alternative recovery proposals for the project area. These estimates have been used to determine the type and extent of recovery activities that would be most appropriate for the project area.

On April 7, 1989, the Pacific Southwest Regional exempted the Grider Fire Recovery Project from the Forest Service administrative appeals process, pursuant to 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 217.4 (11). The FEIS was then released for a 30 day public review period on May 15,1989. This review time afforded the public the opportunity to review changes that had been made to the FEIS as a result of public response to the DEIS and further interdisciplinary team work.

Since the publication of the FEIS, further modifications have been made to Alternative H-Modified. These changes will be addressed below.

Current management direction for lands in the Grider Recovery Area can be found in the 1972 Multiple-Use Plan for the Oak Knoll Ranger District and the Pacific Southwest Regional Guide. Under the Multiple-Use Plan, the project area is presently classified as General Forest Zone, Water

R - 2

- Influence Zone, and Travel Influence Zone. The Pacific Southwest Regional Guide gives direction for management of National Forest lands in Region 5. In addition to the Multiple-Use Plan and the Pacific Southwest Regional Guide, other pertinent management direction has been used. The sources of this direction come from updated management plans, guidelines, and handbook supplements such as the Pacific Crest Trail Management Plan, Dead and Down Material and Snag Management Guidelines, guidelines for Spotted Owl Habitat Areas, Recovery Plan Objectives for Peregrine Falcons. The purpose of these additional plans and guidelines is to enhance the Multiple-Use plan for multiple resource protection and enhancement.

The Klamath National Forest is currently preparing the Forest Land and Resources Management Plan. This plan is required by the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974 (RPA), as amended by the National Act 1976 (NFMA).

The NFMA allows the Forest Service to continue the management of units of the National Forest System under existing land and resource management plans until completion of Forest Plans. This decision on the Grider Fire Recovery Project EIS is being made prior to final approval of the Forest Plan. The urgency to rehabilitate the Grider Recovery Area, in order to protect its resources and to allow the capture of the burned timber values, demands the promptest decision possible for selection and implementation of a project plan. This decision could not have been delayed until after approval of the Forest Plan.

The Grider Fire Recovery Project FEIS tiers to the Oak Knoll District Multiple-Use Plan for land allocation direction as well as specific management direction pertaining to the protection of fisheries, watershed, geologic stability, wildlife, soil productivity, etc. The information that has been gathered in developing this FEIS will be used in developing the EIS for the Forest Plan.

This FEIS discloses environmental effects predicted to occur in the Grider Creek watershed analysis area for each alternative considered in detail. A certain degree of environmental impact from the 1987 is unavoidable under any alternative; some incremental effects in addition to fire impact are probable under any alternative implementation. A wide range of resource values and management activities can be affected, including cultural, fisheries, geology, recreation, oils, vegetation, visual and water quality, and wildlife values; and fire, fuels, and transp tation-s\ ;tem management activities. (For a detailed discussion of alternative effects, see Chapter IV of the =IS.) DECISION

Based on the Grider Fire Recovery Project FEIS, it is my decision to select Alternative H-Modified, with the changes listed below, as the project plan for the Grider Fire Recovery Area. This record of decision documents my selection of the alternative and my rationale for the selection.

The selected alternative is a modification of Alternative H-Modified as described in the FEIS. It is my decision to modify Alternative H-Modified in the following manner:

1. The US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) has proposed the Northern Spotted Owl for listing as a threatened species. Until the FWS determines whether the spotted owl should be listed, it is my decision to delete all harvest units within the 1,650 acre core area of the Rancheria Spotted Owl Habitat Area (SOHA). Those units are: 6075A, 6075B, 6076A, 6076B, 6077A, 6077B, 6078A, 6078B, 6079, 6190B, 6266, 6067, 6268, 6269, 6270, 6271, 6272, 6277, 6278, 6296, 6297. In addition, the following units were modified to eliminate harvest in portions of these units that were in the SOHA: 6279, 6280, 6281 B, 6296, 6297. This results in the elimination of approximately 5.1 MMBF of timber. In addition, approximately 1.8 miles of road have been eliminated from the SOHA which would have serviced these timber harvest units.

SOUTHERN OREGON UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

R - 3 3 5138 006517772 This deletion of harvest units completes the review of the Rancheria SOHA and designates it suitable owl habitat, removes it from the timber base and prescribes no harvest manage- ment for it. This portion of the decision will be reviewed if additinal mortality renders the habitat unsuitable and it is unoccupied by owls for 5 years.

2. An unstable land mass in the Limestone Bluffs area makes the construction and long-term maintenance of a portion of road 45N06Z more expensive than previously thought. Also, construction of this section of road could degrade water quality in Grider Creek. It is my decision to eliminate approximately 0.66 miles of this road in order to eliminate increased economic and resource impacts. As a result of this action, unit 80 will now be harvested by helicopter system rather than a conventional short-span system.

3. Lop and scatter of logging slash was proposed for 82 acres of perimeters of Streamside Management Zones (SMZ). In reviewing fuel treatments on similar sites in the Lower Copper Timber Sale, Oak Knoll Ranger District, Klamath National Forest, it has been determined that normal springtime burning practices combined with contour falling within the SMZ ade- quately meets resource objectives at a lower cost. It is my decision to remove lop and scatter as a mitigation measure from timber harvest units planned in the Grider FEIS.

The Selected Alternative was developed in keeping with the Klamath National Forest Recovery Philosophy and Goal Statement: to return, if possible, the burned areas to either their former or potential biological and economic productivity - or to their best use based on existing land capabilities. The Selected Alternative will accomplish this goal through recovery activities, such as surface stabilization, timber salvage and of burned project-area land, retention of snags and down woody debris for wildlife needs. The Selected Alternative will retain Large Woody Debris and ground cover so to meet minimum and optimal soil cover guidelines in the quickest time-frame possible. Recovery of the Rancheria Spotted Owl Habitat Area (SOHA) will occur through natural processes without any timber harvest within the 1,000 acre core area. Protection of inner gorges will take place through the avoidance of geologic unstable areas and the limited harvest in Streamside Management Zones. The Selected Alternative also reduces the risk of future catastrophic fires through fuels management reduction activities. Optimal road locations have been selected to avoid or mitigate geologic unstable areas, and no major streams are crossed or bridges constructed.

