Environmental Assessment United States for the Department of Agriculture Crow Hazardous Fuels

Forest Reduction Project

Service

March 2021 Emigrant Creek Ranger District Malheur National Forest Harney County, Oregon

For More Information Contact:

Joshua Giles Malheur National Forest 265 Highway 20 South Hines, OR 97738 Phone: (541) 573-4300 https://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=57288 Email: [email protected] Fax: (541) 573-4398

Cover photo: Crow project ponderosa pine stand, Emigrant Creek Ranger District, Malheur National Forest

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 Table of Contents

...... 1 Chapter 1 – Purpose of and Need for Action ...... 1-1 Introduction ...... 1-1 Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA) ...... 1-1 Format of this Environmental Assessment ...... 1-2 Purpose and Need for Action ...... 1-4 Ochoco Forest Plan Direction ...... 1-8 Public Involvement and Tribal Consultation ...... 1-10 Issues ...... 1-12 Regulatory Framework ...... 1-15 Decision Framework ...... 1-15 Chapter 2 – Alternatives ...... 2-1 Introduction ...... 2-1 Alternatives Considered in Detail ...... 2-1 Chapter 3 - Environmental Consequences ...... 3-1 Specialist Reports, and Use of “Best Available Science” ...... 3-1 Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Actions ...... 3-1 Forest Vegetation ...... 3-3 Effects to Forest Vegetation ...... 3-9 Fire, Fuels and Air Quality ...... 3-15 Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Plant Species ...... 3-32 Effects to Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Plant Species ...... 3-33 Invasive Plants ...... 3-40 Effects to Invasive Plants ...... 3-40 Transportation System ...... 3-41 Effects to Transportation System ...... 3-42 Terrestrial Wildlife ...... 3-43 Aquatics and Water Quality ...... 3-74 Effects to Aquatics and Water Quality...... 3-78 Soils ...... 3-88 Effects to Soils ...... 3-89 Environmental Justice ...... 3-91 Effects to Environmental Justice ...... 3-93 Economics ...... 3-93 Effects to Economics...... 3-93 Scenery Management ...... 3-95 Effects on Scenery Management ...... 3-96 Recreation ...... 3-97 Effects on Recreation ...... 3-99 Range Resources ...... 3-101 Effects to Range Resources ...... 3-102 Cultural Resources ...... 3-103 Effects on Cultural Resources ...... 3-103 Special Areas and Undeveloped Areas ...... 3-104 Effects on Undeveloped Areas ...... 3-106 Global Climate Change Prevention Act (7 USC 6701) ...... 3-109 Evaluation of Proposed Forest Plan Amendments ...... 3-111 Other Disclosures ...... 3-116 References ...... 3-120

Commonly Used Acronyms

BA Biological Assessment NF National Forest

BE Biological Evaluation NFMA National Forest Management Act

BMP Best Management Practice NFS National Forest System

CEQ Council on Environmental NTMB Neotropical Migratory Birds Quality ODFW Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife CFR Code of Federal Regulations OG Old Growth DBH Diameter Breast Height PA Proposed Action DecAID Decayed Wood Advisor Tool PCE Primary Cavity Excavator

DEQ Department of Environmental Quality PDC Project Design Criteria

DOG Dedicated Old Growth PFA Post-Fledging Area

EA Environmental Assessment RHCA Riparian Habitat Conservation Area

FP Forest Plan RMO Riparian Management Objective FR Forest Road ROG Replacement Old Growth FS Forest Service ROS Recreation Opportunity Spectrum GIS Geographic Information System RNA Research Natural Area HEI Habitat Effectiveness Index SHPO State Historic Preservation Office HRV Historic Range of Variability SIO Scenic Integrity Objective IDT Interdisciplinary Team SMS Scenery Management System IRA Inventoried Roadless Area TES Threatened, Endangered or Sensitive LRMP Land and Resource Management Plan USFS United States Forest Service

MA Management Area USFWS US Fish and Wildlife Service

MIS Management Indicator Species USDA United States Dept. of Agriculture

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act VQO Visual Quality Objective

This page left blank intentionally

Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Chapter 1 – Purpose of and Need for Action Introduction The Malheur National Forest, Emigrant Creek Ranger District in cooperation with the Harney County Restoration Collaborative is proposing the Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction project (see Figure 1 for a vicinity map) (herein referred to as Crow) to reduce hazardous fuels in a portion of the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) that was designated by the Harney County Community Fire Protection Plan (2013). Crow is being prepared under guidelines contained in the Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA). The HFRA directs Federal agencies to prepare Environmental Analyses utilizing the collaborative process to implement local community fire protection plans. The project area is approximately 33,933 acres and is located in the western portion of the Emigrant Creek Ranger District. Major forest roads in the project area include forest roads 4300, 4100, 4332, 4334, 4340, 4341, 4357, 4360, 4365, and 4370. Landmarks within or near the project area include Snow Mountain Lookout, Swain prairie, Boone prairie, Donnelly camp, and Bear Canyon. Major creeks in the project area include Emigrant, Crowsfoot, Whiskey, and Bear Canyon Creeks. The project is located within the Emigrant Creek watershed, Crowsfoot Creek- Emigrant Creek, Whiskey Creek-Emigrant Creek, and Bear Canyon Creek subwatersheds, within Harney County. Legal locations include T18S, R27E, Sections 31-33; T19S, R26E, Sections 1, 12-14, 23-26, 36; T19S, R27E Sections 3-36; T19S, R28E, Section 31; T20S, R26E, Sections 1, 12; T20S, R27E,Sections 1-18, 20-24; T.20S., R.28E, Sections 6-7,18-19 (Willamette Meridian). Crow is located on National Forest system lands within the former Snow Mountain Ranger District, Ochoco National Forest. The Snow Mountain Ranger District was administratively combined with the former Burns Ranger District on the Malheur National Forest. The two districts were administratively combined and are managed by the Malheur National Forest as the Emigrant Creek Ranger District. Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA) The Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 (HFRA) was signed into law on December 3, 2003. The purpose of the Healthy Forest Restoration Act is to improve the capacity on Federal lands to plan and conduct hazardous fuels reduction projects aimed at protecting communities, watersheds, and certain other at-risk lands from catastrophic wildfire, to enhance efforts to protect watersheds and address threats to forest and rangeland health, including catastrophic wildfire, across the landscape. The Crow Hazardous Fuel Reduction Project qualifies under Title 1 - Hazardous Fuel Reduction on Federal Land of the HFRA. The project is an Authorized Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project as described in Section 102 of the HFRA because it is consistent with the Implementation Plan for the 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy and is on Federal lands within a wildland urban interface area identified in a community wildfire protection plan. HFRA-authorized fuel projects must be designed to retain or culture old-growth forest structure and large trees according to provisions in the law. Additionally, authorized projects must be conducted consistent with all current laws or policies governing forest management in the area, as outlined in the preceding section. To expedite authorized projects, HFRA requires collaborative planning. It also contains provisions that streamline the environmental review of a project. These provisions include: limits on appropriate alternatives that may be considered; and internal, administrative review of any

Chapter 1 Page|1-1 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

objections to a project before a decision is made to approve it or carry it out (as opposed to post- decision appeals).

Harney County Community Wildfire Protection Plan The Harney County Community Wildfire Protection Plan (2013) (CWPP) was developed by county citizens, fire districts, county staff or elected officials, State Forestry officials, and agency representatives. The objectives of the plan are to reduce the risk of fire to life, property, and natural resources in the county. The Harney County Community Fire Protection Plan wildland urban interface (WUI) boundary is county-wide with emphasis on the communities of Burns, Hines, Drewsey, Crane, Diamond, Frenchglen, Fields, Andrews, Riley, and rural residences throughout the county. Crow is located within a designated WUI as defined by the Harney County CWPP (2013) but is more than 1 ½ miles from an at-risk community. Crow lies about 25 miles northeast of the community of Burns/Hines, Oregon. The community of Burns/Hines was rated as a “Moderate to High” hazard rating in the Harney County CWPP due to issues with hazardous fuels proximity, the use of combustible construction material, inadequate emergency ingress and egress, and the lack of structure fire protection. Crow also lies about 26 miles southwest of the community of Seneca, Oregon. The city of Seneca, Oregon is within the Grant County CWPP (2013) and is rated with the highest wildfire risk in the assessment mainly because it has no city fire department. Format of this Environmental Assessment This environmental assessment (EA) was prepared to determine whether implementation of the Crow project may “significantly 1” affect the quality of the human environment and thereby require the preparation of an environmental impact statement. Preparation of this EA fulfills agency policy and direction to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). CEQ regulations define an environmental assessment as: A concise public document that serves to “briefly provide sufficient evidence and analysis for determining whether to prepare an environmental impact statement or a finding of no significant impact (FONSI).” This environmental assessment focuses on what is relevant and important and concentrates on the issues that are truly relevant to the action in question, rather than amassing needless detail (40 CFR 1500.1). Legal requirements are to provide enough evidence to support our conclusions, address relevant environmental impacts and concentrate on whether the action would “significantly” affect the quality of the human environment. Therefore, this environmental assessment does not include topics that are not required in an environmental document but have historically been included. Topics that have been eliminated are: NEPA process language, lengthy list of forest plan standard and guidelines, irreversible and irretrievable commitment section, and list of preparers.

1 Significance as defined by context and intensity of an action.

Page | 1-2 Chapter 1 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Figure 1 – Crow Project Vicinity Map, Ochoco National Forest, Oregon

Chapter 1 Page|1-3 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Purpose and Need for Action The purpose of this project is to: • Reduce hazardous fuel loadings (including surface fuels, ladder fuels, and crown fuels) to alter fire behavior (intensity, duration, rate of spread, torching, and crowning) and move the area towards conditions that will allow fire to play a more frequent and natural role on the landscape while exhibiting historical fire effects (mixed severity) from burning at low to moderate intensities during planned and unplanned ignitions. • Salvage harvest recently killed trees that are surplus to other resource needs in order to reduce hazardous fuels and capture the economic value of those dead trees. Wildfires are a natural and even desirable disturbance mechanism of forested landscapes in the Blue Mountains of Eastern Oregon. Recent wildfires throughout the Blue Mountains are showing an increasing tendency to become larger and costlier both in terms of financial costs as well as loss of ecosystem function. Fire behavior is a function of fuels, weather, and topography. Of these three components affecting wildland fire behavior, only fuels can be manipulated. Canopy, ladder, and surface fuels can be manipulated in several ways to affect their size, arrangement, density, and loading to affect fire behavior. Crow would have historically been dominated by a ponderosa pine overstory and would have had a high frequency, low severity fire return interval of 12-20 years (Heyerdahl and Agee 1996, Johnston et al. 2017). Current forested conditions however are markedly different from historic conditions. Vegetation in Crow has experienced a vast change in stand structure and disturbance regime due to several factors. As a result, nearly all stands in the project area are over-stocked with small trees in the understory layer. Over-stocked stand conditions, coupled with drought, combine to exert a tremendous amount of competition for resources by vegetation. This leads to weakened conditions, making trees more susceptible to insects, disease, and catastrophic stand replacing wildfires. Larger and older trees are often the first victims due to increased stand densities and higher fuel loading. Historic forest conditions (reference conditions) can provide a context for understanding the ecological processes (including fire, insects and disease) that shaped the ponderosa pine and mixed-conifer forests in this area. Disturbance processes and patterns created stand structures to which wildlife species have adapted. Studies from many areas that have looked at historic data suggest that these frequently burned forests had very low tree densities, a greater proportion of ponderosa pine, a clustered stem pattern with highly variable canopy cover, and the majority of growing space taken up by fire-resistant, large-diameter trees (Collins and Stephens 2010, Covington and Moore 1994, Hagmann et al. 2013, Hessburg et al. 2005, Kaufmann et al. 1998, Minnich et al. 1995, North et al. 2009, Smith and Fischer 1997, Wright and Agee 2004). Current forest conditions are over-stocked stands with small trees in the understory layer. Ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir in pure and mixed stands dominate on approximately 77 percent (26,128 acres) of the project area. Roughly 63 percent (21,666 acres) of forested ground in the project area has a basal area greater than 90 square ft. per acre, which is above the desired range, and about 45 percent (15,222 acres) has a basal area greater than 120 square ft. per acre. This overstocking is due to the influx of shade tolerant species. Douglas-fir and grand fir now dominate areas formerly occupied by fire-tolerant ponderosa pine. Some stands originating after overstory removal cutting were commonly reforested with Douglas-fir and the lack of subsequent fires has perpetuated the dominance of this species or grand fir on most sites. Where large overstory ponderosa pine remains, the heavy influx of small diameter Douglas-fir and grand fir creates fuel ladders that alter post-fire successional pathways. Alteration of disturbance processes has resulted in increased fuel loadings, stand densities, and connectivity (both vertically and horizontally), and increased susceptibility to insects and disease outbreaks (Hessburg et al. 2005,

Page | 1-4 Chapter 1 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

2016). This influx has created a structurally homogenous landscape that is less resistant and resilient to high-severity wildfire and other stressors (Hessburg et al. 2016). Insect and disease activity are extensive within the project area. Overcrowded stands on moisture-limited sites lack the ability to defend against key pest such as defoliators, bark beetles, and pathogenic fungi. Mountain pine beetle, western pine beetle, pine butterfly, western spruce budworm, dwarf mistletoe, annosus root disease, Indian paint fungus, and other canker and rust pathogens have all had an impact within the project area. Insect and disease activity have caused widespread mortality throughout the project area, creating hazardous fuels. Further insect and disease information can be found in the insect and Figure 2 - Over-stocked ponderosa pine stand in the disease review included with the project Crow Planning Area. record. Crow has a high fire risk based on past starts. A fire start under current vegetation conditions in Crow would exhibit a variety of fire types. Existing fuel conditions are a result of effective fire management for the past 75 to 100 years, past timber harvest, and livestock grazing. 0 Greater fireline intensities, increased mortality, and resistance to control efforts can all be expected in areas with higher fuel loads. Duff levels over much of the project planning area range from 0.25 to 5.0 inches in depth except under the larger ponderosa pine trees, where duff levels have reached depths of up to 12 inches or greater. When these duff mounds burn completely, under low moisture conditions, high stress can be placed on the tree. Using the guidelines contained in the Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA) hazardous fuels reduction projects would be implemented that aim at protecting communities, watersheds, and certain other at-risk lands from catastrophic wildfire, to enhance efforts to protect watersheds and address threats to forest and rangeland health, including catastrophic wildfire, across the landscape.

Need for Amending the Ochoco Forest Plan The Ochoco Forest Plan was authorized on August 1, 1989. The Ochoco Forest Plan provides a long-range strategy for managing the Ochoco National Forest system lands. Through standards the plan provides rules that govern resource management practices Forest-wide and for each management area. Management areas are geographic areas established by the plan that have similar management objectives and common management prescriptions.

The Record of Decision, Land and Resource Management Plan, Ochoco National Forest and Crooked River National Grassland states that “The Plans can be amended at any time. Amendments can be either 'significant" or 'non-significant" depending on the timing or location of the proposed change, and whether the change alters the goals, objectives, outputs, or management prescriptions. Amendments may be made to respond to changing needs, opportunities, monitoring, Congressional land designations, or catastrophic events (such as major floods or fires), or to take advantage of major new management or production

Chapter 1 Page|1-5 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

technologies” (ROD, page 2). In addition, the Decision Notice signed by the Regional Forester in 1995 authorizing the Eastside Screens stated that “Forest Supervisors retain the option to amendment their individual forest plans when site-specific conditions warrant a deviation from these revised interim standards.” Therefore, changes to the original 1989 Ochoco Forest Plan and the Eastside Screens were anticipated based on site-specific resource conditions. This section identifies the need to amendment the Ochoco Forest Plan, what specific amendments are proposed, and the rationale for each amendment. Appendix B contains the 36 CFR 219 applicability table for the project. The table shows which components of 36 CFR 219.8 through 219.11 directly apply to the proposed forest plan amendment.

Under a more recent analysis, the Forest Service evaluated alternatives to the Wildlife Standard of the Eastside Screens that limits harvest of trees greater than 21 inches for the Umatilla, Wallowa- Whitman, Malheur, Ochoco, Deschutes, and the Fremont-Winema National Forests. This project analysis, called Forest Management Direction for Large Diameter Trees in Eastern Oregon (https://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=58050), and accompanying Decision Notice and FONSI was signed January 15th, 2021. This amended the Eastside Screens by replacing the 21- inch standard with a guideline that emphasizes recruitment of old trees2 and large trees3.

The Forest Service has enacted new rules to guide changes to forest plans, including amendments. The 2012 Planning Rule (36 CFR 219) requires the Forest Service to use the new planning rule for amendments of plans created under a prior rule. The regulation at 36 CFR 219 is very different than the regulations under which the 1989 Ochoco Forest Plan was developed and reflects the complex nature of modern forest planning and management. It is not expected that the 1989 Ochoco Forest Plan would be consistent with all of the components of 36 CFR 219, although the intent of the new planning rule may be met with thoughtful amendments of the older forest plan.

Based on this guidance, site-specific conditions in Crow, and relevant forest-specific information and data, the Forest Service has determined that there is a need to change the existing Ochoco Forest Plan within the project area. Crow proposes the removal of ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir trees greater than or equal to 21 inches diameter at breast height (DBH) amendments to the Ochoco Forest Plan, as amended under the direction of 36 CFR 219.

Within the Crow Hazardous Fuel Reduction Project EA, the following sections address proposed forest plan amendments:

• Chapter 1 – Need for Amending the Ochoco Forest Plan – This section identifies the need to amendment the Ochoco Forest Plan, what specific amendments are proposed, and the rationale for each amendment.

