United States Department of Agriculture Environmental Assessment Forest Service Jim’s Creek Savanna Restoration Project June, 2006 Middle Fork Ranger District Willamette National Forest Lane County, Oregon Legal Location: sections 1, 2, 11, and 12, T.24 S, R.3 E. W.M. For Information Contact: Tim Bailey, Team Leader Middle Fork Ranger District 46375 Highway 58 Westfir, Oregon 97492 541-782-5248 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a compliant of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720- 5964 (voice or TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Jim’s Creek Savannah Restoration Project The Jim’s Creek Forest ~ Then 100 years ago ~ a savannah… The Jim’ Creek Forest ~ Now Today ~ a closed canopy forest … This environmental assessment is dedicated to the memory of Carol Winkler, a tireless team member and prime mover of this effort to restore the historic vegetation. Carol was the archeologist on the interdisciplinary team and passed away late in the development of this project. Carol was aware sometime ago that this area had changed dramatically. She played an integral role in determining the need for restoration and in conveying the importance of this landscape to both historic and current Native American culture. Carol is sincerely missed. -Table of Contents Summary………………………………………………………………………………...3 I. Introduction .....................................................................................................5 A. Document Structure………………………………………………………………………….6 B. Background ............................................................................................................................6 C. Purpose and Need for Action……………………………………………………………….10 D.Proposed Action……………………………………………………………………………..16 E. Public Involvement ...............................................................................................................19 F. Issues………………………………………………………………………………………..21 II. Alternatives, including the Proposed Action .............................................27 A. Alternative A, Proposed Action.............................................................................................27 B. Alternative B – No Action.....................................................................................................31 C. Alternative C .........................................................................................................................32 D. Alternative D…………...................................……………………………………………..35 E. Alternative E..........................................................................................................................39 F. Forest Plan Compliance and Need for a Forest Plan Amendment………………………....42 G. Alternatives Considered But Not Developed……………………………………………....45 H Mitigation Common to All Alternatives ...............................................................................50 I. Comparison of Alternatives ...................................................................................................54 III. Environmental Consequences/Affected Environments ...........................57 A. Water Quality/Fish Habitat………………………………………………………………...57 B. Soils………………………………………………………………………………………...83 C. Vegetation………………………………………………………………………………….91 D. Wildlife…………………………………………………………………………………...119 E. Fuels and Fire Risk………………………………………………………………………..165 F. Cultural Resources………………………………………………………………………...171 G. Air Quality………………………………………………………………………………..175 H. Economics………………………………………………………………………………...177 I. Recreation…………………………………………………………………………………180 J. Scenic Resources…………………………………………………………………………..187 K. Cumulative Effects…………………….………………………………………………….192 L. Incomplete and Unavailable Information…………………………………………………194 M. Legal and Policy Requirements…………………………………………………………...195 N. Consumers, Civil Rights, Minority Groups, and Women……………………………..….202 O. Irretrievable and Irreversible Commitments of Resources…..…………………………...203 P. Special Forest Products…………………………………………………………………...203 Q. Short-Term and Long-Term Effects……………………………………………………...204 R. Farmland,. Rangeland and Forest Land Effects………………………………………….204 S. Unavoidable and Adverse Effects…………………………………………………….......205 T. Climate Change ………………………………………………………………………..…205 IV. Monitoring Plan………………………………………………………………….206 V. Consultation and Coordination……………………………………………….208 A. Interdisciplinary Team Members…………..……………………………………..208 B. Federal, State and Local Agencies………………………………………………..209 C. Tribal Governments………………………………………………………………209 1 Jim’s Creek Savanna Restoration Stewardship Project Environmental Assessment D. General Public Consultation……………………………………………………..210 VI. Contents of the Project Analysis File………………………………………210 VII. Literature Cited………………………………………………………………...211 2 Summary The Willamette National Forest proposes to restore a historic open savanna forest dominated by ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir and Oregon white oak through removal of 100 year old conifer trees that have colonized the area in question subsequent to the commencement of fire suppression. The project area is located in the Hill’s Creek Reservoir sixth field watershed which is part of Middle Fork of the Willamette River fifth-field watershed. The project area contains all or portions of sections 1, 2, 11, and 12, T. 24 S., R. 3 E., Willamette Meridian. The project area contains approximately 688 acres and is within the Middle Fork Ranger District, Willamette National Forest, Oregon. This action is needed because biodiversity has significantly decreased and ponderosa pine/Oregon white oak vegetation types have become very rare in the Willamette River basin. Without this action this rare vegetation type will be lost to forest succession. The proposed action would provide habitat to facilitate persistence of a number of open forest dependant plant and animal species, but would also reduce the amount of late- succession, closed canopy forest habitat in the watershed. The proposed action (Alternative A) would treat about 240 acres with a single entry understory thinning and associated fuels reduction through prescribed burning. It also includes various restoration activities, such as oak and native bunchgrass planting, plantation density reduction, meadow encroachment removal, and prescribed underburning to maintain the savanna. The intent of the thinning is to remove all excess trees at the same time. This would provide for the quickest recovery of bunchgrass and oak regeneration and avoid future ground disturbing activities that could damage recovering vegetation and provide additional risk of noxious weed introduction. The open forest type would then be maintained using prescribed fire. Approximately 90 percent of the younger age class Douglas-fir, grand-fir, and incense cedar would be removed to leave an average of about 20 trees per acre. The largest of the younger age classed trees would be retained, along with all ponderosa pine and sugar pine, regardless of size, (other than those encroaching upon meadows). Since the largest trees are not evenly distributed across the landscape, the distribution of retained trees would be variable and there could be some open areas up to several acres in size. The alternative also includes other restoration activities, as described in the narrative below. In addition to the proposed action (Alternative A), the Forest Service also evaluated the following alternatives: • Alternative B – No Action; • Alternative C – Staged excess tree removal- on 171 acres; 3 Jim’s Creek Savanna Restoration Stewardship Project Environmental Assessment • Alternative D – Multiple prescription approach- on a total of 171 acres; • Alternative E – Full restoration – on 455 acres All the action alternatives provide for some amount of restoration of this important and rare habitat, in compliance with the purpose and need statement, commensurate with the number of acres treated. Alternative C, and to some extent D, do not remove enough trees initially to have many immediate restorative effects. None of the action alternatives would affect stream temperatures or increase peak stream flows. All the action alternatives present a risk of soil erosion, due primarily to the prescribed burning to reduce fuel loading after excess tree removal, and there is some risk for that erosion to enter stream channels and increase stream turbidity. All action alternatives involve some permanent removal of currently suitable northern spotted owl habitat and would reduce the amount of suitable owl habitat within one activity center to less than 40 percent. All action alternatives would reduce fuel loading and eliminate the potential for a stand replacing wild fire. Alternatives A, D and E can be implemented with a positive present net value (PNV). Both Alternatives