The Selected Alternative will recover approximately 24.1 MMBF of salvage and sanitation timber with the construction of 9.8 miles of access roads. Conifers will be planted on 996 acres of harvested and understocked lands in the project area; hardwoods will be planted in about 48 acres of streamside zones for bank stabilization. Placement of approximately 105 structures for water- shed and fisheries protection will occur on about 160 acres.

Where additional tree mortality occurs as a result of direct and indirect fire effects, it is my intent to salvage this material. Incidental and insignificant numbers of fire-killed , where not other- wise designated for other purposes (such as snag retention and recruitment, existing and future down woody debris for wildlife and soils, SMZ protection, visual mitigation, etc.) would be removed under timber sale contracts, if still in force. The removal of this timber will be consistent with the intent for resource protection and enhancement and will be consistent with the guidelines set forth in the FEIS for protection of these resources. The site-specific analysis for these stands of timber has been done with the Grider Fire Recovery Project EIS and any additional removal of that timber mortality, at that time, will be done through that document.

The decision to implement the Selected Alternative includes a monitoring plan that will provide information to evaluate project actions and effects. The information gathered in the monitoring

R - 4 phase will allow an evaluation of the effectiveness of mitigation measures and will aid in the planning of future entries into the recovery area

The Selected Alternative complies with all applicable Federal and State laws and regulations. If information gathered from the monitoring phase indicates that laws, regulations, or objectives are not being met, then the project will be modified accordingly.

The Grider Fire Recovery Project FEIS is a site specific document. The recovery projects include timber salvage with associated road construction. The environmental analysis of these sales is complete with this FEIS.

RATIONALE FOR THE DECISION

The primary decision criterion and foundation for the Klamath National Forest Recovery Goal is found in the basic premise of the Forest Service Mission: 'The objective of the USDA Forest Service is to provide a continuing flow of natural resource goods and services to help meet the needs of the Nation and to the needs of the international community...' (Forest Service Manual (FSM) 1030.2). The first and foremost of the 7 mission objectives listed under FSM 1030.2 is to make the renewable resources of the National Forest System fully productive to provide a sustained flow of recreation, forage, , water, fish, wildlife and wilderness. Recovery efforts and opportunities will be guided by these statements. Effectiveness of the Klamath's efforts in attaining its long-term recovery goal depends on the ability to respond quickly. The return of Grider project-area resource productivity to the level of its former potential value must begin with prompt initiation of rehabilita- tion projects for resources such as soil, water, fish and timber. The specific objectives of rehabilita- tion and salvage/sanitation activities planned for the Grider Recovery Area include:

1. Recovery of long-term soil productivity by restoring surface cover to optimal levels at the earliest possible time where fire impacts have reduced it, and by minimizing erosion from recovery activities.

2. Recovery of water quality and its beneficial uses by reducing the potential for water quality degradation and hastening improvement through surface stabilization projects.

3. Revegetation of unstable areas and restocking of understocked stands through refor- estation activities to restore fisheries, wildlife and timber productivity.

4. Salvage of as much fire-killed and severely damaged timber as possible while protecting the integrity of other resources, to capture the maximum economic value and to minimize the potential future loss of wood values from the spread of insect infestation and disease to healthy neighboring trees.

5. Reduce fuel loadings so that the risk of future catastrophic fire events is reduced.

6. Limit impacts to the visual and recreation resources by screening management activities as much as possible in areas of high sensitivity.

Long-term soil productivity is an important selection criterion; soil productivity can be maintained by minimizing surface disturbance to soil cover from wildfire and subsequent salvage-related activities. The Selected Alternative will reduce surface impacts by balancing conventional tractor, cable-harvest systems and helicopter-harvest systems. Harvest activities will create slash which will increase ground cover in areas where wildfire has denuded the surface material; this will act

R - 5 to increase surface cover and large woody debris which will reduce surface erosion and benefit long-term soil productivity.

Cumulative watershed effects were considered in this decision. The Selected Alternative will lower impacts to beneficial uses, and provides the greatest long-term stability for watershed. Although short-term impacts are slightly less under Alternative B, the Selected Alternative contributes greater long-term watershed stability due to rapid reforestation and reduced risk of large fires.

Recovery projects have been designed to reduce sedimentation through sediment traps and check-dams. Enhancement projects such as hardwood planting in streamside areas and root wad placement in stream pools will increase fish habitat cover - the primary beneficial use of Grider Creek. The Selected Alternative will emphasize stream protection. Streamside Management Zones (SMZ) will be established along stream courses in and adjacent to timber harvest units. There will be no harvest within approximately 95 percent of these buffers; the remaining 5 percent will have individual tree harvest where damage to riparian zones can be avoided.

The Selected Alternative also considers habitat diversity for wildlife, which is essential to the maintenance and survival of wildlife populations and species diversity. Under the Selected Alterna- tive, habitat diversity is predicted to increase in 6 of the 7 seral stages in the Grider Creek drainage as a result of harvest activities. The old growth component seral stage (4C+) will not be reduced under the Selected Alternative. This seral stage will remain at 13-percent, the same percentage as under Alternative A. All seral stages will be within the Regional Diversity Guidelines of 5 percent of each seral stage. As a result of protecting visual, recreational, water quality and fisheries habitat, the Selected Alternative leaves a corridor of unharvested timber along Grider Creek. This corridor is a result of elimination of harvest units that could have degraded resource values in this area. The remaining corridor would vary in width from 2 miles at its northern end to 2/3 mile at the southern end.