• Chapter 2 – Consistency of alternatives with the Ochoco Forest Plan – This section identifies the amendments included in each action alternative, what specific part of the Ochoco Forest Plan is proposed for amendment and what that plan component is being replaced with (if applicable).

2 Old trees are defined as having external morphological characteristics2 that suggest an age ≥ 150 years. 3 Large trees are defined as grand fir or white fir ≥ 30 inches dbh or trees of any other species ≥ 21 inches dbh.

Page | 1-6 Chapter 1 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

• Chapter 3 – The effects of forest plan amendments are discussed in the following sections:

o Requirements of 36 CFR 219.8 through 219.11 – This section provides an explanation of how the plan components meet the sustainability requirements of 219.8, the diversity requirements of 219.9, the multiple use requirements of 219.10, and the timber requirements of 219.11, as applicable.

o Amendment Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects – This section discusses the direct and indirect effects of the proposed forest plan amendments, as well as the effects of past, ongoing, and foreseeable future forest plan amendments that overlap in time and space.

• Appendix B – This appendix contains the 36 CFR 219 applicability table for the project. The table shows which components of 36 CFR 219.8 through 219.11 directly apply to the proposed forest plan amendments.

To address the purpose and need, the Crow project’s proposed action alternative would require the following amendments to the Ochoco Forest Plan, as amended.

Removal of Young, Large Trees The proposed action alternative would require a forest plan amendment to Eastside Screens, Standard 6(d)(2)(a), amended by the Forest Management Direction for Large Diameter Trees in Eastern Oregon and Southeastern Washington Project (January 2021) which allows timber harvest activities outside of late and old structure with the intent statement: “Maintain and increase old and late structure forest. Favor fire tolerant species where appropriate.” The 1995 Standard 6(d)(2)(a) prohibiting removal of 21-inch trees is replaced with the Old and Large Tree Guideline: “Managers should retain and generally emphasize recruitment of old trees and large trees, including clumps of old trees.” Old trees (greater than 150 years of age) are prioritized for retention and recruitment, and if there are not enough old trees to develop late and old structure conditions, large trees are protected, favoring fire tolerant species where appropriate. Large trees are defined as grand fir and white fir ≥ 30" diameter or trees of any other species ≥ 21-inch diameter. Management activities should consider appropriate species composition for biophysical environment, topographical position, stand density, historical diameter distributions, and spatial arrangements within stands and across the landscape in order to develop stands that are resistant and resilient to disturbance.

In order to meet desired conditions, this amendment would allow the removal of the following young large trees up to 30 inches DBH: • Douglas-fir trees on about 1,359 acres in selected commercial thinning units outside of late and old structure stands within the Upland Forest potential vegetation group. • Douglas-fir and ponderosa pine trees on about 1,587 acres in selected commercial thinning units outside of late and old structure stands within the Dry Upland Forest potential vegetation group.

Removal of grand fir trees up to 30 inches DBH and removal of any species greater than 21 inches within late and old structure stands would also occur but do not require a forest plan amendment.

Chapter 1 Page|1-7 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Ochoco Forest Plan Direction

Relationship to the Forest Plan This environmental assessment tiers to the Ochoco National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision (1989) and incorporates by reference the accompanying Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan (1989)), as amended. Additional management direction is provided by Forest Plan amendments approved since 1989, some of which include: • “Interim Management Direction Establishing Riparian, Ecosystem and Wildlife Standards for Timber Sales” (USDA Forest Service 1995; herein referred to as Regional Forester’s Eastside Forest Plan Amendment 2 or Eastside Screens4); • “The Inland Native Fish Strategy Environmental Assessment and Decision Notice.” (USDA Forest Service 1995; herein referred to as INFISH); and • The Pacific Northwest Region Final Environment Impact Statement for the Invasive Plant Program, 2005, hereby referred to as the R6 2005 Invasive Plant FEIS. The R6 2005 Invasive Plant FEIS culminated in a Record of Decision (R6 2005 ROD) that amended the Malheur National 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. • Forest Management Direction for Large Diameter Trees in Eastern Oregon (https://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=58050), and accompanying Decision Notice and FONSI signed January 15th, 2021. This amended the Eastside Screens by replacing the 21- inch standard with a guideline that emphasizes recruitment of old trees and large trees. Old trees are defined as greater than or equal to 150 years of age and are prioritized for protection, and large trees are defined as grand fir and white fir ≥ 30" dbh or trees of any other species ≥ 21-inch dbh. The Forest Plan, as amended, contains Forest-Wide Standards and Guidelines as well as Standards and Guidelines for specific management areas.

Management Areas The Land and Resource Management Plan for the Ochoco National Forest (Forest Plan) designate all areas of the Forest as management areas, each emphasizing a specific resource or mix of resources. Forest Plan Amendment #29 amended riparian areas and provided desired future conditions. Additionally, this amendment provided more specific numeric standards for riparian areas. Standards are now based on the same scientific information used in PACFISH (March 25, 1994) and INFISH (July 28, 1995). Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCA) was created with incorporation of PACFISH and INFISH into the Forest Plan. In this manner, RHCAs are not management areas; however, they amend the Forest Plan and incorporate new goals, objectives, standards, guidelines, and management direction. These new standards take the place of direction described in the Forest Plan. A complete description of the management areas can be found in the

4 Regional Forester’s Forest Plan Amendment (June 1995) designed to maintain options for old growth related and other species.

Page | 1-8 Chapter 1 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Forest Plan (USDA Forest Service 1989). The following management areas and RHCAs are found within the project area:

Management Area F6 – Old Growth The emphasis in this management area is to provide habitat for wildlife species dependent on old growth stands (Forest Plan 4-58). There are about 1,456 acres of MA F6 old growth in Crow.

Management Area F13 – Developed Recreation This management area applies to sites currently developed or planned for camping, boating, trailhead parking, and other developed recreational activities. The emphasis is to provide safe, healthful, and aesthetic facilities for people to utilize while they are pursuing a variety of recreational experiences within a relatively natural outdoor setting (Forest Plan 4-71). There are about 77 acres of MA F13 developed recreation in Crow which are associated with the Falls and Emigrant Creek campgrounds.

Management Area F22 - General Forest The emphasis in this management area is to produce timber and forage while meeting the Forest- wide standards and guidelines for all resources. In ponderosa pine stands, management will emphasize production of high value (quality) timber (Forest Plan 4-86). There are about 29,119 acres of MA F22 general forest in Crow.

Management Area F26 – Visual Management Corridors This management area includes all foreground areas that are adjacent to approximately 260 miles of road across the Forest that serve as significant travel ways for the visiting public. Vegetation in these corridors are of primary importance to the scenic landscape as they represent “The National Forest” to the majority of visiting public. The emphasis in this management area is to maintain the natural appearing character of the Forest along major travel routes, where management activities are usually not evident or are visually subordinate to the surrounding landscape (Forest Plan 4-94). There are about 3,132 acres of MA F26 visual management corridors in Crow.

Management Area F28 – Facilities This management area includes administrative sites located on the Forest. These include ranger stations, work centers, lookouts, and electronic sites. The emphasis in this management area is to provide a safe, efficient, and healthful working environment where structure design and layout of the site blend with the surrounding area. There are about 2 acres of MA F28 facilities in Crow which are associated with the Snow Mountain lookout.

Riparian Habitat Conservation Area (RHCA) Riparian habitat conservation areas are portions of watersheds where riparian-dependent resources receive primary emphasis, and management activities are subject to specific standards and guidelines. These areas include traditional riparian corridors, wetlands, intermittent headwater streams, and other areas where proper ecological functioning is crucial to maintenance of the streams water, sediment, large woody material, and nutrient delivery systems. There are about 3,783 acres of RHCA in Crow.

Chapter 1 Page|1-9 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Table 1. Management Areas

MA# Management Area Name Acres 6 Old Growth 1,456 13 Developed Recreation 77 22 General Forest 29,119 26 Visual Management Corridors 3,132 28 Facilities 2 RHCA Riparian Habitat Conservation Area 3,783

Other Ownership Other ownership within the project includes about 82 acres of private property. No actions are proposed on other ownership. Public Involvement and Tribal Consultation The Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) was directed to involve the public early and often throughout the pre-NEPA and NEPA process. The IDT involved many individuals, organizations, and agencies in the Crow NEPA process including, the Harney County Restoration Collaborative; Federal, State, and County agencies; tribes; and special interest groups.

Schedule of Proposed Actions (SOPA) The project was first listed in the Winter 2019 Schedule of Proposed Actions (SOPA) and has appeared quarterly in the SOPA since that issue.

Scoping The project was provided to the public and other agencies for comment during scoping July 8 through August 7, 2020. Scoping letters were sent to interested individuals and organizations. A list of agencies and persons consulted can be found at the end of chapter 3.

Seventeen responses were received during the scoping period. All comment letters received during initial scoping were reviewed by the IDT and other staff to ensure consideration of comments during the analysis process. Mailing lists, scoping documents, and responses are on file in the Emigrant Creek Ranger District office.

Tribal Government Consultation The Forest Service consulted the Burns Paiute Tribe, the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla, and the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs via letters to each respective Tribal Chairman. Tribal consultation is ongoing.

Page | 1-10 Chapter 1 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Figure 3 – Management Areas

Chapter 1 Page|1-11 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Collaboration The collaboration process for the Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project was initiated by the Harney County Restoration Collaborative and the Emigrant Creek Ranger District. Meetings and field tours were conducted to discuss potential issues, the proposed action and address concerns from the collaboration group. Meeting notes are published on the Harney County Restoration Collaborative website at https://highdesertpartnership.org/collaboratives/harney-county- restoration-collaborative/hcrc-overview.html. Issues Scoping is used to identify issues 5 that relate to the effects of the proposed action. The issues were separated into three groups for the purpose of this analysis: Key issues, Analysis Issues and Issues Eliminated from Detailed Study. A definition of each issue group is discussed below. The Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) identified potential issues and the Responsible Official approved those issues to be carried through the analysis as either key issues or analysis issues in order to fully develop and allow further comparison of the proposed action and alternatives. An IDT issue identification summary document is in the project record files. The environmental consequences of the proposal are disclosed in chapter 3 for each resource affected by the key or analysis issues. Each issue has indicators to allow members of the public and the Responsible Official to determine how well issues are addressed by the alternatives. A discussion of all issue groups, specific issues and the indicator(s) for each issue is given below.

Key Issues Key issues are defined as inherent conflicts that cannot be eliminated that are directly or indirectly caused by implementing the proposed action. Usually an alternative is developed to address key issues. Two key issues were identified during the scoping comment period.

Issue 1 - Effects on Large Trees Some public commenters are opposed to removing large trees as would happen with the proposed action in commercial thin up to 30 inches DBH prescriptions. These treatments are assigned to second-growth mixed ponderosa pine/Douglas/grand fir stands to reduce hazardous fuel load by reducing stand density (for example, to increase the distance between tree crowns or reduce ladder fuels). Commercial thinning incorporates principles for dry forest restoration presented by Franklin and Johnson (2012). These principles include retaining and promoting old trees, increasing forest diversity by creating openings and leaving untreated areas, and reducing forest density, particularly of late seral trees that are less tolerant to disturbance such as drought, fire, and insects. Treatment would remove large ponderosa pine only where densities currently do not reflect the desired conditions, based on historical references (Johnston et al. 2018). Large ponderosa pine trees would not be removed in stands that can meet desired conditions without doing so. HFRA-authorized fuel projects must be designed to retain or culture old-growth forest structure and large trees according to provisions in the law. However, the HFRA also states that the large-

5 A matter of controversy, dispute, or general concern over resource management activities or land uses. To be considered a “key” EA issue, it must be well defined, relevant to the proposed action, and within the ability of the agency to address through alternative management strategies.

Page | 1-12 Chapter 1 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

tree retention requirements of Section 102(f) must not prevent agencies from reducing wildland fire risk to communities, and at-risk Federal land.

The no action alternative and alternative 3 would allow zero removal of large trees.

Cause/Effect Relationship: Commercial logging of large trees in selected upland stands would reduce the number of large trees.

Indicator for Analysis: HRV analysis, acres of stands where large trees are removed, and the number of large trees removed by alternative.

Issue 2 - Effects on Snag Levels and Snag Dependent Species Current Forest Plan direction, as amended by the amended Eastside Screens, is to maintain all snags greater than or equal to 20 inches (or whatever is the representative diameter at breast height of the overstory layer if it is less than 20 inches) OR complete a snag analysis using the best available science on species ecological requirements as applied through current snag tools, models, or other documented procedures to maintain or increase diverse snag composition, size, structure, and distribution (i.e. groups or clusters) for a diverse composition of wildlife species and ecological site conditions.

Integration of the latest science is incorporated into this analysis using DecAID version 3.0 (Mellen-McLean et al. 2017) which 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. Based on the science in DecAid, current snag levels in the ponderosa pine forest type are above the 80 percent tolerance levels indicating snags are abundant in the project area. In the mixed conifer stands, snag levels are estimated to be between 30 and 50 percent tolerance levels in the large and open structure but below the 30 percent tolerance level in the small/medium stand type. Crow is located at the southern portion of the Blue Mountains where snag levels are expected to be low in the mixed conifer stands.

Project design criteria (Appendix A) were developed to address this issue and reduce the impacts to snags. At a minimum, snags would be retained in each harvest unit to meet or exceed forest plan standards. Snags would be retained in clumps, leaving the largest, soundest snags at no less than 3 snags per acre. Additionally, one snag per acre would be left that is at least 12” dbh to support forest plan future down wood requirements. Large ponderosa pine snags in later decay with sloughing bark (“buckskin” snags) would be included in snag patches whenever practical. Rimrock and large boulder patches would be prioritized as leave areas to help meet snag density requirements.

Cause/Effect Relationship: Commercial thinning, precommercial thinning, slash treatment and landscape scale prescribed burning may reduce the number of snags and impact snag dependent species.

Indicator for Analysis: Snag analysis.

Analysis Issues Analysis issues are defined as those directly or indirectly caused by implementing the proposed action and they illustrate the tradeoffs of selecting an alternative. Analysis issues would be tracked in the relevant resource area effects analysis in chapter 3.

Chapter 1 Page|1-13 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Analysis issues considered for this analysis generated from public comments and/or the project interdisciplinary team are listed below.

Effects on Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species Cause/Effect Relationship: No known threatened or endangered (T&E) species occur in the project area. Dispersal habitat for candidate species (California Wolverine) occurs in the project area. Several aquatic, terrestrial, and plant sensitive species and their habitats could be affected by proposed activities. Project design criteria were developed to address this analysis issue and reduce the impacts to threatened, or endangered and Forest Service Sensitive species (TES). Indicator for Analysis: Wildlife, Aquatic and Plant BE/BA determinations and analysis for TES species.

Effects on Other Important Species Cause/Effect Relationship: Management indicator species (MIS), land birds including neotropical migratory birds (NTMB), goshawk, and their habitats could be affected by proposed activities. Project design criteria were developed to address this analysis issue and reduce the impacts to these species. Indicator for Analysis: Effects to MIS, NTMB, and goshawk.

Issues Eliminated From Detailed Study Issues Eliminated from Detailed Study are identified as those: 1) outside the scope of the proposed action; 2) already decided by law, regulation, Forest Plan, or other higher level decision; 3) irrelevant to the decision to be made; or 4) conjectural and not supported by scientific or factual evidence. Refer to the Crow Comment Response for a detailed account of comments, issues, and alternatives for this analysis. Issues eliminated from detailed study include:

Effects on Late and Old Structure Regional Foresters Forest Plan Amendment #2 (Eastside Screens) as amended identifies late and old structure (LOS) as stand conditions where large trees are common. The Amendment further recognizes two stages of LOS, multi-stratum with large trees and single stratum with large trees. Multi-stratum LOS is a structure in which there are two or more layers or stratum of tree canopies. Multiple size classes of trees would be present and well represented. Single stratum LOS on the other hand would have mostly one canopy layer of large trees and a sparse or no understory of smaller size classes.

Under Scenario A of the Eastside Screens, the Interim Wildlife Standard directs that no harvest activities occur within LOS stages that are below HRV, that all live trees 21 inches DBH or larger be maintained, and there be no net loss of LOS. Harvest activities can occur within LOS stages that are within or above HRV and it is allowable to manipulate one type of LOS to move stands into the LOS stage that is deficit. Open, park-like stand conditions are to be maintained where they occurred historically. Scenario A is applicable to all potential vegetation groups in Crow.

Currently there are an estimated 13,674 acres of LOS within the dry upland forest potential vegetation group. The majority (12,125 acres) of the LOS is in a multi-strata condition. Historically, the overall total amount of LOS would have ranged between about 13,610 and 25,952 acres, with the bulk of it in a single strata condition due to frequent low-intensity fires which were the dominant disturbance regime in the area. Crow project is therefore within HRV

Page | 1-14 Chapter 1 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

for multi-strata LOS and below HRV for single-strata LOS. No commercial harvest is proposed within single-strata LOS.

The Proposed Action alternative would remove large trees in multi-strata LOS however project design criteria (Appendix A) were developed to address this issue and reduce the impacts to LOS. All stands would be maintained in late and old structure habitat by retaining at least 10 trees per acre greater than or equal to 21 inches diameter at breast height with a target residual trees per acre of 12 trees greater than or equal to 21” DBH under the proposed action. There would be no net loss of LOS within the project area under any alternative. Therefore there would be no effects to LOS status. Regulatory Framework This project is framed to be consistent with all laws or policies governing national forest management. These include but are not limited to the Clean Air Act, State Smoke Management Plan, Clean Water Act, Congressionally Designated Areas, Environmental Justice, the National Historic Preservation Act, and Threatened and Endangered Species Act. Decision Framework This EA will provide the decision maker with a summary of current information on key issues to aid in the decision-making process. It will also provide the decision maker with information to help determine if an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) needs to be prepared or if a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is appropriate. If the decision is to proceed with a finding of no significant impact (FONSI), it is anticipated that project operations could begin in fiscal year 2021 and continue intermittently for several additional calendar years (through 2025 or beyond). The deciding official would consider: • What actions are most appropriate to address the purpose and need to reduce fuels, alter fire behavior and move the area towards historical fire behavior and fire regime with historical fire effects on vegetation? • What are the effects to the issues by each alternative? • Is the selected alternative consistent with the Forest Plan and other applicable laws?

Chapter 1 Page|1-15 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

This page left blank intentionally

Page | 1-16 Chapter 1 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Chapter 2 – Alternatives Introduction Chapter 2 describes the no action alternative (alternative 1), the proposed action alternative (alternative 2), and alternative 3 for the proposed Crow project. Appendix A refers to the measures necessary to mitigate environmental effects, identifies management requirements called design criteria, and develops monitoring plans. A summary comparison of the alternatives is included at the end of this chapter. Affected environment 6 and environmental consequences of implementing alternatives for Crow can be found in chapter 3.

A detailed list of Alternatives and Treatments Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study along with the rationale for their elimination are included in the Crow project file and incorporated by reference (40 CFR 1502.21). Alternatives Considered in Detail Three alternatives were analyzed in detail: the no action alternative, the proposed action alternative, and alternative 3. The Forest Service developed design criteria to be used as part of the action alternatives to avoid possible undesired consequences.

No Action Alternative Under the no action alternative, no hazardous fuel reduction or other connected actions would occur. The no action alternative serves as a baseline against which effects of the action alternatives could be measured and compared.

Proposed Action Alternative The proposed action alternative was developed through the collaborative process to meet the purpose and need for the project and responds to hazardous fuel reduction need. Activities already under permit or contract, or authorized under other NEPA based decisions, would continue. Maps of the proposed action are displayed at the end of chapter 2.

The proposed action is a set of treatments, and design features developed by an interdisciplinary planning team in direct response to (1) the stated purpose and need for action; (2) advice obtained through collaboration and early public participation; and (3) known forest resource conditions and environmental factors of the area requiring management or protection under the Forest Plan or other applicable standards.

Actions Common to all Vegetation Treatments The following actions are common to all vegetation treatments unless specified later under the vegetation treatment name. • During thinning activities, dead lodgepole, grand fir, Douglas fir, and ponderosa pine trees that are surplus to other resource needs may be considered for salvage opportunities in selected units. See prescriptions below for more information.

6 Natural environment that exists at the present time in the area being analyzed.

Chapter 2 Page|2-1 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

• Commercial thinning treatments are based on site productivity as measured by plant association and determined on a stand-by-stand basis. Elevational gradients, aspect, and soil composition would also help define residual basal area targets. • Species preference for retention is as follows: retain all Western larch where it exists. Ponderosa pine is preferred as the primary retention species. After considering ponderosa pine leave Douglas-fir, grand fir, and lodgepole pine respectively. • Trees less than 21 inches DBH exhibiting recent beetle activity would first be targeted for removal. Trees less than 21 inches DBH within double the dripline of the largest, healthiest ponderosa pine would be removed. • One replacement ponderosa pine tree would be maintained within double the dripline of large ponderosa pine (> 21" DBH) exhibiting substantial crown dieback (less than 1/3rd live crown ratio). • Skips and Gaps: Up to two-acre gaps would be created by removing all trees, this is to simulate disturbance. Gaps should be placed in areas of heavy dwarf mistletoe, root disease pockets, and in " wet noodle7" patches whenever possible. Skips of high density un-thinned trees or higher density patches in rocky areas, northern aspects, draws, and around existing snag patches would be left untreated for the benefit of wildlife; these patches would be up to 2 acres in size. Two acres of skips and two acres of gaps would occur for every 25 acres. These areas do not have to be contiguous. Skips and gaps would not be placed in units less than 50 acres in size. • Large trees would not be cut with the following exceptions: o They are deemed a hazard to operations o Ponderosa pine, grand fir and Douglas-fir up to 30 inches in the proposed action in specified commercial thin treatments. • Actions would be accomplished using ground-based equipment such as a mechanical harvester, tractor or rubber-tired skidder. Slopes which are less than 35% would be harvested using ground-based equipment • Harvest-generated logging slash would either be removed to the landing through whole tree yarding or if cut-to-length logging methods are used, machine and/or hand piled and burned in the unit. • If feasible, all created biomass would be removed for commercial use. Any created biomass not utilized for commercial purposes would be left on site as downed wood, utilized as large wood for stream restoration, piled and burned or jackpot burned in areas of light fuel loads. • Thinning activities would be accomplished using chainsaws or ground-based equipment to cut and either skid biomass to be utilized or piled. The intent is to remove created biomass from the site. However, some biomass may be piled (machine and/or hand piled) and burned or occasionally lopped and scattered and in areas of light fuel concentrations may be jackpot burned. Thinning would be followed by under burning. • Where mountain mahogany exists as an inclusion in the unit: all conifers up to 21 inches DBH within 15 feet of the crown of single live mountain mahogany would be cut. Where mahogany exists as a clump (defined as 2 or more individuals within 30 feet of each other crown to crown), all conifers up to 21 inches DBH within 30 feet of the crowns within the clump would be cut. Prescribed fire would be allowed to back into mahogany patches, no active lighting would occur.

7 Dense areas were the trees lose their ability to maintain a rigid form.

Page | 2-2 Chapter 2 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

• Where aspen exist as inclusions within a unit: all conifers up to 21 inches DBH for 150 feet to the south of the aspen, 100 feet both east and west of the aspen, and 66 feet to the north of the aspen would be cut. • Juniper that does not exhibit old growth characteristics would be cut in all treatment units.

Proposed Vegetation Treatments The following vegetation treatments and acres are proposed to meet the purpose and need for the project. Reference the Vegetation Treatment Map.

Commercial Thin – 5,067 acres This treatment is assigned to second-growth mixed ponderosa pine/Douglas/grand fir stands to reduce hazardous fuel load by reducing stand density (for example, to increase the distance between tree crowns or reduce ladder fuels) and selected standing dead trees. Commercial thinning incorporates principles for dry forest restoration presented by Franklin and Johnson (2012). These principles include retaining and promoting old trees, increasing forest diversity by creating openings and leaving untreated areas, and reducing forest density, particularly of late seral trees that are less tolerant to disturbance such as drought, fire, and insects. Thinning would occur throughout the diameter range up to 21” DBH with residual basal area targets of 25 to 75 square feet per acre based on site productivity as measured by plant association and determined on a stand-by-stand basis. During thinning activities, dead lodgepole, grand fir, Douglas fir, and ponderosa pine trees that are surplus to other resource needs may be considered for salvage opportunities. Design criteria for snag dependent species are included in Appendix A.

Commercial Thin – Up to 30” DBH – 1,359 acres This treatment is identical to commercial thin prescription but includes removing grand fir and Douglas-fir trees up to 30 inches DBH. Treatment would not remove ponderosa pine trees over 21 inches DBH.

Commercial Thin – Up to 30” DBH Ponderosa Pine – 1,587 acres This treatment is identical to commercial thin prescription but includes removing grand fir, Douglas-fir, and ponderosa pine trees up to 30 inches DBH. Species preference for removal is grand fir, Douglas-fir and lastly ponderosa pine. Treatment will remove large ponderosa pine only where densities currently do not reflect the desired conditions, based on historical references (Johnston et al. 2018). Ponderosa pine 21 inches DBH or greater will not be removed in stands that can meet desired conditions without doing so.

Commercial Thin LOS Enhancement – 999 acres This treatment is assigned to stands that currently meet the definition of both late and old structure (LOS) and old forest multi stratum (OFMS). These stands are typified by a ponderosa pine overstory and a moderate to heavy understory consisting of some or all of the following species: ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, lodgepole pine, and grand fir. The goal of this treatment is to reduce the risk of stand replacement fire by converting OFMS to old forest single stratum (OFSS), thus shifting structure in the project area closer to the HRV and reducing competition to predominant overstory trees and protect and retain large old trees. This treatment would maintain all stands in late and old structure habitat by not removing trees greater than 21 inches DBH. Treatment would remove most of the understory, favoring ponderosa pine over Douglas-fir and grand fir between the overstory groups, and leaving replacement trees for the declining overstory.

Chapter 2 Page|2-3 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Thinning would occur throughout the diameter range up to 21” DBH with a residual basal area target of 40 square feet per acre.

Commercial Thin LOS Enhancement – Up to 30” DBH – 3,184 acres This treatment is identical to commercial thin LOS enhancement prescription but includes removing grand fir and Douglas-fir trees up to 30 inches DBH. Treatment would not remove ponderosa pine trees over 21 inches DBH. This treatment would maintain all stands in late and old structure habitat by retaining at least 10 trees per acre greater than or equal to 21 inches diameter at breast height. Residual trees per acre targets of 12 trees greater than or equal to 21” DBH would be retained, while reducing basal area of trees less than or equal to 21” DBH to an average basal area of 30ft2 per acre in the residual stand.

Commercial Thin LOS Enhancement – Up to 30” DBH Ponderosa Pine – 1,791 acres This treatment is identical to commercial thin LOS enhancement prescription but includes removing grand fir, Douglas-fir, and ponderosa pine trees up to 30 inches DBH. Species preference for removal is grand fir, Douglas-fir and lastly ponderosa pine. Treatment will remove large ponderosa pine only where densities currently do not reflect the desired conditions, based on historical references (Johnston et al. 2018). Ponderosa pine 21 inches DBH or greater will not be removed in stands that can meet desired conditions without cutting larger trees. This treatment would maintain all stands in late and old structure habitat by retaining at least 10 trees per acre greater than or equal to 21 inches diameter at breast height. Residual trees per acre targets of 12 trees greater than or equal to 21” DBH would be retained, while reducing basal area of trees less than or equal to 21” DBH to an average basal area of 30ft2 per acre in the residual stand.

Commercial Thin - Connectivity Corridors – 5,989 acres This treatment is assigned to stands that currently meet the definition of both LOS and OFMS, and second-growth mixed ponderosa pine/Douglas/grand fir stands and are connectivity corridors that must be managed at higher canopy densities for old growth-dependent species. These stands are typified by a ponderosa pine overstory and a moderate to heavy understory consisting of some or all of the following species: ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, lodgepole pine, and grand fir. The goal of this treatment is to reduce hazardous fuel loads while still managing for old growth dependent species. Corridors established for old growth-dependent species in the project area would allow for big game and migratory bird dispersal and provide increased hiding cover. Thinning would occur throughout the diameter range (up to 21” DBH for all species) and would remove most of the understory, favoring ponderosa pine over Douglas-fir and grand fir between the overstory groups, and leaving replacement trees for the declining overstory. Proposed treatments would not degrade LOS status and would not drop acreage for OFMS below the HRV. The residual basal area target in these stands would be based upon two-thirds site potential based on site productivity as measured by plant association and determined on a stand-by-stand basis.

Commercial Thin – Lodgepole Pine – 289 acres This treatment is assigned to stands with a lodgepole component to reduce hazardous fuel load by reducing stand density (for example, to increase the distance between tree crowns or reduce ladder fuels). All ponderosa pine over 15” DBH would be left as reserve trees, creating an irregular open pine stand. Lodgepole pine under 21” DBH would be removed. During thinning activities, dead lodgepole, grand fir, Douglas fir, and ponderosa pine trees that are surplus to other resource needs may be considered for salvage opportunities. Design criteria for snag dependent species are included in Appendix A.

Page | 2-4 Chapter 2 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Small Diameter Thinning OFSS – 1,173 acres This treatment is assigned to stands that currently meet the definition of both LOS and OFSS. These stands are typified by a ponderosa pine overstory and a moderate to heavy understory consisting of the following species: ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, lodgepole pine, and grand fir. The goal of this treatment is to reduce hazardous fuels and the potential for a stand replacement fire, protect and retain large old trees, enhance OFSS, thus shifting structure in the project area closer to the HRV and reducing competition to predominant overstory trees. Small diameter thinning would be used to adjust species composition, forest structure, and stand density. Trees less than 12 inches DBH would be cut and would be removed. Proposed treatments would not degrade LOS status and would not drop acreage for OFSS below the HRV.

Small Diameter Thinning – 4,570 Acres Small diameter thinning would be used to reduce hazardous fuel load by reducing stand density (for example, to increase the distance between tree crowns or reduce ladder fuels) and protect and retain large old trees. Trees less than 12 inches DBH would be cut. Small diameter thinning may also be required in proposed restoration treatments described below, to reduce fuels and competition. In lodgepole pine units, trees less than 4 inches DBH would be cut, with an emphasis on retaining species other than lodgepole. About 10 to 15 percent of the small diameter trees would be left as patches for wildlife hiding cover using variable density thinning that includes the use of openings and untreated areas (skips and gaps). Outside of connectivity corridors, variable spacing would average 15’ inter-crown spacing based on the residual stand including overstory; within connectivity corridors, variable spacing would average 10’ inter-crown spacing based on residual stand including overstory. • Within harvest units: approximately 98 percent of commercial thinning units may also require small diameter thinning to reach stand density objectives. • Outside of harvest units: small diameter thinning in these stands would release larger trees from competition with undergrowth, making the stand more resilient to changes in growing conditions.

Juniper Encroachment in Ponderosa Pine– 1,357 Acres This treatment is assigned to dry ponderosa pine sites to reduce hazardous fuel load by reducing stand density (for example, to increase the distance between tree crowns or reduce ladder fuels) and protect and retain large old trees. This treatment would remove juniper trees that do not exhibit old growth characteristics in ponderosa pine stands where Western juniper is increasing in numbers in the understory in direct competition with the pine.

Conifer Encroachment – 525 Acres This treatment would remove conifers that have encroached into historically non-forested areas. Areas proposed for this treatment include meadows and shrub-steppe habitats and would reflect a more historical outline by removing encroaching conifers less than 21” DBH. If feasible, all created biomass would be removed for commercial use over winter or dry conditions and after approval by a hydrologist or fish biologist

Plantation Thinning – 48 Acres This treatment will consist of cutting non-commercial sized trees so that the residual stand has average crown spacing of 12 feet. This will reduce the chances of a stand replacing event during wildfires. This will also decrease inter-tree competition, while increasing the health and vigor of residual trees. Slash would be pulled back, lopped and scattered, or piled and burned when necessary.

Chapter 2 Page|2-5 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Landscape Scale Prescribed Burning Activities Landscape scale prescribe burning treatment activities are proposed across 31,060 acres within 9 fuel blocks. Reference Table 2. Much of these areas overlap previously mentioned proposed vegetation treatments and typically vegetation treatment activities would occur prior to reintroducing fire. Because prescribed fires burn in a mosaic pattern, the entire 31,060 acres would not actually be burned. An estimated 21,750 acres would be burned, about 70% of the area.

The purpose of prescribed fire in Crow is to reduce long term wildfire risk through reductions in existing fuel loading and restore ecological function in fire-adapted ecosystems. Priority areas for treatment would be primarily in the dry upland forest potential vegetation groups. Prescriptions parameters for prescribed fire would be designed to mimic a range of fire effects. Mixed severity fire effects would be common for managing mixed ponderosa pine and associated fir stands to reduce fir stocking and perpetuate ponderosa pine. Ignitions are planned when conditions would meet desired fire behavior and could occur during spring, summer, fall or winter. Modelling can help to identify the desired weather parameters needed to achieve the desired fire behavior which in turn would provide the desired fire effects. The desired fire behavior is for a creeping or backing fire, and flanking fire, with maximum flame lengths of 2 - 4 feet with occasional torching of individual or small pockets of trees. The litter layer, which consists of mostly compact needles, duff, smaller twigs, and branches, would be the primary carrier in areas with a timber component. In areas without a timber component, the primary carrier would be grass. However, the duff, litter layer and 10-100-hour fuels are still the primary fuel component targeted for reduction. It is expected that burning would reduce accumulated plant material and decadent grasses and shrubs and stimulate new growth, enhancing foraging habitat. Roads and natural boundaries would be the main fire control lines however, some areas may need hand or machine constructed line prior to ignition. Implementation of fuel treatments would occur over the next 10 years. The exact timing and acreage would be determined by funding, availability of personnel and variations in weather patterns. Maintenance burning would continue as needed.

Table 2. Prescribe Burn Blocks Burn Block Acres 1 2389 2 4538 3 2923 4 2511 5 1652 6 1592 7 6723 8 4827 9 3915 Total 31,060

Page | 2-6 Chapter 2 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Acceptable mortality ranges for prescribed burning are as follows: • Trees 0-1” dbh tree mortality from 30 to 70%. • Trees 1-5” dbh tree mortality from 5 to 15%. • Trees 5-10” dbh, tree mortality from 5 to 10%. • Trees 10-20” dbh, tree mortality from 1 to 5%. • Over 20” dbh tree mortality is not to exceed 1 tree per acre. • Mortality levels are based on averages over the whole burning areas and recognize the fact that prescribed fire is a relatively inexact tool and there would be some localized areas where mortality reaches 100%. These patches where mortality may reach 100% should be kept to less than 80 acres and preferably no larger than the 10 acres.

Forest Road Activities Road activities would include road use, maintenance, reconstruction, temporary road construction, and confirmation of past administratively closed roads based on recommendations from the interdisciplinary team to create a safe and sustainable road system. Forest road activities are proposed as a connected action and are connected in order to implement the proposed vegetation activities which address the purpose and need.