There will be no adverse impacts to any Federally listed threatened and/or endangered species or critical habitat as a result of this project plan. Existing peregrine falcon eyries will be protected, as in all alternatives considered. Through consultation with the USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, protection measures for the falcons have been established. An April 6, 1989 letter from the Fish and Wildlife Service to the Klamath National Forest concurs with our biological assessment in that there would be no adverse impact to either the peregrine falcons or the bald eagles (located outside of the project area).

The Northern Spotted Owl has been proposed for threatened status by the FWS. Proposed harvest units contained within the 1,650 acre Rancheria SOHA have been deleted as identified above. Implementation of the Selected Alternative will comply with current regional direction for spotted owl habitats.

The Rancheria SOHA 1,650 acre core area would not be entered under this FEIS for timber harvest or associated road construction. Until such time that the FWS determines the status of the Northern Spotted Owl, there will be no timber harvest within this core. This SOHA has been identified as part of the Klamath National Forest interim network and is expected to become a dedicated SOHA, and will be treated as such until it is analyzed by the Forest Land and Resource Management Plan.

Fire-killed or damaged timber declines in net volume and dollar value over time; the longer harvest is delayed, the greater will be the decline in its net volume and value. The Selected Alternative will recover about 24.1 MMBF. Under some alternatives, more timber would be salvaged, but important issues such as water and fisheries habitat quality would not be adequately addressed. The Selected Alternative will provide reforestation of 996 acres of understocked stands in the project area, which will also benefit wildlife and reduce soil erosion. Road construction is necessary to

R - 6 economically salvage timber and provide access for more effective reforestation efforts. All of the project area can be accessed under this alternative by either roads or helicopter. Limited road construction permits conventional harvest with tractors and skyline cable systems (22-percent of the volume harvested), and provides economical helicopter access to the remainder of the burned area (78-percent of the volume harvested). The project area is not fully roaded; road access has been limited to ridges and no major stream crossings or bridges will be constructed. The remain- der of the project area is accessible by helicopter. The corridor of unroaded land remaining along Grider Creek is only accessible by foot or helicopter.

In addition to salvage, reforestation and watershed rehabilitation measures, road access of the Grider Recovery Area is beneficial for increased effectiveness of future fire prevention and suppres- sion, insect and disease control, and multiple-use management activities.

Increased potential for future catastrophic wildfire in the Grider drainage was a very important consideration in the selection process. Development of a transportation system in the project area will improve access for fuel reduction activities to more effectively reduce logging slash and establish a fuel mosaic through various types of fuel treatments. Additional road access will also increase the effectiveness of fire prevention activities, and will reduce initial attack times and thus the size of future .

In areas where organic surface material is in abundance, fuels management and soil productivity concerns will be addressed through alternative fuel treatment strategies, such as handpiling, jackpot burning, or springtime broadcast burning.

Reducing the potential for insect and disease infestation was also an important determining factor in this decision. Timber damaged by fire is under stress and more susceptible to damage by insects and disease. The resultant insect populations may affect adjacent stands of healthy timber. The Selected Alternative will reduce this risk by harvesting dead and fire-damaged timber.

The cost efficiency of recovery activities was also considered in the decision. While the Selected Alternative does not have the highest monetary return, it is one of the more economically feasible alternatives. Timber values received are expected to pay for the cost of the harvest, road develop- ment and mitigation measures required for environmental protection. Low volume-per-acre harvest units have been eliminated from the Selected Alternative because of costly harvest and mitigation requirements, thereby eliminating any additional cumulative effects they might have on the Grider Creek watershed due to harvest related activities. However, leaving this burned material poses a long-term fuels management problem and an increased risk of large fires in the future.

Recreation and visuals are also very important issues in this recovery project. Management of the unroaded portion of the Grider drainage has been a controversial issue for a number of years. The former Grider Roadless Area was considered and rejected for recommended wilderness designa- tion 3 times during the Roadless Area Review Evaluations (RARE); it was finally released for multiple-use management activities under the 1984 California Wilderness Act. The long-range management of this area will be addressed in the Draft Klamath Land and Resource Management Plan. Most of the unroaded area is allocated as General Forest by the Oak Knoll District's Multiple- Use Plan, which calls for intensive timber management consistent with other resource values and plans. An area along Grider Creek is designated as Water Influence and Travel Influence Zones. The Water Influence Zone direction is to maintain or enhance water quality and on-site use, while the Travel Influence Zone direction calls for maintaining or enhancing natural beauty and attractive- ness. Reductions in the unroaded component under the Selected Alternative will be less than under Alternative H-Modified.

R - 7 Roading portions of the unroaded area may temporarily reduce the semi-primitive nbn-motorized recreation opportunities and promote roaded opportunities for hunting. All roads constructed in the project area, however, will be closed upon completion of post-sale activities.

The Pacific Crest Trail (PCT), which traverses Grider Creek and provides access to the Marble Mountain Wilderness, will not be directly affected by timber harvest or road construction activities under the Selected Alternative.

Existing Visual quality objectives (VQOs) in the drainage will be maintained under this alternative over the long-term. The consequence analysis documented in the DEIS identified areas where management activities would result in unacceptable modification under Alternative H. Adjustments in the Selected Alternative have eliminated these visually unacceptable areas; however, visual quality may experience short-term reductions of 1-2 VQO classes (from the Existing VQO's) in some portions the project area.

I am fully aware of the environmental consequences disclosed in the Grider Recovery Project FEIS that are predicted to occur under each alternative considered in detail. There was no single decisive factor in my choice of alternatives - the Selected Alternative is the most balanced in addressing the full spectrum of issues. I have reviewed referenced documents and I am aware of their content and intent. In addition to the above rationale, specific alternative effects that influ- enced my eventual decision are briefly described in the following Alternatives section.

ALTERNATIVES

The Grider Interdisciplinary (ID)Team began the alternative development process after identifying and refining the major issue areas, gathering preliminary field data and studying the existing resource inventories. Ten alternatives were developed to provide a wide range of ways to address the issues and achieve recovery objectives. Two of these alternatives were eliminated after ID Team review because of unacceptable impacts or similarity with other alternatives (see Chapter 11of the FEIS for details). The remaining 8 were fully developed and considered in detail, including management features, mitigation measures, enhancement projects and monitoring requirements. After reviewing public responses to the DEIS, the ID Team modified the preferred alternative, Alternative H, to address public response and management concerns in the FEIS. This resulted in Alternative H-Modified. Additional modifications were made to Alternative H-Modified, as de- scribed above, to arrive at the Selected Alternative. Highlights of the 9 FEIS alternatives analyzed in detail are described below.

Alternative A - No Action

Consideration of this alternative is required by NEPA. No management action would be taken to recover resource productivity values or fire-killed and damaged timber values - the project area would be left to recover naturally.

Alternative B - Recovery Projects - Environmentally Preferred

There would be no timber salvage or road construction in this alternative; it has a recovery theme designed to provide rehabilitation measures that would reduce adverse fire impacts while main- taining the unroaded condition of the project area. Recovery projects would occur in the most severely burned areas on extremely unstable lands, highly erosive soils, and along the most critical stream reaches. Approximately 670 acres would be reforested; an additional 194 acres of under- stocked project area land would be left to regenerate naturally.

R - 8

-- - Alternative B is the environmentally preferred alternative, as it is predicted to have the least impact on the physical resources of the project area. It would, however, have the most impact on the local social and economic environments. There would be no monetary returns from timber salvage to the Federal Treasury or Siskiyou County; no reforestation would occur to increase long-range timber productivity, which could delay future harvests. Lack of development in the project area would make it largely inaccessible for public use of resources under multiple-use management.

Alternative C - Salvage - No Road Construction

The theme of this alternative is low-impact salvage of fire-killed timber only. Leaving the project area in an unroaded condition would require nearly exclusive use of helicopter logging (about 95 percent) to harvest a total of approximately 20.8 MMBF. This would minimize impacts to amenity values such as visual, water, and fisheries and wildlife habitat quality and increase salvage recovery costs. Cable harvest would be limited to units adjacent to existing roads. Reforestation of 715 acres would occur under even-aged treatments, while 149 acres would be left to regenerate naturally.

Alternative D - Salvage - Minimum Roading

This alternative is similar to Alternative C, except that it provides access into the recovery area by development of 6.1 miles of roads located primarily on ridge-tops that would avoid sensitive wet and extremely unstable areas. This would allow tractor salvage of 1.9 MMBF of fire-killed timber, increased skyline-cable harvest of 5.8 MMBF, more total salvage volume (25.9 MMBF), and more regeneration (864 acres) through even-aged management methods.

Alternative E - Salvage - Moderate Roading

The environmental setting under this alternative would be very similar to Alternative D, except that development of a larger transportation system (13.2 miles of road) would access more salvage volume for conventional systems. About 11.9 MMBF (55 percent) of the total harvest volume (25.9 MMBF) would be cable-logged; volume of tractor harvest (1.9 MMBF) and amount of reforestation (864 acres) would be the same as Alternative D.

Alternative F - Regeneration/Salvage - No Roading

This alternative is similar to Alternative C, except that about 7.8 MMBF of sanitation timber would also be harvested. Concurrent harvest of salvage and sanitation timber would increase regenera- tion potential and improve long-term vigor of young residual stands. Examples include severely damaged, decadent, diseased or insect-infested trees and trees that would become isolated and cause damage to young stands if left to future harvest entries. Lack of road construction and almost exclusive use of helicopter logging (about 96 percent) would minimize effects on the amenity values (visuals, water, fish, etc.). Cable logging would be employed at a minimum (1.1 MMBF) from existing roads. Approximately 28.6 MMBF of timber would be harvested, and 1,057 acres would be regenerated by even-aged treatments.

Alternative G - Regeneration/Salvage - Minimum Roading

This alternative has the same regeneration theme as Alternative F and the same minimum-roading theme as Alternative D. The additional sanitation harvest in conjunction with the 6.1 miles of road-system development would allow more cable-logged timber harvest (11.4 MMBF), greater total harvest volume (35.4 MMBF - 67 percent helicopter), and regeneration of 1,343 acres by even-aged methods.

R - 9 Alternative H - Regeneration/Salvage - Moderate Roading

This alternative has the same sanitation emphasis as Alternative G; thus it would have the same total harvest (35.4 MMBF) and amount of reforestation (1,343 acres). The development of a larger transportation system (13.2 miles) would allow more of the total volume to be harvested by skyline-cable systems (18.4 MMBF or 53 percent).

Alternative H-Modified

This alternative modifies the Preferred Alternative identified in the DEIS. Improved placement of roads and harvest units would provide better protection of water quality, fisheries and visual resources. Timber harvest levels and road access would be slightly lower than Alternative H. Approximately 29.2 MMBF of timber would be harvested (54 percent conventional), 12.3 miles of road would be constructed and 1,071 acres would be treated by even-aged regeneration.

For more detailed description of the alternatives, refer to Chapter II of the FEIS. Chapter IV of the FEIS describes the environmental consequences of implementing any of the above alternatives.

Other Alternatives Considered

Two of the original 10 alternatives considered, Alternatives I and J, were eliminated from detailed study. Their descriptions and the rationale for their elimination are as follows:

ALTERNATIVE I - MAXIMUM TIMBER HARVEST

This alternative would salvage fire-killed timber in conjunction with full development of the entire drainage during this entry. Approximately 70 MMBF of timber would be harvested and 53 miles of road would be constructed. This alternative was developed to respond to concerns for economic efficiency, to coordinate fire salvage with future harvest options, and to maximize the long-term management of the timber resource in the Grider drainage.

This alternative was eliminated from further consideration for 2 reasons: (1) combined resource impacts from the fire and harvest of the fire area, along with full development of the unburned portion of the drainage, would be unacceptable at this time, and (2) other alternatives involving road development are designed to develop a transportation system compatible with future trans- portation needs that would be economically efficient over the long term.