Road Use, Maintenance and Reconstruction Forest roads used for hazardous fuel reduction (haul) would have road maintenance activities to varying degrees, dependent upon severity of road damage, erosion and sediment production, and designed maintenance level. Road maintenance and reconstruction may occur on both open and closed National Forest system roads. Most commonly, maintenance would consist of hazard tree removal and brushing for sight distance, although some ground-disturbing activity may be necessary. Road maintenance for timber haul would occur on 203 miles of Maintenance Level 2 or temporarily opened Maintenance Level 1 roads to provide safe access and adequate drainage. The following work is included in the maintenance requirements for roads:

• Blade and shape road including existing drain dips and grade sags • Constructing waterbars/cross ditches, drain dips and grade sags • Seeding • Spot rocking • Brushing • Removing danger trees • Realigning of road junction • Widening of roadbed to meet standard width • Removing excess material • Rocking roadbed and/or drain dips and grade sags

Closed roads utilized for haul would be opened, utilized and then reclosed at the end of its use. Basic custodial maintenance would be performed to allow for future access and to maintain adequate drainage to prevent damage.

Proposed haul roads are subject to change through implementation. Any roads that are added to haul during implementation would be consulted on with Forest Service resource specialists. All roads used for haul would follow project design criteria included in Appendix A.

Chapter 2 Page|2-7 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Temporary Roads Temporary roads are roads authorized by contract, permit, lease, or other written authorization, or emergency operation not intended to be part of the forest transportation system and not necessary for long-term resource management. Temporary roads are not intended to be included as part of the forest road atlas, as they are managed by the projects or activities under which they are authorized and decommissioned at the conclusion of the authorized activity. Temporary roads would be decommissioned and restored after harvest and related activities are complete. Potential temporary roads in RHCAs must follow BMPs and be approved on a site-specific basis by hydrologist or fish biologist. Temporary road construction (less than 27 miles) would be necessary to access timber harvest units.

Table 3. Crow Administratively Closed Roads Road Beginning Ending Segment Number MP MP Length 4300053 0.0 0.4 0.4 4332013 0.0 1.0 1.0 4332825 0.2 1.2 1.0 4335275 0.89 1.1 0.2 4340000 0.4 0.982 0.58 4340075 0.0 0.5 0.5 4340215 0.0 0.3 0.3 4340305 0.0 0.3 0.3 4340460 0.0 0.2 0.2 4340475 0.0 0.3 0.3 4340505 0.0 0.3 0.3 4341575 0.0 0.2 0.2 4341700 0.0 0.89 0.89 4360015 0.0 0.1 0.1 4365300 0.0 0.3 0.3 4370285 0.0 0.3 0.3 4370400 0.0 1.0 1.0 4370450 0.0 0.3 0.3 Total 8.17

Confirmation of Past Administratively Closed Roads Within Crow, there are roads that were closed by previous administrative actions. These road segments, identified as maintenance level 1, are physically closed on the ground and are not being utilized by the public. These roads may be used for haul and then reclosed as described above. These roads are included in this project because they are being utilized for haul and so they can be documented as closed through a National Environmental Policy Act process. Previous administrative actions closed these roads for multiple reasons including road densities, wildlife habitat security, hydrological impacts, water quality, or to reduce other resource damage. The interdisciplinary team analyzed each road segment to determine its current use and future access

Page | 2-8 Chapter 2 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

need for administration and public use. Through the Crow project analysis, these roads are proposed for official closure and long-term storage for future use and are listed in Table 3.

Proposed Forest Plan Amendments Selection of the proposed action alternative would not be consistent with the Ochoco Forest Plan, as amended (36 CFR 219.10(c)). A Forest plan amendment to cut and remove trees greater than 21 inches DBH in selected stands would be required to implement this alternative.

Removal of grand fir trees up to 30 inches DBH and removal of any species greater than 21 inches within late and old structure stands would also occur but do not require a forest plan amendment.

Vegetation treatments in these stands would focus “largely” on small-diameter trees (less than 21 inches), however some large, young trees greater than 21 inches would need to be removed. Removing selected large (greater than or equal to 21 inches DBH) young trees would reduce the dominance of fire-intolerant species, reduce the stocking to pre-fire suppression conditions, reduce the likelihood of a catastrophic stand replacing hazard, and allow the stand to return to a more historic low intensity/severity fire regime. This amendment would apply only for the duration of, and for those actions proposed in, the site-specific Crow Hazardous Fuel Reduction Project. The HFRA states: • “projects shall fully maintain, or contribute toward the restoration of, the structure and composition of old growth stands according to the pre-fire suppression old

Chapter 2 Page|2-9 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

growth condition characteristic of the forest type, taking into account the contribution of the stand to landscape fire adaptation and watershed health, and retaining the large trees contributing to old growth structure. • The large-tree retention requirements of Section 102(f) must not prevent agencies from reducing wildland fire risk to communities, and at-risk Federal land. HFRA requires treatments to be carried out in a manner that will modify fire behavior, as measured by the projected reduction of uncharacteristically severe wildland fire effects for the forest type. In achieving this objective, vegetation treatments are to focus “largely” on small-diameter trees, thinning, strategic fuel breaks, and prescribed fire. • Therefore, large trees of selected species that are not adapted to fire processes may need to be removed to promote greater fire resiliency. Similarly, the removal of small- to mid-sized trees will generally be needed to reduce fuel ladders within the treatment area, curtailing uncharacteristically severe wildland fire effects and enabling use of prescribed fire. Trees in a variety of size classes may need to be removed in these areas to reduce wildland fire risk to communities, and at-risk Federal land.”

The Forest Management Direction for Large Diameter Trees in Eastern Oregon and Southeastern Washington Project states that late and old structure stand components would be maintained and/or enhanced in stands subject to timber harvest as much as possible by adhering to the following plan components: • old trees are prioritized for retention and recruitment, • large, fire tolerant species would be favored where appropriate, • appropriate species composition for biophysical environment, topographical position, stand density, historical diameter distributions, and spatial arrangements within stands and across the landscape are considered in order to develop stands that are resistant and resilient to disturbance • vegetative structure is manipulated in a manner that moves it towards late and old structural conditions as appropriate to meet historic range of variability • open, park-like stand conditions are maintained where they occurred historically

Within Crow there has been an increasing trend of shade-tolerant grand fir and Douglas-fir trees growing in the understory. The combination of timber harvest and fire suppression has gradually converted these dry forests from primarily long-lived, early-seral species (ponderosa pine) to a higher proportion of late-seral species (grand fir and Douglas-fir). Grand fir and Douglas-fir were historically not a major component within these dry forest types, but were present on the landscape, primarily on northern slopes and topographic depressions with higher availability of moisture. Some of these late-seral species are now greater than or equal to 21 inches diameter at breast height. The ingrowth of shade-tolerant trees has increased the risk of tree mortality to old ponderosa pine due to competition induced stress, insect attacks, and uncharacteristic wildfire.

Page | 2-10 Chapter 2 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Stand densities and multi-layered canopies have also increased across the project area. Roughly 63 percent (21,666 acres) of forested ground in the project area has a basal area greater than 90 square ft. per acre, which is above the desired range, and about 45 percent (15,222 acres) has a basal area greater than 120 square ft. per acre. Stand structures in the project area currently do not reflect the desired condition based on historical references. Over stocking, drought stress, and slow growth, accompanied by stagnated stand conditions are contributing to insect activity. This amendment is proposed in part because, “Diameter limits can prohibit removal of large young trees that provide ladder and crown fuels and competition, thereby increasing the potential for wildfire or drought to kill old trees” (Franklin and Johnson 2012). Currently Crow is outside the historic range of variability (HRV). Modeled results of current conditions in the project area indicate an HRV Figure 4 - Example of Douglas-fir growing departure of 32,408 acres in the dry forest PVG. under old growth ponderosa pine providing a ladder for potential crown fire. Departures are most evident in the old forest single- stratum cohort. As a stand becomes dense, active crowning occurs at lower wind speeds and the stand is more vulnerable to crown fire (Reinhardt et al. 2003). Through past harvest activities and the effects of fire exclusion, stand structure over much of the project area has shifted from primarily single storied stands with large trees to densely stocked stands with multi layered canopy of mid-size and small trees. These multi layered canopies favor mixed severity and stand replacement fire effects. Higher proportions of less fire dependent tree species such as grand fir and Douglas-fir have been recruited into the understory. Figure 5 - Example of dense, relatively large ponderosa pine trees needing density management. Grand fir and Douglas-fir exhibit very dense crowns and grow in tighter spacing than the more fire dependent ponderosa pine and western larch. Much of the stands in the project area have smaller grand fir and Douglas-fir growing as ladder fuels underneath the mature over story.

Treatments in selected upland stands would consist of removing large (greater than or equal to 21 inches DBH) grand fir, Douglas-fir and ponderosa pine trees to reduce hazardous crown fuels and contribute toward the restoration of, the structure and composition of old growth stands according to the pre-fire suppression old growth condition characteristic of the forest type. Large trees that

Chapter 2 Page|2-11 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

are performing another ecosystem service, such as a living snag, has severe defect or damage (i.e. multiple or broken tops), or is being utilized by cavity nesters would be left.

Alternative 3 Alternative 3 was developed from the key issue of effects on large tree retention and future snags. Activities already under permit or contract, or authorized under other NEPA based decisions, would continue.

Vegetation Treatments Vegetation treatments in alternative 3 have been modified in order to preserve trees greater than 21 inches in the upland commercial thin treatments. The treatment types are the same as described in the proposed action alternative with the exception of those commercial thin treatments that treat large trees. Refer to the proposed action alternative for a description of treatments, and refer to Table 4 for the difference in acres of vegetation treatments between action alternatives. Reference the Alternative 3 Commercial Vegetation Actions Map and the Action Alternatives Non-Commercial Vegetation Actions Map at the end of chapter 2.

Table 4. Action Alternative Comparison Difference Alternative 2 Treatment Alternative 3 Between Proposed Action Alternatives Commercial Thin 5,067 8,013 +2,946 Commercial Thin – Up to 30” DBH 1,359 0 -1,359 Commercial Thin – Up to 30” DBH PP 1,587 0 -1,587 Commercial Thin LOS 999 5,974 +4,975 Commercial Thin LOS – Up to 30” DBH 3,184 0 -3,184 Commercial Thin LOS – Up to 30“ DBH 1,791 0 -1,791 PP Commercial Thin – Lodgepole Pine 289 289 0 Commercial Thin - Connectivity Corridor 5,989 5,989 0 Conifer Encroachment 525 525 0 Juniper Encroachment 1,357 1,357 0 Plantation Thinning 48 48 0 Small Diameter Thinning 4,570 4,570 0 Small Diameter Thinning - OFSS 1,173 1,173 0 Totals 27,938 27,938 0

Proposed Forest Plan Amendments Selection of alternative 3 would be consistent with the Forest Plan, as amended (36 CFR 219.10(c)).

Page | 2-12 Chapter 2 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Chapter 2 Page|2-13 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Page | 2-14 Chapter 2 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Chapter 2 Page|2-15 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Page | 2-16 Chapter 2 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Chapter 3 - Environmental Consequences Specialist Reports, and Use of “Best Available Science” Specialist reports contain the detailed data, analysis methodologies, analyses, conclusions, maps, references, and technical documentation that the resource specialists relied upon to reach the conclusions in this environmental assessment. In those reports, the IDT members based their analyses on data collected during field surveys, skilled interpretations of data and maps, and application of professional judgment from observations and evaluation of data, and integrated relevant scientific information and responsible opposing views where raised by internal or external sources. This Environmental Assessment hereby incorporates by reference the Silviculture (vegetation), Fire/Fuels/Air Quality, Soils/Watershed, Wildlife, Fisheries, Botany, Invasive Plants, Recreation, Range, Visual, Heritage, Economics/Social, IRA and Other Undeveloped Areas, and Transportation reports all located in the Crow Project Record (40 CFR 1502.21). Other resources not listed above wrote directly into the EA and no stand-alone specialist reports were written. The best available science is considered in preparation of this EA. The concept of “best available science” is also a matter of opinion to some degree since scientists can legitimately disagree about the meaning of individual study results. As a general matter, we show consideration of the best available science when we ensure the scientific integrity of the discussions and analyses in the project NEPA document. Specifically, this EA and the accompanying project record identifies methods used, references reliable scientific sources, discusses responsible opposing views, and discloses incomplete or unavailable information, scientific uncertainty, and risk (See 40 CFR, 1502.9(b), 1502.22, 1502.24). Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Actions The temporal and spatial scale of analysis is variable depending on the resource concern being evaluated, particularly when considering the effects of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions. During the interdisciplinary process the team followed guidance presented in CEQ’s letter dated June 24, 2005 regarding past actions. Using this guidance the following summary of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions within and adjacent to Crow was developed. These projects were considered where relevant, when addressing the cumulative effects for various resources. The effects are disclosed in this chapter.

Summary of Past Actions Past Commercial Harvest and Precommercial Activity – A GIS summary of activity from 1982 to 2010 include: • 4,735 acres of Overstory removal • 1,679 acres of Improvement • 1,347 acres of Shelterwood • 146 acres of Salvage • 2,895 acres of Single-tree Selection • 759 acres of Commercial Thin • 1,071 acres of Clearcutting • 2,354 acres of Precommercial thinning

Chapter 3 Page|3-1 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Past Fire Activity – Since 1986, there have been 83 fire starts with most of them contained at less than 1 acre according to recorded data. The majority of fire starts for this area are from lightning. Large fires were recorded in 1910, 2007 (Bear Canyon and Egley Complex), and 2019 Box Fire. Past Prescribed Fire Activity –The 2,185-acre Spring Canyon prescribed burn was completed in 2004. Smaller prairie burns were conducted on Oso, Duffy and Swain prairies in 2006-2007.

Summary of Present Actions Recreation – Ongoing use of developed trails, dispersed camping, hunting, and sightseeing occurs year-round. Public firewood gathering and snowmobile use would also continue to occur.

Grazing – This project is located within portions of 6 livestock grazing allotments. Grazing is ongoing according to the permits issued.

Emigrant Creek Ranger District Danger Tree Removal Project- Remove hazard trees along 2- and 4-digit roads and campgrounds through-out the Emigrant Creek Ranger District

Skull 120- Annual bike race in June. Route goes through Crow

Summary of Reasonably Foreseeable Actions Boone Prairie Burn - 150-acre prescribed burn Salt Canyon North – 30-acre prescribed burn

Whistle Prescribed Burn – 250-acre prescribed burn

Recreation – Ongoing use of developed trails, dispersed camping, hunting, and sightseeing occurs year-round. Public firewood gathering and snowmobile use would also continue to occur.

Grazing – This project is located within portions of 6 livestock grazing allotments. Grazing is ongoing according to the permits issued.

Malheur National Forest Site-Specific Invasive Plants Treatment – Treatment of known and newly discovered invasive plants using herbicide, manual, mechanical, biological and/or cultural treatments.

Emigrant Creek Ranger District Danger Tree Removal Project- Remove hazard trees along 2- and 4-digit roads and campgrounds through-out the Emigrant Creek Ranger District

Skull 120- Annual bike race in June. Route goes through Crow

Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects of No Action (Alternative 1) By definition, direct and indirect effects (40 CFR 1508.8), and cumulative effects (40 CFR 1508.7) result from the proposed action, and thus are not germane to the no action alternative. Each resource section will describe the consequences to the resource, if any exist, of taking no action.

Page | 3-2 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Forest Vegetation The following is a summary of the Forest Vegetation resource report for the Crow project. The entire report is incorporated by reference and can be found in the project file, located at the Emigrant Creek Ranger District, Malheur National Forest, Hines, Oregon. Vegetation in this area has experienced a vast change in stand structure and disturbance regime due to past over-story logging, grazing, and fire suppression. As a result of past management and lack of historical disturbance, nearly all stands in the project area are over-stocked with small trees in the understory layer. Over-stocked stand conditions, coupled with drought, combine to exert a tremendous amount of competition for resources by vegetation. This leads to weakened conditions, making trees more susceptible to catastrophic stand replacing wildfires.

The purpose of this project is to reduce hazardous fuel loadings. Proposed hazardous fuel reduction treatments would also improve stand resilience to drought, restore historic structure and spatial pattern of vegetation, reduce the potential for stand replacement fire events, mitigate potential insect and disease epidemics, and restore declining riparian, grass-shrub, and meadow plant communities.

Potential Vegetation Groups Vegetation patterns in the Blue Mountains are described by using a concept called potential vegetation. Hall et al. (1995) defined potential vegetation as “the community of plants that would become established if all successional sequences were completed, without interference by humans, under existing environmental conditions including edaphic, topographic, and climatic factors.” Potential vegetation is broken down into mid- and fine-scale hierarchical units.

Potential vegetation groups (PVGs) are mid-scale units named for the predominant temperature or moisture influences occurring on a site. Activities proposed in this project would take place almost entirely within the dry upland forest PVG. Therefore, discussion of existing and desired conditions will focus on these sites. Percent of PVGs within the project area are displayed in Figure 6.

Historic Range of Variability The concept of Historic Range of Variability (HRV) is used to characterize fluctuations in ecosystem conditions over a period of time and can be utilized as an indicator of forest health (Powell 2010). HRV refers to the historical pattern and abundance of species and structural stages within watersheds, using pre-settlement (1800-1900) conditions as a reference point. It involves the determination of whether a particular action might critically alter the abundance of any structural stage or species within the project area. By utilizing pre-settlement conditions as a proxy for a naturally functioning ecosystem one can compare the deviation of current conditions to historical and ascertain what amount of area is outside of what is considered naturally functioning or healthy. The definitions of the structural stages managed for can be seen in Table 5.