ALTERNATIVE J - ECONOMICS

This alternative would focus on maximizing dollar outputs to the local and national economy. All Grider Recovery Projects would be evaluated for cost efficiency - only the most cost-efficient or those projects with the highest dollar return would be included.

This alternative was dropped from further consideration because economic efficiency was used as a criterion in every alternative for selection of harvest units, road segments, and recovery projects.

For a more detailed description of the alternatives, refer to Chapter II of the FEIS. Chapter IV of the FEIS discloses the estimated environmental consequences of implementing these alternatives.

R - 10 ISSUES

The following is a brief comparison of alternative responses to the 9 major issues that were developed during the scoping process; only the more relevant differences in their environmental consequences are highlighted here.

Issue No. 1 - Timber Management

The silvicultural objective of this issue is to create logical harvest units for long-range stand management. Silviculturists considered a variety of harvest methods, including even-aged man- agement (cc, seed tree and shelterwood), and uneven-aged management (group selection and individual tree selection). They then recommended options to the ID Team. The Team analyzed the recommendations on a unit-by-unit basis and selected the optimum mix for each alternative.

Alternatives D, E, G, H and H-Modified provide the largest volume of salvage timber recovered. Both Alternatives D and E recover 86 percent of the short-term salvage volume for 25.9 MMBF. Most of the salvage volume is harvested by these alternatives because they harvest the most acres. Alternatives G and H recover slightly less salvage volume at 85 percent, but harvest the most timber overall at 35.4 MMBF; these alternatives set up logical harvest units but harvest some uneconomical units. This increase in harvest is accomplished on less acres, but the harvest intensity is greater. Alternative H-Modified harvests less volume at 29.2 MMBF with 77 percent of the salvage volume; economical and logical harvest units are established for long-range stand management and reforestation. The Selected Alternative harvests 24.1 MMBF with 60-percent from salvage timber.

Alternative C harvests the lowest amount of salvage, with 20.8 MMBF. The bulk of this is harvested with helicopter systems; no roads are constructed. No timber is harvested in Alternatives A, no-action, and B, recovery projects. These alternatives allow the project area to recover naturally.

Alternatives G and H accomplishes the most reforestation - 1,343 acres. Alternative H-Modified has 1,071 acres of planned reforestation. The Selected Alternative would reforest 996 acres. Alternative B would have 670 acres of reforestation activity, primarily for watershed and fisheries concerns. Issue No. 2 - Fisheries/Watershed

Alternative G would have the most cumulative effects on watershed and fisheries values, in terms of total sediment delivery to Grider Creek. In a 2-year storm event (Q2) an estimated 3,162 tons of sediment would be delivered to the drainage system. This represents the greatest predicted increase over the Alternative A baseline value - an increase of 170 tons or only about 5 percent.

Alternatives E and H, which have the most proposed roading (13.2 miles), also have the highest ERA values at 13.4 and 13.6, respectively - 3.9 to 4.1 percentage points higher than the 9.5 percent value predicted for Alternative A.

Alternative H-Modified has the second lowest sediment delivery value of any harvest alternative because of a virtual elimination of proposed harvest, and subsequent post-treatment activity, in sensitive areas such as streamside management zones. This results in a projected Q2 sediment delivery value of 2,944 tons - almost 2 percent less than the no-action baseline value; the drainage ERA value is reduced to a lesser extent to 12.1 percent - a predicted increase of 2.6 percentage points over the Alternative A value. Although its estimated Q2 delivery value of 74 percent over pre-fire conditions may seem high, it is 3 percentage points lower than the baseline value of 77 percent projected for Alternative A.

R- 11 The Selected Alternative has the lowest sediment delivery value of any harvest alternative. This is due to the reasons identified under Alternative H-Modified; additionally, proposed harvest units and roads in the Rancheria SOHA have been deleted, and a segment of road in the Limestone area has been deleted. Subbasin RL2, located in the Rancheria drainage, is critical for sediment delivery. The ERA for this subbasin has been lowered from 44.1-percent (Alternative H-Modified) to 6.7-percent under the Selected Alternative due to the elimination of harvesting and road construction in this area The total Grider drainage ERA value is 11.2-percent. Estimated sediment delivery within the Rancheria drainage has been reduced by 53 tons during the Q2 event to 1,041 tons.

Alternative B would have the least impact to fisheries and overall watershed values with respective increases of 60 and 71 percent of delivered sediment under Q2 and Q 10 conditions relative to pre-fire levels. This lower delivery value is due to its exclusive focus on recovery projects, with no timber salvage or road construction. Both Alternatives A and B have the greatest risk for future large wildfires because dead woody material is not removed or treated to reduce fuel loading levels.

Issue No. 3 - Roading

The largest transportation system (13.2 miles) would be developed under Alternatives E and H, which would provide more project-area access for conventional logging. These alternatives would employ the most balanced mix (close to 50/50) of conventional and helicopter logging systems. Alternative H-Modified will have slightly less road construction at 12.3 miles (the next highest); but its harvest balance is similar with 54 percent of the total volume logged by skyline-cable systems. The Selected Alternative will construct 9.8 miles of road and the harvest system mix will be 22-percent conventional, 78-percent helicopter.

No roads would be constructed under Alternatives A, B, C, and F, but with somewhat different recovery objectives in mind. In Alternatives A and B there would be no salvage activity, while in Alternatives C and F, low-impact salvage of fire-killed timber would be predominantly by helicopter - 95 and 96 percent, respectively - with the remainder cable-logged from existing roads.

Issue No. 4 - Habitat Diversity

All alternatives exceed the regional management requirements for habitat diversity. The minimum standard is 5 percent for each seral stage. When measured against the post-fire situation, all alternatives meet or exceed the existing diversity. Salvage and sanitation harvest will decrease the 4C+ level by a maximum of 3 percent in Alternative D, E, G, H, and H-Modified. Alternatives C and F decrease the level by 2 percent and Alternatives A and B remain the same. The Selected Alternative will not change the 4C+ seral stage from the post-fire condition.