Chapter 3 Page|3-3 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Figure 6 – Crow Potential Vegetation Groups

TOTAL PVGS

DRY UPLAND FOREST 94%

Non-Forested 5%

COLD UPLAND FOREST 1% MOIST UPLAND FOREST 0.001

Table 5 Description of Forest Structural Classes by Developmental Stage and Size. Stand Initiation (SI). Following a stand-replacing disturbance such as wildfire or timber harvest, growing space is available but in the process of being occupied rapidly by vegetation that either survives the disturbance or colonizes the area. Survivors literally survive the disturbance above ground, or initiate growth from their underground roots or from seeds stored on-site. Colonizers disperse seed into disturbed areas, the seed germinates, and then new seedlings establish and develop. A single canopy stratum of tree seedlings and saplings is present in this class. Stem Exclusion (SECC or SEOC). In this stage of development, vigorous, fast-growing trees that compete strongly for available light and moisture occupy the growing space. Because trees are tall and reduce sunlight, understory plants (including smaller trees) are shaded and grow more slowly. Species that need sunlight usually die; shrubs and herbs may become dormant. In this class, establishment of new trees is precluded by a lack of sunlight (stem exclusion closed canopy) or of moisture (stem exclusion open canopy).

Page | 3-4 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Understory Reinitiation (UR). As a forest develops, new age classes of trees (cohorts) establish as the overstory trees die or are thinned and no longer fully occupy growing space. Regrowth of understory vegetation then occurs, and trees begin to develop in vertical layers (canopy stratification). This class consists of a sparse to moderately dense overstory with small trees

underneath. Young Forest Multi Strata (YFMS). In this stage of forest development, three or more tree layers are present as a result of canopy differentiation or because new cohorts of trees became established. This class consists of a broken or discontinuous overstory layer with a mix of tree sizes present (large trees are absent or scarce); it provides high vertical and horizontal diversity. This class is also referred to as “multi-stratum, without large trees” (USDA Forest Service 1995). There are less than 10 trees per acre that are 21” in diameter. Old Forest (OFMS). Many age classes and vegetation layers mark this structural class and it usually contains large, old trees. Decaying fallen trees may also be present that leave a discontinuous overstory canopy. On Cool Moist sites without recurring underburns, multi-layer stands with large trees in the uppermost stratum may be present. Consists of ten or more trees per acre that are 21” in diameter. Old Forest (OFSS). Many age classes but only a single fairly distinct overstory layer marks this structural class and it usually contains large, old trees. Decaying fallen trees may also be present that leave a discontinuous overstory canopy. The diagram shows a single-layer stand of ponderosa pine that evolved with high frequency, low-intensity fire. Consists of ten or more trees per acre that are 21” in diameter. Sources/Notes: Based on Oliver and Larson (1996) and O’Hara and others (1996). Modified, Tatum (2006).

Chapter 3 Page|3-5 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Figure 7. Deviation of current structural stages (2019) from reference conditions within dry upland forest of the Crow Planning Area (Historic conditions adapted from Countryman and Justice 2010).

NA 2019 HRV 25,000

20,000

15,000

Acres 10,000

5,000

0 Stand Stem Understory Old Forest Old Forest Initiation Exclusion Reinitiation Single-Story Multistory Current Acres 1,573 14,699 2,461 1,332 12,342 Historic Minimum 4411.29 1234.244 0 13912.53 339.33 Historic Maximum 9501.24 7465.26 2375.31 21377.79 5768.61

Methodology The Forest Vegetation Simulator (FVS) is a model used for predicting forest stand dynamics that is used extensively in the Unites States (Dixon 2002). FVS is utilized in this project to summarize current stand conditions and to predict future stand conditions under various management alternatives. Current conditions, along with future conditions resulting from various management alternatives, will be analyzed against the HRV identified in Countryman and Justice (2010). Long-term model projections become estimates at best; however, results do show trends and are useful for comparing alternatives. The following assumptions were used during analysis: • Stand attributes from sampled stands were imputed to non-sampled stands using Most Similar Neighbor (MSN) methodology (Crookston et al. 2002). • Hazardous fuel removal would begin in late 2020 and would take up to 8 years to complete. • Prescribed burning would follow mechanical treatments. • Stand acres currently characterized by SEOC, SECC, YFMS, and UR structural stages have the ability to move directly into OFSS or OFMS structural stages when old forest structure is defined by the number of large trees over 21” DBH per acre. • Stand replacement events are predictable (fire, insects, wind, etc.).

The above assumptions are used to simplify the analysis and are to be used for comparative purposes only and are not meant to accurately predict actual future conditions. There are numerous limitations with what FVS can model and the following are a few of the most significant limitations. • FVS cannot model treating around large trees for double the dripline. • FVS does not model unpredictable natural disturbance phenomena

Page | 3-6 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Existing Condition – Dry Upland Forest Fire was historically the most influential disturbance agent in forests of eastern Oregon and Washington (Hessburg et al. 1994). Fire regimes on south facing slopes, ridgetops, and lower montane settings were characterized by frequent low- to mixed-severity fires which created open- canopy forests, fairly large areas of open woodlands, shrublands, and grasslands (Hessburg et al. 2016). However, fire regimes in the dry forests of the inland Pacific U.S. have undergone a dramatic change to a less frequent, more severe regime (Everett et al. 2000). Hessburg et al. (2005) estimated that the area in the Columbia Basin with potential for low-severity fire has decreased by 53 percent, while the area with potential for high-severity fire has doubled. A century-long combination of fire suppression, fire exclusion by livestock grazing, road building, and selection and clearcut logging of large, fire-resistant trees has led to a condition where high-severity fire is now common in these forests. Douglas-fir and grand fir now dominate areas formerly occupied by fire-tolerant and shade- intolerant ponderosa pine. Stands originating after overstory removal cutting were commonly reforested with Douglas-fir and the lack of subsequent fires has perpetuated the dominance of this species or grand fir on most sites. Even where large overstory ponderosa pine remains, the heavy influx of small diameter Douglas-fir and grand fir creates fuel ladders that alter post-fire successional pathways. Johnston et al (2018) has estimated that there are the same or greater number of lives trees 21 inches DBH or greater today than in the late 19th century. Alteration of disturbance processes has resulted in increased fuel loadings, stand densities, and connectivity (both vertically and horizontally), and increased susceptibility to insects and disease outbreaks (Hessburg et al. 2005, 2016). This influx has created a structurally homogenous landscape that is less resistant and resilient to high-severity wildfire and other stressors (Hessburg et al. 2016). Within the dry upland forest, typical stand types include: • Second-growth ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir (and locally grand fir) that had a complete or partial removal of the overstory ponderosa pine during past harvests; usually composed of fairly even-aged/sized patches with no or scattered ponderosa pine predominates. Much of this type was thinned after the overstory was removed. Current density is open to moderately dense. Douglas-fir dwarf mistletoe is seriously affecting the Douglas-fir in much of this type, and where this condition is found it is a good candidate for gap treatments. • Large, old ponderosa pine with a density of 5-15 trees per acre and a range of open to dense understory of ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, and grand fir of all sizes and ages. • Ponderosa pine/western juniper on hot-dry sites (rocky outcrops and steep southern aspects), which were historically savannas but are now filling in with conifer regeneration. • Lodgepole pine/ponderosa pine found on colder sites consisting of dense lodgepole with a ponderosa pine component. These sites typically have heavy infestations of mountain pine beetle. Ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir in pure and mixed stands dominate on approximately 77 percent (26,128 acres) of the planning area. Roughly 63 percent (21,666 acres) of forested ground in the planning area has a basal area ≥ 90 square ft. per acre, which is above the desired range, and about 45 percent (15,222 acres) has a basal area ≥ 120 square ft. per acre. Aspen, grass-shrub and meadow communities, most with conifer invasion, are estimated to occupy about 8 percent of the planning area (2,711 acres).

Expansion of conifer woodlands into sagebrush-steppe, meadow, and grassland communities is often attributed to the effects of fire suppression in the western United States (Keane et al. 2002; Krannitz 2007; Miller and Eddleman 2000; Miller and Heyerdahl 2008; Turner and Krannitz

Chapter 3 Page|3-7 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

2001; Vale 1981). Prior to the late 1800s, fire was largely responsible for maintaining these communities by limiting conifer encroachment, however, fire regimes have changed since the late 1800s, resulting in increases of pioneering conifers into areas they did not previously inhabit (Miller and Heyerdahl, 2008). Sediment cores collected by Reid et al. (1989) on the Emigrant Creek Ranger District in sites west of Silvies Valley and south of Gold Hill provide evidence of fire exclusion and shifts in vegetation types over the past 100 years. Pollen analysis within surface samples showed increased pine pollen and decreased sagebrush pollen values suggesting recent increases in woodland density.

Figure 8. Aerial imagery of Duffy Prairie in 1953 and 2017. The red polygons highlight areas of conifer encroachment into sagebrush-steppe habitat.

1953 2017

Furthermore, low charcoal values within surface samples indicated that fire has decreased to a point not seen in the last 4,000 years, a likely side effect of the fire suppression era. Historic aerial imagery provides further evidence of woodland expansion into historically open habitats within Crow (Figure 8). The encroachment is typically characterized by linear bands of even- sized trees, with the trees becoming progressively smaller and younger toward the center of the opening, suggesting a recent invasion. These are typically surrounded by a hard edge of much larger and older conifers, often established hundreds of years earlier, further suggesting younger, smaller trees are pioneers. Once a threshold of conifer invasion is reached in sagebrush-steppe types, understory species, such as sagebrush and bitterbrush decline (Miller and Eddleman 2000). Projects to remove pioneering conifers in eastern Oregon have been linked to increases in perennial grasses, perennial forbs, and sagebrush seedlings (Miller et al. 2014).

Page | 3-8 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Insect and disease activity are extensive with in the project area. Overcrowded stands on moisture-limited sites lack the ability to defend against key pest such as defoliators, bark beetles, and pathogenic fungi. Current, recent, and older mortality of lodgepole pine caused by mountain pine beetle (Figure 9) and mortality of ponderosa pine caused by mountain pine beetle and/or western pine beetle is evident throughout the project area. Ponderosa pine in portions of the planning area also sustained defoliation by pine butterfly during the 2009-2012 outbreak. In addition to the pine butterfly outbreak; the project area has seen an outbreak of western spruce budworm from 2001-2012. Some trees with reduced photosynthesis surface area have subsequently been attacked and killed by bark beetles. Other key pests, particularly disease agents, were also active within the project area. Infections of western dwarf mistletoe in ponderosa pine, and Douglas-fir dwarf mistletoe in Douglas-fir are found varying extent, intensity, and frequency throughout the project area. Root disease pathogens were present within the project area as well. Diagnostic conks of annosus root disease were found in ponderosa pine and grand fir stumps. Canker and rust pathogens infecting lodgepole pine were also apparent, though infrequent. Grand fir infected with Indian paint fungus were also observed. Further insect and disease information can be found in the insect and disease review included with the project record.

Figure 9. (A) Western pine beetle and mountain pine beetle activity in ponderosa pine. (B) Defoliation of ponderosa pine by pine butterfly. (C) Douglas-fir with heavy dwarf mistletoe infection.

Desired Vegetation Condition The desired condition of this project area is to have stands at a more resilient and resistant stocking that is closer to the lower limit of the management zone in all size classes and species, and no higher than the upper limit of the management zone defined by Powell. This will result in a more fire resistant and resilient stand, as well as control density in respect to insect outbreaks, furthermore it will increase stand vigor as the densities will be lowered to levels below that of competition for resources between trees. Effects to Forest Vegetation

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) Modeled results of current conditions in the planning area indicate a departure from the historic range of variability of 29,313 acres in the Dry forest PVG. Without treatment this number

Chapter 3 Page|3-9 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

increases to 23,276 acres in 2069. Although a decrease in acreage deviating from HRV does occur throughout time under the no action alternative, this number is much higher than that of the action alternatives throughout the same modeling period. This comparison can be seen in Table 6.

Table 6. Deviation of forest structure (acres) from HRV by alternative in the Crow Project Area Year No Action Alternative Proposed Action Alternative 3 2019 29,313 18,684 19,412 2039 30,223 13,951 15,512 2069 23,276 5,140 18,300

Consequences of the no action alternative show continued deviation from the historic range throughout the modeling period. Without treatment, departures will continue to occur in the SI, OFSS, and OFMS Structural Stages (Figure 11). By 2069, OFMS will have a surplus of 11,817 acres, while OFSS and SI show deficits of 10,438 and 6,322 acres, respectively. Under the no action prescribed fire would not be implemented. Fire plays a vital role within dry upland forest ecosystems and the lack of fire would increase the structure and composition of vegetation that is outside of historical parameters (Hessburg et al 2005).

NA 2069 HRV 25,000

20,000

15,000

10,000 ACRES

5,000

0 Stand Stem Understory Old Forest Old Forest Initiation Exclusion Reinitiation Single-Story Multistory NA 2069 Acres 264 6,619 2,126 6,207 17,191 Historic Minimum 4411.29 3393.3 0 13912.53 339.33 Historic Maximum 9501.24 7465.26 2375.31 21377.79 5768.61

Figure 10. Deviation of structural stages from reference conditions in dry upland forest of the Crow Planning Area under the no action alternative in 2069 (historic conditions adapted from Countryman and Justice).

With respect to fire risk under the no action alternative, the increased risk to the planning area for large scale fire events is evident through comparison of stand densities, canopy heights and small tree stocking between the no action alternative and proposed action alternative. Pollet and Omi (2002) found that crown fire severity was mitigated in ponderosa pine stands that had mechanical fuel treatments compared to stands without. These two variables show the increase in vertical and horizontal fuel continuity within the planning area throughout the analysis period which allows for high intensity large fire growth. The comparison of average canopy height across the entire planning area can be seen in Table 7 below.

Page | 3-10 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Table 7. Average Canopy height by Alternative and Analysis Period (feet). Year No Action Proposed Action Alternative 3 2019 12’ 14.2’ 14’ 2069 22’ 24.5’ 18.2’

As seen in Table 7, the action alternatives reduce the risk of large fire growth as the average canopy height across the entire planning area continues to increase in height above ground level. This increase in canopy height leads to the decrease in the ability of fire to get into the crowns of the older stand structures and cause high intensity crown fire. Another notable difference is the proposed action shows an immediate change of more than double the average crown height immediately after implementation of this alternative. This is ideal for reducing the risk of catastrophic fire within Crow.

In conjunction with the increase in canopy height and its effect on large fire growth and large fire risk there can also be a comparison to the reduction in ladder fuels through the mechanical thinning and reduction of small diameter trees. Pollet and Omi (2002) found that crown fire severity was mitigated with mechanical fuels treatments. This directly relates to management of small diameter trees. These size classes represent the ladder fuels that would allow a surface fire to move into the crowns of mature trees in a stand. The reduction of these size classes to stocking levels that are historically sustainable create a more resilient and vigorous stand that also translates into a reduction of ladder fuels from a hazardous fuels perspective.

Direct and Indirect Effects of the Proposed Action (Alternative 2) Implementation of activities in alternative 2 reveals a steady decline in acres deviating from the HRV for structural stages during the 50-year modeling period. From 2019 to 2039 the acres departing from HRV dropped from 18,684 to 13,951 (Figure 12). By 2069 the HRV departure drops to 5,140 acres in alternative 2, with stand initiation, stem exclusion and old forest multi- strata structural stages modeling outside of the historic range (Figure 13). Although the no action alternative reduces the HRV departure by year 2069, it’s not as effective as alternative 2.

The FVS model shows that currently there are 280,201 trees greater than 21inches diameter at breast height within the Crow planning area. Treatments proposed in alternative 2 would remove about 15,447 of those trees, or about 5.5 percent, to meet the desired conditions.

A major goal of treatments included in alternative 2 is to reduce overall fire risk and increase stand health and vigor within Crow. A combination of mechanical treatments and prescribed burning will be implemented to achieve this goal. Mechanical fuel treatments will aim at removing small diameter trees with low hanging crowns and raising overall canopy heights. Busse et al. (2009) found that thinning treatments conducted in central Oregon were an important first step in restoring ecological characteristics of pre-settlement ponderosa pine forests. Furthermore, Pollet and Omi (2002) found that crown fire severity was mitigated in ponderosa pine stands that had mechanical fuel treatments compared to stands without. These studies highlight the importance of mechanical thinning in improving fire resilience and restoring natural processes within dry upland forest stands. Within Crow, mechanical treatments followed by prescribed fire were modeled over a 50-year period. Results reveal canopy base height more than doubling in 2019 to 2069 (Table 7). This is evidence that mechanical thinning treatments, which remove small diameter ladder fuels, will be beneficial for reducing crow fire severity on treated sites.

Chapter 3 Page|3-11 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

PA 2019 HRV 25,000

20,000

15,000

Acres 10,000

5,000

0 Stand Stem Understory Old Forest Old Forest Initiation Exclusion Reinitiation Single-Story Multistory PA 2019 Acres 2,368 15,785 1,320 6,384 6,561 Historic Minimum 4411.29 3393.3 0 13912.53 339.33 Historic Maximum 9501.24 7465.26 2375.31 21377.79 5768.61

Figure 11. Deviation of structural stages from reference conditions in dry upland forest of the Crow Planning Area under Alternative 2 in year 2019 (historic conditions adapted from Countryman and Justice 2010).

PA 2069 HRV 25,000

20,000

15,000

Acres 10,000

5,000

0 Stand Stem Understory Old Forest Old Forest Initiation Exclusion Reinitiation Single-Story Multistory PA 2069 Acres 2,262 4,319 650 15,445 8,759 Historic Minimum 4411.29 3393.3 0 13912.53 339.33 Historic Maximum 9501.24 7465.26 2375.31 21377.79 5768.61

Figure 12. Deviation of structural stages from reference conditions in dry upland forest of the Crow Planning Area under Alternative 2 in year 2069 (historic conditions adapted from Countryman and Justice 2010).

Promoting fire- and drought-tolerant ponderosa pine, while targeting encroaching grand fir and Douglas-fir is fundamental to increasing resilience of dry upland stands (Franklin et al. 2013). Prescriptions for alternative 2 targets species for removal in the following order: grand fir, lodgepole pine, Douglas-fir then ponderosa pine. The goal of these prescriptions is to create stands that more accurately reflect pre-settlement species compositions and to align with direction given by USDA (2010). Treatments will remove large ponderosa pine only where densities currently do not reflect the desired conditions, based on historical references (Johnston et. al. 2018). Ponderosa pine 21 inches diameter or greater will not be removed in stands that can meet the desired conditions without cutting larger trees. Overall, basal area for each species remains

Page | 3-12 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

relatively unchanged, but vast reductions in trees per acre for each species occur by 2069. This indicates future conditions under alternative 2 will include large diameter, widely spaces trees with fewer small diameter stems in the understory. Also, the proportion of grand fir per acre in relation to other species drops by the end of the modeling period, aligning future conditions more accurately with the desired HRV.

These results are not only conducive to stand health and resiliency, they directly correlate to more fire resilient stands and a reduction in fire severity. Canopy height increase and ladder fuel decrease are both direct by-products of managing stands for proper stocking level and carrying capacity. Reducing the basal area and trees per acre on a stand translates into a reduction in available fuels, and increase in stand vigor, and an increase in the likelihood of a fire remaining low severity as it moves through the stand.

Direct and Indirect Effects of Alternative 3 Alternative 3 has the same footprint acres of treatment, with the difference between the alternatives being alternative 3 does not cut trees greater than 21 inches diameter.

Alternative 3 HRV in 2019 has 19,412 acres outside the bounds of HRV as defined by Countryman and Justice (2010). This is defined by a deficit of 2,120 acres SI, a surplus in SE of 8,569 acres, a deficit in OFSS of 7,833 acres and a surplus of OFMS of 881 acres. Single-strata LOS is improved 27% in the 2069 over no action.

Alternative 3 in 2069 has 18,300 acres being outside HRV. This is a result from a deficit of SI of 3,875 acres, a deficit of OFSS of 5,356 acres and a surplus of OFMS of 9,069 acres.

The average post treatment basal area across the entire planning area for Alternative 3 is 88.3 ft2 per acre. The average post treatment basal area on the acres treated is 73 ft2 per acre. This represents a 22% reduction in standing biomass across the planning area with respect to basal area.

Alternative 3 has a canopy base height of 14 feet immediately post treatment and improves around 12,370 acres when compared to the No Action. At the end of the 2,069-modeling period the canopy base height is 18.2 feet. With regards to fire type Alternative 3 has 386 acres of active crown fire, 2,675 acres of conditional crown fire, 10,712 of passive crown fire and 18,644 acres of surface fire. Alternative 3 has a total modeled combined surface fire type acreage of 29,356 acres during severe fire weather conditions. Compared to no action at that time, Alternative 3 improves 150 more acres in the active crow fire category, 2,683 more acres of conditional crown fire, and improves 2,844 more total combined surface fire type. This alternative reduces the potential for active/conditional crown fire in the project area by 52% compared to no action in the year 2069.

Chapter 3 Page|3-13 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Figure 13. Deviation of structural stages from reference conditions in dry upland forest of the Crow Planning Area under Alternative 3 in year 2019 (historic conditions adapted from Countryman and Justice 2010).

Alt3 2019 HRV 25,000

20,000

15,000

Acres 10,000

5,000

0 Stand Stem Understory Old Forest Old Forest Initiation Exclusion Reinitiation Single-Story Multistory ALT3 2019 Acres 2,309 16,061 1,319 6,080 6,649 Historic Minimum 4411.29 3393.3 0 13912.53 339.33 Historic Maximum 9501.24 7465.26 2375.31 21377.79 5768.61

Figure 14. Deviation of structural stages from reference conditions in dry upland forest of the Crow Planning Area under Alternative 3 in year 2069 (historic conditions adapted from Countryman and Justice 2010).

Alt 3 2069 HRV 25,000

20,000

15,000

Acres 10,000

5,000

0 Stand Stem Understory Old Forest Old Forest Initiation Exclusion Reinitiation Single-Story Multistory ALT3 2069 Acres 536 5,946 1,647 8,556 14,838 Historic Minimum 4411.29 3393.3 0 13912.53 339.33 Historic Maximum 9501.24 7465.26 2375.31 21377.79 5768.61

Page | 3-14 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Cumulative Effects of the Action Alternatives Cumulative effects of action alternatives include moving acreage in the Crow to more closely resemble the HRV. Also, the reduction in small trees across the action alternatives to more sustainable stocking levels and the spatial distribution of the units across the planning area greatly reduce the amount of contiguous untreated acres available for stand replacing wildfire. As well as reducing the ladder fuel component, the crown canopy height is more than doubled in the first year of implementation per modeling. This from a fire risk standpoint as well reduces the risk of catastrophic wildfire by reducing the probability of crown fire across both alternatives.

Treatments in action alternatives would revisit approximately 15,365 acres of previously harvested ground. The combination of past removal of overstory trees and fire suppression throughout the 20th century has allowed small diameter trees to colonize into areas previously occupied by large, widely spaces trees with relatively open sub-canopies. Stand densities throughout the project area are currently well above the recommended stocking range for both dry and cold upland forest communities. Competition induced mortality due to moisture limitations is evident at numerous locations in the planning area, particularly among intermediate and suppressed trees. Consequently, trees experience competition induce moisture stress may have insufficient photosynthate to allocate to secondary growth as well as the production of secondary metabolites for defense against key pest such as defoliators, bark beetles and pathogenic fungi. Data from Aerial Detection Surveys (ADS) supplemented by ground reconnaissance shows evidence of expanding infestations of western pine and mountain pine beetles, along with growing pockets of root disease. By reducing the number of trees, stand vigor will increase creating stands that are more resilient to insect and disease infestations, as well as drought conditions. Additionally, removal of small diameter ladder fuels will create a much more fire resilient landscape. Fire, Fuels and Air Quality The following is a summary of the Fire, Fuels and Air Quality resource report. The entire report is incorporated by reference and can be found in the project file, located at the Emigrant Creek Ranger District, Malheur National Forest, Hines, Oregon. Fire behavior is a function of fuels, weather, and topography and only fuels can be manipulated. Canopy, ladder, and surface fuels can be manipulated in several ways to affect their size, arrangement, density, and loading to affect fire behavior.

Weather and Topography The project area lies in the southwest corner of the Emigrant Creek Ranger District. National Forest system lands within the project area boundary total approximately 33,876 acres of which 95% is forested and the remaining 5% is considered non-forest. Much of the project area is well represented by dry plant associations. Approximately 31,843 acres or 94% of the planning area is considered dry upland forest. These areas would have historically been dominated by ponderosa pine overstory and would have had a high frequency, low severity fire return interval of 12-20 years. The project area ranges in elevation from a high of about 7000 feet to a low of about 4600 feet in the draw bottoms that exit the project area to the east and south. All aspects are represented with an overall gradient flowing to the southeast. Slopes are flat to moderate over much of the project area with steeper slopes in the main drainages. These drainages are major features on the landscape and influence both vegetation types as well as fire behavior. During fire season, normally June to October. Temperatures can exceed 80 degrees and relative humidity can

Chapter 3 Page|3-15 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

fall below 15%. Winds are generally calm to 10 mph out of the west to southwest. Lightning is common in the summer months.

Fire Management and Disturbance Timber and fire management as well as grazing have replaced fire as the major disturbance in Crow. Past timber management activities as well as effective fire suppression have altered stand structure as well as species composition. This combination of management has altered forest structure through a combination of activities and has allowed vertical and horizontal fuel loading to reach hazardous levels. Approximately 12,630 acres have been previously harvested in Crow and of those acres approximately 8,980 acres used regeneration cutting prescriptions to remove large overstory trees. Much of the area was historically represented by single story stands of large ponderosa pine that have transitioned to multi layered canopy or mixed conifer forest. In the regeneration harvest units, young even aged plantations now occupy the sites. These plantations can create fire behavior like that of a brush fuel model. In those stands that were selectively harvested the remaining forest are now densely stocked with many small to midsized, less fire resilient species such as grand fir and Douglas-fir. These species exhibit dense crowns and grow in higher densities in the understory, making these stands more susceptible to stand replacing fires, rather than the low to mixed severity fire that was common before management. Much of the remnant large ponderosa pine are surrounded by these dense, tightly spaced understories, providing a ladder for fire to move from the ground into the over story.

Throughout the project area, livestock grazing continues to have an effect on the availability of fine fuels to influence fire spread. These grasses are the primary carrier that allows fire to spread, in turn maintaining the historic stand structure of large old fire resilient trees. While grazing has always occurred here by native ungulates, current grazing practices yield different results in terms of spatial composition.

Fire Risk Fire risk is defined as the potential and frequency for wildfire ignitions. Areas that have a fire start every 1-10 years are considered to have a high fire risk. Crow has a high fire risk based on past starts. The majority of fire starts for this area are from lightning. Since 1986, there have been 83 fire starts with most of them contained at less than 1 acre according to recorded data. The most recent large fire was Bear Canyon in 2007 totaling 52,891 acres and becoming part of the Egley Complex which burned over 100,000 acres in and around Crow. In 2019, the 100-acre Box Fire was managed using existing control features allowing fire managers to mimic low to moderate intensity prescribed fire using an unplanned ignition.

Fire Hazard Fire hazard refers to the difficulty of controlling a potential wildfire. Fire behavior characteristics are terms such as rate of spread, flame length, intensity, spotting potential, and resistance to control.

Fire hazard for any forest stand or landscape is the potential magnitude of fire behavior and effects as a function of fuel conditions (Peterson et al. 2005). Fire hazard needs to be reduced to protect life and property. Fire hazard reduction would also enhance stand resiliency to fire effects associated with wildland fire.

Page | 3-16 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Fire behavior and severity depend on the properties of the various fuel strata and the continuity of those fuel strata. The fire hazard can be characterized by the potential for fuels to cause specific types of behavior and effects. Fuel beds can be classified into 6 strata (Graham et al. 2004):

• tree canopy • shrubs/small trees • low vegetation, • woody fuels • moss, lichens, and litter • ground fuels (duff)

The influences of fine fuels such as litter, duff, grasses and small woody fuels (less than 3 inches diameter) have the most effect on spread rate and intensity of fires. These fuels are used in fire behavior models developed for predicting the fire behavior and rate of spread of the initiating fire (Rothermel 1983). Coarse woody debris (>3 inches) has little influence on spread of the initiating fire; however, they can contribute to development of large fires and high fire severity. Fire persistence, resistance-to-control, and burnout time (affects to fire fighter and public safety, soil heating and tree mortality) are significantly influenced by loading, size, and decay state of large woody fuel.

Torching, crowning, and spotting contribute to large fire growth and are greater where large woody fuels have accumulated under a forest canopy. Large woody fuel, especially containing large decayed pieces, are a suitable fuel bed for firebrands and can hold smoldering fire for extended periods of time (Brown et al. 2003). Spot fires can also be started in standing snags. The distance firebrands travel is dependent of size of the firebrand, wind speed, and height above ground at the source. Crown fires are generally considered the primary threat to life, property, ecological and human values. Crown fires occur when surface fires create enough energy to preheat and combust fuels well above the surface (Agee et al. 2002). Crown fires pose the greatest threat to fire fighter safety from increased fire line intensities and long-distance spotting. These risks increase the likelihood of an indirect fire management strategy, which increases acres burned and thus increases fire effects on the landscape.

Existing fuel conditions are a result of effective fire management for the past 75 to 100 years, timber harvest, and livestock grazing. There has been an increase in understory vegetation and an increase in surface fuels, a change in species composition, and an increase in the continuity of vertical and horizontal stand structure. As a result, the potential for crown fire has increased. Historic stand structure played an important role in maintaining fire dependent forest types, such as ponderosa pine (Graham, et al., 2004).

Fire Regimes A natural fire regime is a general classification of the role fire would play across a landscape in the absence of modern human intervention but includes the influence of pre-settlement burning (Agee 1993). Coarse-scale definitions for natural fire regimes have been developed and interpreted for fire and fuels management. The five natural fire regimes are classified based on average number of years between fires combined with the severity of the fire on the dominant overstory vegetation (Hann et al. 2003). The five regimes include:

Chapter 3 Page|3-17 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

I – 0 to 35-year frequency and low to mixed severity (less than 75 percent of the dominant overstory vegetation replaced) II – 0 to 35-year frequency and high severity (greater than 75 percent of the dominant overstory vegetation replaced) III – 35 to 100+ year frequency and mixed severity (less than 75 percent of the dominant overstory vegetation replaced) IV – 35 to 100+ year frequency and high severity (greater than 75 percent of the dominant overstory vegetation replaced) V – 200+ year frequency and high severity

The fire regimes for non-forested vegetation are dependent upon the moisture regime and whether it is upland or riparian. The fire regime for these areas can be I, II, III, or IV

A study completed by Emily Heyerdahl in the Blue Mountains of eastern Oregon found the historical fire-return interval to be approximately 12 years in similar dry forest types as the ones found in Crow. Frequent lightning and pre-settlement burning contributed to these frequent fires. The frequency of wildfires changed drastically in the late 1800s. The change to low frequency fire-return intervals may be due to a dramatic increase in sheep and cattle grazing during the 1870s and 1880s, which reduced the fine fuels (Heyerdahl and Agee 1996). Other factors that reduced the overall frequency of wildfire on the landscape are fire management improvements and increased access as more roads were constructed.

A separate study was completed by Diana Olson in 2000 to assess fire history and return intervals within riparian habitats. Using the same fire history data from Heyerdahl’s study, along with sample plots within riparian areas, Olson found similar fire-return intervals within the riparian areas as that found in the upland forested areas (Olson 2000). These frequent fires burned with low severity. Olson concluded that keeping fire out of the riparian ecosystem would continue to alter structure and vegetation composition.

The most recent study of fire history and fire return intervals was completed in 2016 by James D. Johnston et al. (2017). Johnston calculated fire return intervals on five grand fir sites that ranged from 12-19 years. All sites were located on the Malheur National Forest. See Historical Fire- Climate Relationships in Contrasting Interior Pacific Northwest Forest Types by Johnston et al for more detailed information.

Vegetation patterns in the Blue Mountains is described by using a concept called potential vegetation (PV) (Hall et al. 1995). Potential vegetation groups (PVGs) have been identified in Crow. (Refer to Forest Vegetation section for more information on potential vegetation groups within Crow) Within the project area, approximately 97 percent of the PVG’s are identified as Dry Upland Forest. The fire return interval for Dry Upland Forest is commonly accepted to be between 12 and 20 years. Forested stands in Crow have missed several fire cycles based on the known fire return intervals and many of these stands would not burn as a low severity surface fire. Fires would be mixed severity to stand replacing with detrimental effects to other resources that did not historically occur. Another ecological component that has changed and is contributing to the departure from the natural fire regime includes the vegetation condition. Tree densities are much higher and species composition has shifted to have a higher proportion of shade tolerant, fire susceptible fir. Insect and disease are contributing to tree mortality in the area which contributes to surface fuel loading as trees fall to the ground. Hazardous fuel loadings continue to increase as surface fuels accumulate and understory vegetation propagates in the absence of a historic fire return interval.

Page | 3-18 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Fuel Loadings Fuel models (FMs) are used to help describe and quantify surface fuel situations and estimate fire behavior. Criteria for choosing a fuel model involve assessing the fuel strata that will support the fire as it spreads and generates heat intensity. Where fuel beds are continuous with similar fuel characteristics, one model can provide a realistic representation of expected fire behavior. A brief description of the FM characteristics that exist in the project planning area and their representation follows:

FM 2 includes open shrub lands and ponderosa pine stands. Grasslands being encroached by conifers, as well as light understory development is typical. These stands may include clumps of fuels or small concentrations of dead down material that could generate higher intensity fire and may produce firebrands. Fire spread is primarily through the fine curing grass, dead herbaceous fuels, and litter. Grazing can reduce grasses, decreasing the potential fire spread where grass is the primary carrier. FM 5 is made up of young brush. Fire is generally carried in the surface fuels that are made up of litter cast by the shrubs and the grasses or forbs in the understory. The fires are generally not very intense because surface fuel loads are light, the shrubs are young with little dead material, and the foliage contains little volatile material. Usually shrubs are short and almost totally cover the area. FM 8 represents a closed canopy of short-needle conifers with a compact surface-fuel litter layer. Representative vegetation types are mixed conifers of lodgepole, Douglas-fir, subalpine fir, white fir, and larch. The surface-fuel layer is mainly needles and occasional twigs with very little undergrowth. Fires are typically slow burning with low flame lengths. An occasional heavy fuel concentration may cause a flare up, but the chance of any erratic fire behavior is small. Only under severe weather conditions with high temperatures, extremely low relative humidity, and high wind speeds does this fuel bed pose a high fire hazard. FM 9 areas have mature, closed canopy stands with small amounts of understory development. Fires spread through surface litter that has accumulated under more dense stands of ponderosa pine. Concentrations of dead-down woody material contribute to possible torching of overstory trees. FM 10 represents an area in which there is a moderate loading of larger size fuel at the surface layer. In this model, fires burn in the surface and ground fuels with greater fire intensity than the other fuel models. The fuel bed contains a moderate loading of large size fuels from insect/disease, wind damage, or natural mortality. High heat intensity, torching, spotting, and crowning may be expected during wildfire events; resistance to control is high. FM 12 is dominated by slash, much of it less than 3 inches in diameter. Rapidly spreading fires with high intensities capable of generating firebrands can occur. When fire starts it is generally sustained until a fuel break or change in fuels is encountered.