Issue No. 5 - Economics

The maximum dollar return to Federal and local governments is achieved in Alternative H, $3.6 and $1.8 million respectively. The larger the harvest level, the greater the monetary return. Alternative H-Modified would return less revenue to Federal and local governments at $2.9 and $1.5 million respectively. The Selected Alternative would return slightly less revenue to Federal and local governments than Alternative H-Modified, but more than Alternative G. There would be no return to federal or local governments in Alternatives A and B.

Altematives C, D, and E show negative revenues to the federal government. This is an indication that the timber harvest costs may make these alternatives unattractive for timber purchasers;

R - 12 therefore, if the salvage volume is not purchased the return to the governments is the same as Alternative A or B.

Issue No. 6 - RecreationNisuals

There would be no change in the future visual character predicted for the drainage under Alterna- tive A, as the visual impact of the fire is considered to be a natural-appearing part of the landscape (see Chapters III and IV,Visual Resources, in the FEIS). Alternative B would have the second least reduction (4 percent). The alternative that would affect the greatest change in visual character is Alternative E, reducing it about 31 percent, while Alternative H-Modified is estimated to effect a 20 percent reduction - the third lowest change in visual character. The Selected Alternative would change the visual character less than Alternative H-Modified, but more than Alternative B. The remaining alternatives (C, F, D, G and H) have projected reductions of 21 to 28 percent. These changes would be a result of project activities, including timber salvage/sanitation, road access construction, reforestation, and site-specific rehabilitation projects under the harvest alternatives.

Under Alternative H, the Grider drainage analysis area would have the most land (10,002 acres) which would not meet VQOs; Alternatives A and B would have 6,494 acres. Alternative H-Modified will not meet VQOs on 9,003 acres. The Selected Alternative has fewer acres which would not meet VOO's than Alternative H-Modified but more than Alternatives A and B. The other harvest alterna- tives would range from 8,525 to 9,524 acres. Salvage/sanitation harvest and related recovery activities are the primary influence in these harvest alternatives.

Alternatives A and B would leave the drainage with the most 'untouched landscape' (15,929 acres),left in its current state without salvage-related activities. In Alternatives D and E the drainage would have 11,876 acres of untouched landscapes, as a predicted result of salvage and road- access construction activities. Alternative H-Modified is projected to leave the drainage with 12,712 acres of untouched landscapes - the fourth highest of the alternatives. The Selected Alternative will have more untouched landscapes than Alternative H-Modified, but less than Alternatives A and B. In the remaining harvest alternatives, the drainage would have from 12,044 to 12,825 acres of untouched landsc ipes.

The unroaded character of the project area would change in any alternative where roads are developed. No change wout J occur in the unroaded area (10,860 acres) under Alterantives A, B, C, and F, as no roads would be constructed. Alternatives E and H would reduce unroaded areas the most - leaving it at 9,146 acres. Alternative H-Modified will retain a little more of this area (9,334 acres) as a result of about a mile less road construction; the Selected Alternative will retain more acres than Alternative H-Modified as a result of 2.5 miles less road construction; while Alternatives D and G - with about 7 miles less roading - would leave 9,854 acres.

Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized (SPNM) lands would also be also affected by salvage-related road- ing activities. Thus, in Alternatives A, B, C and F, the largest SPNM area in the drainage (9,208 acres) would be retained. Alternatives D and G would have 5,998 acres of SPNM. Under Alterna- tives E and H, the smallest SPNM area (5,029 acres) would be left; while Alternative H-Modified will leave 5,091 acres. The Selected Alternative will leave more acres in SPNM than Alternative H-Modified due to fewer miles of road construction, but fewer than in Alternatives D and G.

The last indicator assessed for the Recreation/Visual environment of the drainage was measured in acres of the Pacific Crest Trail (PCT) which would be significantly affected". This is defined as an unacceptable modifications of an area, by reducing its VQO classes 2 or more levels. The existing situation shows 5,973 acres of the drainage in this category. There would be no change in Alternatives A, B or C. Alternative C would have no management which could be seen from the

R - 13 V___

PCT. The drainage would have the largest significantly affected area (6,770 acres) in Alternative H, as it has the most proposed harvest, road construction, and recovery project activity that could be seen from the PCT. Under Alternative H-Modified this area would be reduced to 6,212 acres - an increase of 239 acres the Alternative A no-action scenario. The Selected Alternative would have fewer acres in this category than Alternative H-Modified but more than Alternative F. The remaining alternatives have 6,179 to 6,636 acres in this category.

All practical means of mitigating visual disturbance have been built into the framework of the Selected Alternative. Timber harvest units and road construction have been eliminated near the PCT. Harvested units within the middle and background views of the PCT will have boundaries shaped according the visual quality objective of the area, and both green and fire-killed timber will be retained to reduce visual obtrusiveness.

Issue No. 7 - Fuels/Fire

The size of future large fires is predicted to decrease under Alternatives C, D, E, F, G, H, H-Modified and the Selected Alternative. This is due to the effectiveness of their fuels treatment activities in reducing the amount of existing and anticipated natural fuel and logging slash build-up. Potential size of future wildfires under these alternatives - assuming a 4-hour delay for initial suppression response - is estimated at 60 acres, compared to 295 acres under Alternatives A or B. Fuels treatment accounts for this significant difference in size. Type of access also plays role in future and size, and it can influence initial attack time, logistical efficiency and safety. The increased road access in Alternatives D, E, G, H, H-Modified and the Selected Alternative would reduce initial attack time to .45 hours, as compared to 2 hours for Alternatives A, B, C, and F.

Issue No. 8 - Insect and Disease Control

For insect and disease control, in general, the greater the area accessed and the more insect- and disease-prone trees removed, the less habitat is available for insects to utilize. There would be no reduction in potential insect and disease habitat in Alternatives A and B; the fire-killed and weakened trees left standing would provide habitat for insects and diseases that could spread to adjacent healthy stands. This habitat would be reduced by 3,509 acres under Alternatives D and E, 3,383 acres under Alternatives G and H, 2,701 acres under Alternative H-Modified, 2,696 acres under Alternative C, and 2,586 acres under Alternative F. The Selected Alternative would reduce 2,414 acres of this habitat.