Much of the project planning area falls within a FM 2, 8, and 10. These fuel models burn with differing intensities and rates of spread.

Surface fuels vary widely across the project planning area. An inventory of surface fuels was completed with silvicultural stand exams (see Crow Silviculture Report).

Much of Crow has light fuel loads of less than 8 tons per acre (Table 3). However, there are forested stands identified as having moderate to heavy fuel loads located alongside many of the main travel routes that would be used for ingress, egress, and as anchor points should a wildfire

Chapter 3 Page|3-19 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

occur. Greater fireline intensities, increased mortality, and resistance to control efforts can all be expected in areas with higher fuel loads.

Table 8. Crow project planning area fuel load summary Total fuel loading Percentage of project planning area 0–8 tons/acre 65% 8–15 tons/acre 13% 15+ tons/acre 23%

Duff levels over much of the project planning area range from .25” to 5.0” in depth. The exception is directly under the larger ponderosa pine trees. Bark from ponderosa pine constantly flakes off and accumulates within the first few feet of the bole of the tree. With the exclusion of fire over the past century these bark flakes have reached depths of up to 12+” under much of the larger ponderosa pine. When these duff mounds burn completely, under low moisture conditions, high stress can be placed on the tree.

Crown Fire Potential Crown fires are generally considered the primary threat to life, property, ecological, and human values. Crown fire occurs when surface fire creates enough energy to preheat and combust fuels well above the surface (Agee and Skinner 2005). Crown fires are typically faster moving than surface fires, more difficult to suppress, and pose the greatest threat to firefighter safety from increased fireline intensities and long-distance spotting. During the hotter, drier, windier days of the summer these risks force an indirect fire management strategy, which increases acres burned and thus increases fire severity on the landscape resulting in more tree mortality and smoke production.

Crown fires are generally classified two ways:

• Passive crown fire occurs when single trees or small groups of trees torch. After the trees torch the fire returns to the surface. • Active crown fire occurs when the fire moves through the crowns of adjacent tightly spaced trees until it reaches a more open stand, there are changes in topography, or a change in wind speed and/or direction.

Both types of crown fire are dependent on the surface and ladder fuels for their initiation. The continuity and density of tree canopies in combination with wind and physical setting provide conditions required for rapidly moving crown fire. Canopy base height, canopy bulk density, and canopy continuity are key characteristics of forest structure that affect the initiation and propagation of crown fire. Reducing canopy bulk density by thinning is a means to minimize crown fire hazard. As surface fire intensity increases, or canopy base height decreases, it takes less wind to cause a surface fire to become a crown fire. As a stand becomes dense, active crowning occurs at lower wind speeds and the stand is more vulnerable to crown fire (Reinhardt et al. 2003). Through past harvest activities and the effects of fire exclusion, stand structure over much of the project planning area has shifted from primarily single storied stands with large trees to densely stocked stands with a multi layered canopy of mid-size and small trees. These multi layered canopies favor mixed severity and stand replacement fire effects. Higher proportions of less fire dependent tree species such as Grand Fir and Douglas-fir have been recruited into the

Page | 3-20 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

understory. These species exhibit very dense crowns and grow in tighter spacing than the more fire dependent ponderosa pine and western larch. Much of the stands in the project area have smaller Douglas-fir and Grand Fir growing as ladder fuels underneath the mature over story.

A fire start under current vegetation conditions in Crow would exhibit a variety of fire types. Fires escaping initial attack would burn at a low to mixed severity with some areas of high severity. As previously mentioned, higher tree densities as well as a species composition of less fire resilient species would contribute to the higher severity fire effects. These areas are primarily found at the higher elevations, north aspects, and drainage slopes in the planning area. These species with their lower canopy base heights and higher densities have the potential to move fire from the ground to the over story. Stand replacement in these stands removes the largest, most fire resilient ponderosa pine, Western larch and Douglas-fir. Additionally, insect and disease are contributing to tree mortality in the area. This mortality eventually falls to the ground where it contributes to an increase in ground fuels.

Table 9. Crow project planning area existing crown fire potential by fire type Fire type Percentage of project planning area Active crown fire 2% Crown conditional fire 16% Passive crown fire 32% Surface fire 50%

Air Quality Activities that would create smoke emissions must follow the Oregon Smoke Management Plan (OSMP). The Strawberry Mountain Wilderness is a Class 1 airshed located approximately 40 miles to the northeast of the project planning area. State of Oregon monitoring has not shown degraded visibility, therefore, protection periods from burning have not been set for Class 1 airsheds in eastern Oregon. The towns of John Day (45 miles northeast) and Burns (35 miles southeast) are listed in the OSMP as smoke sensitive receptor areas, and thus protected by the highest standard in the plan. Other small communities that could be affected by prescribed burning are Riley to the south, Seneca to the northeast, and Crane to the southeast to name a few. Prevailing winds during times of prescribed fire activity typically range from northwest to southwest. During the day diurnal heating forces air up-valley, up-slope, and out of the area. During the night, air tends to sink down drainages and could potentially direct smoke into valley bottoms and temporarily affect air quality. Inversions affecting air quality occur mostly during winter months but can develop other times of the year in the morning hours and dissipate by noon. Currently, air quality conditions in surrounding smoke sensitive areas are limited to short-term effects resulting from wood burning, prescribed burning, and field burning. The greatest affect to the wilderness area is from field burning in the Willamette Valley and Central Oregon, as well as summer wildfires that occur to the south and west. These sources contribute to haze and can last for several days in spring and summer.

Desired Condition The Ochoco National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (1989) provides guiding direction for fuels management in Crow. Overall, the desired condition is to have fire maintain a mosaic of diverse native plant communities; there would be a mosaic of stand structures reflective

Chapter 3 Page|3-21 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

of the vegetation structures and fuel loadings historically found when fires played a more frequent and natural role in the area. Available fuel is the only factor that can be changed through management actions. The desired fuel condition includes a mixture of stands with moderate densities of understory conifers and ladder fuels intermixed with other stands exhibiting low densities of small conifers and other ladder fuels, lower canopy densities (less dead standing trees and live individual tree crown overlap), and increased distances from surface fuels to tree crowns. Surface fuels (small trees, shrubs, and dead and down vegetation) and overall canopy density would be a mosaic of open and closed crowns. Reducing high load surface fuels is directly correlated to reducing fireline intensity.

The desire would be to manage fuels such that fire starts in the area would generally exhibit ground fire behavior with occasional torching leading to reduced potential for a surface fire to transition into active crown fire.

The desired condition is to have fire function as a natural disturbance within the ecosystem without causing loss to ecosystem function or to human safety, lives, and values. Over time, conditions would allow managers to use fire to maintain the area as a functioning ecosystem. Fire would continue to play an important role in shaping and maintaining the vegetative communities and wildlife habitat across the landscape. Maintaining these low- and mixed-severity fire regimes over time would minimize the loss of old growth forest and wildlife habitat for the clear majority of species that evolved within the historical fire regimes. Fuel loadings would provide for adequate duff and coarse woody debris to minimize soil exposure and maintenance of long-term site productivity.

Lastly, a desire to reduce hazardous fuels (including surface fuels, ladder fuels, and crown fuels) to alter fire behavior (intensity, duration, rate of spread, torching, and crowning) and move the area towards historical fire behavior (low intensity surface fires) and fire regime (frequency) with historical fire effects on vegetation (from high mortality to low mortality). This would allow for greater public and fire fighter safety should wildfires occur and protect private land and communities near the project area. Effects to Fire, Fuels, and Air Quality

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) This alternative would not reduce hazardous fuel loading by commercial harvest, non-commercial thinning, mechanical surface fuels treatment, or prescribed fire. Hazardous fuel loading would continue to increase leading to a situation where it wouldn’t be a matter of “if” a catastrophic fire would occur, but it would simply become a question of when. The effect of no action would be more difficult and less successful protection of life and property. Increased fuel loading would increase the potential for uncharacteristic crown fire behavior and fires would become more resistant to control efforts. High severity fire with detrimental effects to vegetation and soils could be expected at a larger scale than historically would have occurred.

Direct and Indirect Effects – Fire Hazard The effect of no action would be an increased potential for uncharacteristic crown fire behavior with greater resistance to control. The expected fire severity would increase for much of the project planning area because of increases in ladder fuels resulting from high stocking levels in the understory, low canopy-base height, and high canopy-bulk density. Surface fuel loading

Page | 3-22 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

would also increase particularly in areas of mortality caused by insects and disease. Dead and dying trees would continue to fall over time and increase surface fuel loads to hazardous levels.

Large ponderosa pine trees would continue to be vulnerable to mortality from wildfires due to deep accumulations of duff continuing to build around tree bases and an increase in ladder fuels. These trees are also threatened by overstocking, which would only increase under this alternative. Forested areas on Douglas-fir and grand fir sites that were historically dominated by ponderosa pine would continue toward their climax vegetation. Native shrubs and other native ground vegetation in the project planning area are adapted to low-severity fire. The absence of low- severity fire has had adverse effects on these plants, which have also been adversely affected by shading and competition from conifers. When wildfires occur, the severity would be greater with this alternative, possibly killing plants that would otherwise have the ability to sprout after a low- severity fire.

Direct and Indirect Effects – Fuel Loadings If no action were taken, the project planning area would see an increase in the potential for stand replacing fires rather than the low-intensity/low-severity fires that would have occurred historically. Surface fuels including downed-woody material, needle litter, and duff accumulation would increase from current levels, contributing to the potential for stand-replacing fire and increased mortality. In pockets of insect and disease mortality, surface fuel loads would continue to increase reaching hazardous levels.

Table 10. Fuel load in percentage of project planning area—existing condition compared to no action

Fuel load Existing condition No action – 2069 Percentage change 0-8 tons/acre 65% 25% -40% 8-15 tons/acre 13% 46% +33% 15+ tons/acre 22% 29% +7%

In year 2069 the total area having a moderate fuel load would increase by 33 percent, while areas with a heavy fuel load would increase by 7 percent. Areas with light fuel loads would decrease by 40 percent (Table 10). These departures from the existing condition and from the desired condition to models with heavier fuel loadings indicate fires would burn with high intensity and severity. High heat intensity, torching, spotting, and crowning may be expected during wildfire events and resistance to control would be high. This makes protection of life and property more difficult and decreases chances of successful fire management efforts.

Ladder and Crown Fuels The continuity and density of tree canopies would provide conditions that enable rapidly moving crown fire. Overstocked stands would continue to slow in growth. Stand density would increase and tree vigor would decrease. The overall resiliency to withstand natural disturbances would continue to decrease. Late seral species would continue to increase in mixed species stands. Additionally, crown base heights would decrease, and canopy bulk density would increase leading to greater potential for crown fire. Continuity of ladder fuels and tree crowns creates a very hazardous fuel loading where fires can become very difficult to control.

Chapter 3 Page|3-23 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Direct and Indirect Effects – Crown Fire Potential Historically, this area had rather short fire-free periods that prevented high fuel loads to accumulate and limited the fuel strata within the stand. In the absence of treatment, both mechanical and prescribed fire, surface fuels, ladder fuels, and crown fuels would continue to increase leading to an increased potential for crown fire. Models indicate a 3% increase in active crown fire across the project area under the no action alternative (Table 11). Active crown fire potential would likely increase more in reality as current models do not account for natural regeneration.

Table 11. Fire type in percentage of project planning area—existing condition compared to no action

Fire type Existing condition No action - 2069 Percentage change Active Crown 2% 5% +3% Conditional Crown 16% 15% -1% Passive Crown 32% 19% -13% Surface 50% 61% +11%

Direct and Indirect Effects – Fire Regime Fire regime 1 represents dry upland forest plant association groups (PAG) and comprises approximately 94 percent of the project planning area. A fire under current conditions would not burn as a low severity surface fire. Fires would be mixed severity to stand replacing with detrimental effects to other resources, which did not historically occur.

Vegetation condition is another ecological component that would contribute to the departure from the natural fire regime. Tree densities would continue to increase, and species would continue the shift to higher proportions of shade tolerant, fire susceptible fir. Stand conditions would increase susceptibility to insect and disease effects, reaching levels that are highly departed from the natural fire regime. Forested stands in the project planning area would continue to depart further from the natural fire regimes.

Direct and Indirect Effects – Air Quality The no action alternative would have the least immediate effect on air quality, as no prescribed fire or pile burning would occur. Biomass would continue to accumulate and remain available for consumption by wildfires, increasing the potential for large amounts of smoke during the summer months when diurnal inversions can concentrate smoke at low elevations. Wildfires tend to occur at the driest time of the year; therefore, fuels are more completely consumed and typically produce three to five times more emissions than early- or late-season prescribed fires. There is potential during a wildfire for approximately 440 pounds per acre of PM2.5 emissions. These smoke concentrations can have high particulate levels that may cause health problems or violate summertime Class I air quality visibility standards for wilderness areas. The communities of Burns, Hines, Seneca, Izee, Riley, Mt. Vernon, Dayville, Prairie City, John Day, Crane, and several other communities throughout Harney County could be affected by smoke from a wildfire in this area.

Cumulative Effects The following discussion focuses on those past, ongoing, and reasonably foreseeable activities that may contribute effects to fire or fuels.

Page | 3-24 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Past actions including fire management, timber harvest, and grazing have contributed to the current conditions of fuels and departure from the natural disturbance regime. These past actions have resulted in increases in understory vegetation and surface fuels and changes in species composition and vegetative continuity. Past road construction enabled fire management personnel to more easily access fire starts and contributed to successful fire management. Commercial harvest since the early 1900s, followed by dense planting, has converted stands to more fire- resistant tree species that are in the early seral stage, currently overstocked, and at risk to high mortality from fire. The lack of non-commercial thinning has increased canopy and ladder fuels and the stands have grown to the point that crowns are becoming denser and many acres are still overstocked needing additional fuel reduction treatments. Fire management would continue as an ongoing activity but would get increasingly more difficult as fuels increase.

Fuel treatments on other ownerships reduce the chance of a severe wildfire on those ownerships. Not treating this area does not contribute to landscape fuel reduction with those adjacent and nearby lands. No action in the project planning area affects other present and ongoing actions. If a wildfire were to burn at high intensity and severity all current and future actions would be affected.

Direct and Indirect Effects of the Action Alternatives Both action alternatives propose about 28,000 acres of mechanical treatment. Prescribed fire would be applied to about 31,000 acres and planned ignitions could occur any time weather and environmental conditions are within certain prescription parameters. Unplanned ignitions may be used like prescribed fire when fuel loading and weather conditions are appropriate. Prescribed fire is not allowed in old growth stands on the Ochoco National Forest. The change in effects is negligible between alternative 2 and alternative 3 relative to the scope and scale of the project planning area. One reason this occurs is both alternatives are still using prescribed fire across the landscape which reduces hazardous surface fuel loading, ladder fuels, and duff build up. Stands that are not treated would have effects similar to the effects discussed in the no action alternative. Untreated stands would have higher stress induced mortality rates and likely be more affected by wildfire should one occur.

Proposed treatments would help return the forest to a more resilient and sustainable condition. The overall effect would be a reduction of canopy, ladder, and surface fuels, which would contribute to the success of fire management and protection under most fire scenarios. Stands not receiving treatment would have effects similar to those discussed under the no action alternative. Crown or canopy fuels and ladder fuels would be treated by commercial harvest and non- commercial thinning. Surface fuels would be treated by hand or mechanical piling followed by burning of the piles, removal of slash for utilization (biomass), and/or underburning. Cram et al. (2006) observed that mechanical treatment followed by prescribed fire (including pile burning) had the greatest influence toward mitigating fire severity.

Prescribed fire burn blocks vary in size from 1,500 to 6,800 acres with many boundaries identified along natural fuel breaks, such as existing roads. The size, in acres, of a particular burn block does not represent how much of the landscape would be burned or blackened. Within each identified burn block there would be a number of unburned acres. Examples include open scabby areas, wet riparian areas, and north facing slopes in general. Additionally, much of the area where prescribed fire would carry is expected to burn in a mosaic pattern for a number of reasons. Fuel moisture, shading, grazing, and lack of continuous fuel beds can lead to the mosaic burn pattern often created during prescribed fire operations (Figure 16). Another factor limiting actual burned acres is design criteria limiting where active ignitions can occur within a particular burn block.

Chapter 3 Page|3-25 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Depending on weather conditions, fuel characteristics, and design criteria (Crow EA Appendix A) the number of acres burned could vary from 50 to 80 percent of the proposed burn block size.

Removal of small diameter trees would also reduce ladder fuels and the continuity of the tree crowns. This is proposed within areas treated commercially and in areas where there is little commercial material but there is a need to remove the smaller trees.

Of the 34,000-acre project planning area, over 80 percent of the area would be mechanically treated typically prior to prescribed burning. Much of the planning area could potentially be treated with prescribed fire, which would burn in a mosaic pattern as described above and displayed in Figure 16. These treatments would break up the continuity of hazardous fuel loadings across the project planning area.

Both action alternatives propose several treatments along main roads in the project planning area. Implementing treatments along main road corridors can be a great benefit because the hazardous fuel loading along these roads can be manipulated in a way that will moderate fire behavior. The treatments proposed would allow safe travel for the public and fire management forces should the need arise to escape from an emerging wildland fire. Treatments along these main travel corridors would also provide fire management forces with anchor points and better opportunities for impeding the spread of wildland fires.

Direct and Indirect Effects – Fire Hazard An overall effect of the action alternatives would be a reduction of canopy fuels, ladder fuels, and surface fuels, which would contribute to successful fire management and protection of life and property under most fire scenarios. Mechanical fuel treatments that reduce ladder and canopy fuels would have a direct effect on canopy base height and crown bulk density. The continuity of hazardous fuel loads within the project planning area would become disrupted resulting in a more historical range of fire effects should a wildfire occur.