Issue No. 9 - Soil Productivity

Soil productivity has been estimated, in part, in terms of the amount of soil cover identified as minimum and optimum in the Forest Soil Cover Guidelines. In general, the less the soil cover,'the more the potential for erosion which in turn decreases soil productivity. Alternatives C, D, E, F, G, H-Modified, and the Selected Alternative would all meet the minimum and optimum guidelines in 2 years. This rapid rate of surface recovery would be achieved through planned increases in logging slash in burns where surface cover has been significantly reduced. Alternatives A and B would take up to 4 years to achieve the same result.

PUBLIC INVOLVEMEN T AND RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENT

Public concern over the future of the Grider Creek watershed began to escalate as early as the onset of the 1987 Fires. The ensuing controversy remains focused on the appropriate degree of

R - 14 management response to fire impacts on the drainage. Public involvement meetings were held in Seiad Valley and Yreka, California, to encourage the public to voice opinions and concerns.

Additional input was obtained in formal and informal meetings and field trips, with representatives of environmental groups, the forest products industry, and local, State and Federal governmental agencies. Open-house sessions were also held on 2 separate occasions at the Grider Fire Recovery Project Office in Yreka to provide information, answer questions and solicit further input. In addition, Grider Project personnel prepared and distributed a biweekly newsletter to keep the public abreast of project developments such as the major issues, alternatives and other relevant topics. Articles were also published in local newspapers elaborating on project status, develop- ment of alternatives, and who to contact for further information.

The Grider Fire Recovery Project DEIS was released on September 15, 1988. The public review and comment period lasted to the close of business on October 31, 1988. The Klamath National Forest received approximately 200 responses to the DEIS. These responses were individual pieces of mail and each document contained one or more comments on specific issues, proposed activities or recovery topics more general in nature.

The content analysis of public response summarizes and reflects, as accurately as possible, individual public comments. No relative weights were given or policy recommendations assigned. Public opinion is very important in the decision process, as the decision maker needs to be aware of all relevant values, proposals, suggestions and concerns expressed. Whether an opinion is for, against, divided or undecided, each is important to gaining an accurate, overall perspective of the public views. It is important to note that public response to the DEIS was not utilized as a Ovoting4 process. The number of responses in favor or against a certain issue or topic does not dictate or prescribe agency decisions.

Responses to the DEIS include original letters, cards, form letters and resolutions. The majority of responses consist of form letters and modified form letters. The largest single group of form letters was sent by the Klamath Alliance for Resources and the Environment (KARE). KARE supports salvage and roading in the project area The second largest group of form letters favors no timber harvest or road construction (Alternative B). These responses stress natural recovery of the project area supplemented by watershed and fisheries recovery projects.

Public response generally fell into 2 categories or interest areas - commodity and amenity interests. Commodity interest groups favor Alternative H, and the immediate extraction of salvage timber to realize maximum economic gains to local and Federal governments and benefit to the local economy. They also stress the need to develop a road system to facilitate future multiple-use management of the project area These groups feel that the area should not be preserved or maintained in an unroaded state.

The amenity interest groups generally favor Alternative B - they are mostly against, or discourage, salvage of timber or road construction. Their primary concern for the project area is any loss of its wildlife, watershed or fisheries values, or its present primitive character and the solitude and recreational experience it provides. While they generally desire little or no management activity, these groups do want the Forest Service to rehabilitate the area through recovery projects for its amenity values.

There are over 1,500 comments on the DEIS and the alternative recovery project proposals it describes. Alternative H drew the most support, with 858 comments (or 56 percent) in favor of the preferred alternative; Alternative B received next greatest support, with 360 (or 21 percent) sup- portive comments; third is Alternative A which received 132 favorable comments (10 percent).

R - 15 The Grider Recovery Project DEIS was revised to reflect responses from the public and other agencies. On-going field review also identified areas of concern that were addressed by the ID Team. Chapter V of the FEIS addresses public response to the DEIS. This chapter includes (1) a summary of public involvement before and after DEIS publication, (2) a summary of public re- sponse to the DEIS by major issue area and how it was addressed in the FEIS, and (3) representa- tive comments and ID Team responses.

As a result of the Grider Fire Recovery Project being exempted from the appeals process, the FEIS was released on May 15, 1989 for a 30 day public review period. Upon the close of the public comment period, 6 letters were received. Comments centered on biological diversity, wildlife corridors, watershed modeling, and old-growth dependent wildlife species. MITIGATION AND MONITORING Mitigation Measures

Mitigation measures are defined as actions taken to avoid, minimize, reduce, eliminate, or rectify the impacts of management activities. The mitigation measures identified in the FEIS, Chapter II are adopted as part of my decision. All practical means to avoid or minimize environmental harm from the Selected Alternative have been adopted. Some of the more important mitigation measures are summarized below.

STREAMS. To protect stream temperature and fisheries habitat, and reduce sediment delivery to streams, streamside management zones (SMZ) would be managed to maintain 80 percent of the canopy cover in class I and 11streams and 70 percent of the canopy cover within class IlIl streams. The width of the SMZ would vary depending upon soil type, stream class, extent of fire disturb- ances, and steepness and stability of slopes. Standard SMZ widths are included in Appendix D, FEIS. Management objectives within the SMZ would emphasize establishment and maintenance of sufficient ground and canopy cover to protect water quality and stability of landforms. Salvage of fire-killed timber would occur only where primary objectives can be met. Timber sale contract provisions would require directional and full suspension of logs over inner gorge buffers.

WILDLIFE. Habitat for snag and dead and down material dependant wildlife would be managed according to the current Forest Snag Management Guidelines. A minimum of 1 hard and 2 soft snags per acre and 320 cubic feet of down woody material per acre would be maintained.

All management activities have avoided the peregrine falcon eyries. Consultation with the USDI Fish and Wildlife Service has established guidelines for management of these areas. A biological assessment was prepared to determine the impacts of the project on the peregrine falcons and bald eagles. The biological assessment shows that there would not be any adverse impact to these species from this project. The US Fish and Wildlife have reviewed the biological assessment and are in concurrance with our findings.

FISHERIES. Where practical and feasible, check-dams and filter-cloth-lined sediment traps would be constructed across class IV ephemeral streams and perennial streams above critical fisheries stream reaches. Hardwood and conifer trees would be planted in selected riparian areas burned by the fire or disturbed by salvage activities to accelerate the return of stream shade and stabilize streambanks with added root mass. Sensitive inner gorge areas, mass-wasting streambanks, and high-erosion hazard areas would be seeded with both legumes and deep-rooted grasses to reduce sediment delivery. Burned bedload areas on fisheries reaches would be seeded and stabilized to prevent future flood events from causing channel scour. Stabilizing ground cloth would be placed on the most sensitive burned streambanks and riparian areas to inhibit sloughing

R - 16 and promote stability. Wattling of brush and burned material at the base of oversteepened inner gorges would be used to prevent sedimentation.

SOIL PRODUCTIVITY. Trees of less than 6 inches in diameter would be contour felled to control erosion in selected high-watershed sensitivity slopes. Log erosion barriers (LEB) would be installed on uniform slopes at the base of swales and inner gorges to reduce rill and gully erosion. Soil organic matter cover requirements to protect long term site productivity would be met where sufficient organic matter currently exists. Soil cover requirements can be found in Appendix E, FEIS. Slash will be cool burned within clearcut and seed tree areas and small concentrations of slash would be burned within salvage areas. The objective is to maintain adequate soil cover for soil protection and productivity after management activities.

ROADING. Erosion control measures and drainage control structures would be used to reduce soil movement and stream sedimentation from road cut and fillslopes. Rock-filled drainage structures and energy-dissipating structures, as well as road outsloping, would be specified in the general culvert and road design. Cut and fillslopes would be stabilized by either hydromulching, netting, planting, seeding, or windrowing slash at the base of the fillslope.

Temporary roads in high watershed-sensitivity areas would be seeded with a native species mix and mulched to hasten stabilization and minimize surface erosion. Newly constructed road sys- tems would be closed to vehicle traffic at the completion of proposed management activities. This would reduce road damage from wet weather use, reduce potential sedimentation of drainages along these road systems, and minimize disturbance to wildlife.

VISUALS. Timber harvest units located in visual quality areas along the Pacific Crest Trail (PCT) will apply appropriate harvest techniques to meet the retention objective. These techniques include feathering edges of harvest units, blending shapes of harvest areas, maintaining islands of dead softwood poles or hardwoods, and screening. All watershed and fisheries improvement projects would be designed and constructed to meet visual quality objectives in retention and partial retention zones.

Monitoring

Monitoring is the evaluation of project implementation to determine how well objectives are being met, and to determine the effects of project implementation on the environment. The Forest Service will monitor this project during and after its implementation to ensure that objectives are being met and to gather research data. Information gathered in the monitoring plan will also be used to gauge appropriateness and timing of any future entries and necessity of follow-up rehabilitation mea- sures. Monitoring methods include surveillance, sampling, and measurement.

If preliminary data from monitoring indicates that laws, regulations, or stated objectives are not being met, the project will be modified immediately. Certain measures in the monitoring plans are specifically designed to provide feedback during on-going operations. Below is a summary of the monitoring plans. A complete description can be found in Appendix F, FEIS.

CONIFER MORTALITY. This plan will monitor the project area to determine the extent of future timber mortality. Determining appropriate plans for possible salvage and success of regeneration efforts from the Grider Project are also features.

WILDLIFE MONITORING. This will determine what effects management activities have on threat- ened, endangered, or sensitive wildlife species, snag management, riparian habitat, and manage- ment indicator species.

R- 17 SOIL RESOURCE. The soil resource monitoring plan is designed to determine project compliance with soil guidelines for the protection of soil productivity.

FUELS. Rates of fuel build-up after wildfire and management activities will be measured to deter- mine their accumulation. The rates of accumulation will be used to predict future wildfires.

FISHERIES. This plan will determine the impacts to fisheries habitat quality from the fire and management activities, review how management activities affect fish habitat variables, evaluate the effectiveness of implemented mitigation measures, establish baseline data on anadromous fish escapement, and evaluate the intra-gravel survival of salmonid embryos in Grider Creek. IMPLEMENTATION

Implementation of this project would begin with the award of timber sales. At this date field work is on-going for the final layout of harvest units. Actual breakdown of sales and associated timber harvest volumes will occur after this layout is complete.

The estimated total volume of harvested timber in the Selected Alternative is 24.1 MMBF. Of this timber harvested, 9.5 MMBF is by skyline, 2.9 MMBF by tractor, and 11.7 MMBF by helicopter.

This decision was made while field layout of harvest units and survey of roads was on-going. These actions do not constitute irretrievable commitments of resources and no permanent on-the-ground changes were made during this work. Most of the work consisted of flagging boundaries, marking timber, and surveying road locations.

As additional data became available, layout of some units and roads was adjusted as needed. These refinements were done in order to reduce the environmental effects of activities. Although there may be slight discrepancies between actual boundaries and the Selected Alternative maps, all of the on-the-ground layout is within the area for which site specific analysis was done in the FEIS.

Timber sale contracts with associated road construction will be prepared in the summer of 1989. Implementation of these contracts will begin as soon as conditions permit.

APPEAL RIGHTS

This decision is not subject to appeal pursuant to 36 CFR 217 (published in the Federal Register, Volume 54, Number 13, Friday, January 23,1989). The Regional Forester for the Pacific Southwest Region has exempted this decision from appeal pursuant to 36 CFR 217.4 (11) (published in the Federal Register, Volume 54, Number 66, Friday, April 7, 1989).

ROBERTI RICE Date Forest Supervisor Klamatki.National Forest

R - 18