Direct and Indirect Effects – Fire Regime Fire regime 1, a low severity, but high frequency regime, comprises approximately 94 percent of the project planning area. Treatments would change vegetation characteristics including stand density, species composition, and structural stage. Treatments would also change fuel composition and potential fire severity, components relating to change from reference conditions. After completion of all mechanical treatment (approximately 28,000 acres proposed) and prescribed burning (approximately 31,000 acres proposed) these stands would begin to resemble a more historical forest structure and pattern. A noticeable reduction in hazardous fuels would have occurred and conducting maintenance burning throughout the project area would be important to continue moving stands toward a more historical condition to maintain resiliency in those stands over time. As untreated stands continue to miss fire return intervals they would continue to depart from historical conditions. Hazardous fuels would continue accumulating and the effects of a wildfire have the potential to be moderate to severe during the summer months.

Page | 3-26 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Figure 15 – Pre and Post Prescribed Fire, Mosaic Pattern of Burn

Treatments would result in conditions that are more resilient to natural disturbance processes, including wildfire. The increased tree growth from thinning would cause the development of old forest structural stages to accelerate, allowing the thinned stands to grow into the large size classes sooner. As structure approaches the historical range of variability, and with continued maintenance burning to sustain low fuel levels, forest structure, composition, and density would move toward more resistant and resilient vegetative conditions given the historical fire regime.

Direct and Indirect Effects – Fuel Loading There would be a short-term increase in fire hazard following treatment and prior to slash disposal when hazardous fuel loading remains in the units and on the ground. Existing surface fuels and created slash would be treated by one or a combination of methods. Whole tree yarding or yarding with tops attached would remove the slash to a landing for utilization or to be piled and burned. Other slash treatments would include hand piling or machine piling followed by burning of the piles and/or implementing understory prescribed burning. Any combination of slash treatments would facilitate a reduction in hazardous surface fuel loading. All units include treatments to reduce hazardous loadings of surface fuels to a loading that mitigates the possible increase in surface winds and drier fuels that may occur following treatments. A prescribed fire program continuing into the future would be needed to maintain fuel beds below hazardous levels and limit regeneration from becoming a ladder fuel concern as well as a stand density concern. Van Wagtendonk (1996) found in fire simulations that a reduction in fuel loads decreased subsequent fire behavior, increased fireline control possibilities, and decreased fire management costs. Efficient fireline construction rates are also enhanced where fuel reduction has occurred, which decreases resistance to control (Agee et al. 2000). Increased fireline control leads to enhanced firefighter and public safety. The beneficial effects of prescribed fire on altering fuel structure and fire effects have long been observed and reported. Prescribed fire is a useful tool to alter potential fire behavior by influencing multiple fuel bed characteristics, including:

Chapter 3 Page|3-27 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

• Reducing loading of fine fuels, duff, large woody fuels, rotten material, shrubs, and other live surface fuels, which together with compactness and continuity change the fuel energy stored on the site along with the potential spread rate and intensity. • Reducing the horizontal fuel continuity (shrub, low vegetation, woody fuel strata), which disrupts growth of surface fires, limits the buildup of intensity, and reduces spot fire ignition probability. • Increasing compactness of surface fuel components, which reduces combustion rates (Graham et al. 2004).

Prescribed fire often consumes some of the lowest ladder fuels and scorches the lowest tree branches, killing them, which raises the live crown above the ground surface. Prescribed fire can reduce fire intensity and severity from wildfires (Omi and Martinson 2002, Pollet and Omi, 1999). The primary stand attributes that control fire behavior are surface fuel condition, crown bulk density, and crown base height (Graham et al. 1999). The objectives of utilizing prescribed fire are to reduce surface fuels, reduce litter and duff depth, and increase canopy base height by scorch of the lower limbs. Prescribed fire is not being utilized to change the structural stage of the stands. Some tree mortality is expected and acceptable in forested stands. In a study of the effects of low-intensity fires on ponderosa pine forests in Zion National Park, needle/litter fuel load layer was reduced by 54 percent, duff loading was reduced by 35 percent, and pole-sized trees were reduced by 18 percent (Bastian 2001). With the reduction in ladder fuels, there would be a reduced probability of a surface fire moving into the tree crowns.

There are approximately 31,000 acres proposed for prescribed fire. The stands being underburned outside of the mechanical treatment area are likely in a condition that prescribed fire is used to improve and maintain current fuel loading. The objective for the surface fuels is to reduce fuel loadings from hazardous conditions to more desirable levels. Mortality in the smaller diameter trees is acceptable while mortality in larger diameter trees would be minimized. Burning to reduce surface fuels within riparian habitat conservation areas (RHCAs) would be coordinated with a district biologist. When lighting near RHCAs, lighting patterns can be utilized that would best meet the surface fuel reduction with limited tree mortality and soil exposure.

In 50 years following the proposed treatments, approximately 52 percent more area would be classified as having a light fuel load compared to no action (Table 13). This decrease in surface fuel load after 50 years is the result of modeling the proposed mechanical treatments and two prescribed fire entries following those treatments, one in the year 2025 and one in 2039. Adding a regular maintenance schedule of prescribed fire would further increase the effectiveness of reducing and maintaining surface fuel loads. Surface fuels would become dominated with grasses (fuel model 2) in treated stands. The rate at which a fire moves through these stands would be higher than stands with a greater component of larger woody fuels and denser tree stocking. Wind would be less restricted and fine fuels, such as cured grasses, would burn more readily. While increased surface-fire intensity (flame length) under extreme fire-weather conditions is not desirable, the combination of modified surface, ladder, and canopy fuels still suggests improved firefighting capability even under difficult weather circumstances, and reduced fire severity (resource effects). These expected outcomes are the result of decreased crown-fire potential, lower overall fire intensity, and less damage to soils.

Grazing would continue to affect fine fuels. This can affect the implementation of prescribed fire and meeting objectives if grazing removes the fuel (grasses) needed to carry fire. Ongoing grazing in the project planning area can also affect fire intensity and rate of spread as flame lengths would be decreased in areas where grazing has reduced the grass loading. Grazing management and fuels management would be coordinated to best meet the objectives of both.

Page | 3-28 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Table 12. Fuel load in percentage of project planning area— action alternatives compared to no action

Fuel load Existing No action Alternative 2 Alternative 3 0-8 tons/acre 65% 25% 77% 77% 8-15 tons/acre 13% 46% 21% 20% 15+ tons/acre 22% 29% 2% 3%

Ladder and Crown Fuels Mechanical thinning can be effective in reducing vertical fuel continuity that contributes to the initiation of crown fires, especially when thinning reduces the number of smaller trees. The net effect of removing ladder fuels is that surface fires burning through treated stands are less likely to ignite the overstory canopy fuels (Graham et al. 2004). Thinning is potentially effective at reducing the probability of crown-fire spread and is precise in that specific trees are targeted and removed from the fuel bed. There is a concern that removal of canopy level trees can increase fire risk. As Peterson (2004) points out, in some cases, removal of trees from the canopy and understory could increase surface wind movement and facilitate the drying of live and dead fuel, although effective removal should mitigate these factors by reducing the fuel load and potential for fire spread. Agee and Skinner (2005) also state that sufficient surface fuel treatments after thinning provides an overall reduction in expected fire behavior and fire severity that usually outweighs the changes in wind speed and fuel moisture. The overall reduction in surface, ladder, and crown fuels, in addition to reducing fuel continuity, reduces crown fire potential and improves firefighter ability to control a wildfire. Commercial and non-commercial treatments in overstocked stands reduces the ladder fuels, increases the average distance between the ground and the crown of the trees, increases the distance between the crowns of the trees, and decreases the continuity of the overstory.

Other benefits of these treatments include increased growth and improved vigor on residual trees, decreased stand density, and increased proportion of fire tolerant species—restoring conditions more resilient to wildfire. Cram et al. (2006) observed that mechanical treatment followed by prescribed fire (including pile burning) had the greatest influence toward mitigating fire severity. Specifically, as density and basal area decreased, and mean tree diameter increased, fire severity decreased. See the Silviculture Report for additional effects on composition and density and structural stages.

Canopy base height, canopy bulk density, and canopy continuity are key characteristics of forest structure that affect the initiation and propagation of crown fire. Models indicate the average crown-base height across the project planning area in 2069 with the no action alternative is similar to the canopy base height in 2069 with the treatments proposed in action alternatives. The average canopy-bulk density of the project planning area following treatments in the proposed action would be 0.046 kilograms per cubic meter (kg/m3), a 0.016 kg/m3 decrease from the no action alternative. Stands with this canopy-bulk density would be less likely to burn with an active crown fire than previously denser stands. The change in effects is negligible between alternative 2 and alternative 3 relative to the scope and scale of the project planning area.

Reducing the fuel loadings, fuel continuity, and the availability of ladder fuels keeps fire confined as a surface fire and reduces the occurrence of firebrands, which increases the ability to control fires. In the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI), reducing the threat of ignition from firebrands requires reducing fuels both near and at some distance from the structures. Proposed treatments

Chapter 3 Page|3-29 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

reduce the likelihood of firebrands being lofted onto private land and structures. This improves our ability to protect life and property.

Direct and Indirect Effects – Crown Fire Potential Following proposed treatments, the potential for active/conditional crown fire in the project planning area changes from 2% to 0.8% compared to the no action alternative, a decrease of 1%. (Table 14). The potential for passive crown fire (single to group torching) shows a decrease of 8% based on model outputs. Essentially, after the proposed treatments, models indicate a 9% chance of active/conditional crown fire being initiated, from 18% with no action. These outputs are based on two prescribed fire entries following mechanical treatments, one in 2025 and one in 2039. The intent would be to continue maintenance burning to keep surface fuels at a desirable tonnage/acre. The reduction in potential for passive, conditional, and active crown fire would contribute to successful fire management, protection of life, and protection of property under most fire scenarios.

Maintenance burning, whether prescribed or natural ignition, is needed in the future to limit regeneration and maintain light surface fuel loads. Without maintenance burning, future conditions would begin moving back toward the existing condition. By implementing a maintenance burning program, the active/conditional crown fire potential would remain similar to that of alternative 2. Surface fuels would not accumulate, and natural regeneration would be controlled to some degree.

Table 13. Fire type in percentage of project planning area—action alternatives compared to no action

Fire type No action Alternative 2 Percentage Alternative 3 Percentage 2069 2069 change 2069 change Active Crown 2% 0.8% -1% 1% -1% Conditional Crown 16% 8% -8% 8% -8% Passive Crown 34% 32% -2% 33% -1% Surface 68% 59% 21% 58% -10%

The stands proposed for treatment, the stands currently with a low crown fire potential, and the stands that are non-forested and non-vegetated all contribute to breaking up fuel continuity on the landscape. When all these stands are considered, the pattern on the landscape would modify fire behavior and reduce fire growth, allowing for protection of life and property.

Direct and Indirect Effects – Air Quality Burning would follow the guidance provided by the Oregon Smoke Management Plan. Emissions from a wildfire are generally 3 to 5 times more than from prescribed fire. Emissions from pile burning would occur at a different time of year than the underburning. There would be short-term effects to communities and residences downwind and in drainages adjacent to prescribed fire. There would also be short-term effects along highway 395 south, highway 20, highway 26, county roads in or adjacent to the project planning area, and local forest roads in or adjacent to the project planning area. All prescribed fire should comply with applicable federal, state, and local air quality regulations.

Page | 3-30 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Communities located in Harney and Grant counties could be affected by smoke from prescribed fire. Communities in the surrounding areas located in valleys or high elevation basins could be temporarily affected by smoke emissions related to prescribed fire activities.

Experience of prescribed fire in this area has shown that diurnal winds, down slope and down valley during the night, settle smoke in low areas and valley bottoms. With daytime heating, air is forced back up slope and up valley allowing smoke to lift out of an area.

Prescribed fire would likely affect highway visibility and potentially affect driver safety. Signing could occur on highways, county roads, and forest roads as needed to mitigate the hazards associated with operating a motor vehicle during times of poor visibility. If driving conditions warrant, Oregon Department of Transportation and/or Harney County Road Department would be contacted to coordinate traffic control when needed.

Smoke sensitive areas, including John Day and Burns, may be affected by prescribed burning because of transport winds. However, affects are expected to be minimal because of smoke dilution over time and space. Weather forecasts would be obtained prior to burning to help minimize the effects of smoke in these smoke sensitive areas. Additionally, the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness should not be directly affected with prescribed fire smoke during the visibility protection periods of July 1 to September 1.

Direct and Indirect Effects – Other Project Activities

Road Activities Planned road activities would have little effect on fire management efforts or fuel loading. Closed roads can limit access to some degree, but often times other options for access are available.

Cumulative Effects Past actions including fire management, timber harvest, and grazing have contributed to the current conditions of fuels and the departure from the natural disturbance regime. These actions have resulted in increases in understory vegetation and surface fuels and changes in species composition and vegetative continuity. Past grazing reduced fine fuels at varying levels depending on the intensity of grazing which reduced potential fire spread. Past road construction enabled fire management personnel to more easily access fire starts and contributed to successful fire management.

Approximately 38,401 acres of mechanical treatment has occurred since 1978. These activities helped maintain historical vegetation densities, but with no record of underburning surface fuels, duff, litter, and ladder fuels have continued to accumulate. Litter and duff have accumulated at the base of large ponderosa pine to the level that would likely cause mortality should a fire occur, even a surface fire. The proposed action would build upon these treatments of the past and combined with additional treatments would reduce hazardous fuels in the project planning area.

Cumulatively, this project would have a positive effect on protection of life and property and reduce the potential for severe wildfire across the landscape by reducing hazardous fuels. Fire management would continue as an ongoing activity and the probability of successful fire management would improve with the above-mentioned projects. Treatments adjacent to road corridors would establish known anchor points and control lines allowing fire management forces to get ahead of advancing wildfires and complete indirect attack.

Chapter 3 Page|3-31 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Future grazing would continue to affect fine fuels. This can affect the implementation of prescribed fire and meeting objectives if the fuels (grasses) needed to carry fire are removed. Grazing management and fuels management need to coordinate to best meet their objectives. Some people have suggested that continued grazing would also shift the plant communities toward shrubs and trees. Local experience shows increases in tree stocking are not due to grazing but can be attributed to the past combination of timber harvest and fire management.

Future prescribed burning and management of natural ignition fires would be necessary to maintain fuels at desirable levels and limit ingrowth. The modeling for this project applied prescribed burning after mechanical treatments, once in 2025 and again in 2039. By implementing a maintenance burning program (applying prescribed fire at regular intervals either planned or unplanned), crown fire potential would likely decrease even further than described in this alternative. Regeneration would remain at sustainable levels, preventing increases in ladder and surface fuels.

Emissions produced from prescribed burning under both action alternatives should not exceed air quality standards. There is potential for prescribed burning to occur at the same time in nearby project areas. Total emissions produced from concurrent projects from National Forest System lands are expected to meet air quality standards. It is likely that only a few projects, in isolated areas, would undergo burning at the same time. The dilution of smoke over time and space from concurrent burning would limit the cumulative effects. All burning would be coordinated to reduce cumulative effects and meet all applicable laws and regulations. Therefore, the cumulative effects of multiple prescribed burning projects should not cause air quality to exceed standards.

Future activities authorized under the Malheur National Forest Aquatics Restoration Decision (2014) include several riparian enhancement projects. The main emphasis on these riparian enhancement projects would be placing large and coarse woody debris in streams. There would be a short-term, 5 to 10 years, adverse effect on fuel loading in the riparian areas where woody debris is placed in the stream. However, over time the riparian area would begin to function more effectively. A healthy riparian area acts as a natural fuel break to slow and help stop a wildfire. Underburning in the riparian areas would reduce conifer encroachment and stimulate growth of hardwoods. Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Plant Species The following is a summary of the Biological Evaluation for threatened, endangered and sensitive plant species found within Crow. The entire report is incorporated by reference and can be found in the project file, located at the Emigrant Creek Ranger District, Malheur National Forest, Hines, Oregon. There are no known populations or potential habitat for any federally listed, or proposed, plant species in the project planning area. Therefore, this project would have No Impact (NI) to any federally listed, proposed, or candidate plant species. Consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is therefore not required for this project for rare plants.

Sensitive plants suspected to occur within the project area are derived from the 2018 Region 6 Regional Forester's Special Status Species List (USDA Forest Service, 2018). 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 section. There are currently 90 species of Forest Service designated sensitive plants documented, or suspected, to occur, on the Malheur National Forest (USDA Forest Service, 2015), which includes the portion of the Ochoco National Forest administered by the Malheur National Forest. Refer to the

Page | 3-32 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Biological Evaluation, Appendix 1: Malheur Plant Habitat Groups and Associated Sensitive Plant Species for a complete list of sensitive plant species for the Malheur National Forest.

Documented Sensitive Plants Sites in the Project Area Three Region 6 sensitive plant species are documented in Crow. Refer to Table 15 for more information on these species.

Table 14. Documented Region 6 Sensitive Plants in the Crow Project Area

# Sites on # Sites in Common name Scientific name Malheur NF project area Crenulate moonwort (sensitive) Botrychium crenulatum 46 4 Common moonwort (notable) Botrychium lunaria 2 1 Peck’s mariposa lily (sensitive) Calochortus longebarbatus var. peckii 33 20

Sensitive Plant Habitat Groups in the Project Area Sensitive plants tend to grow in specialized habitat types within broader plant communities. 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. Only those habitats present in the project area will be discussed and analyzed. Habitat groups in Crow include four forested plant communities, three non-forested upland communities, and five aquatic and riparian dependent communities. For a complete description of plant communities refer to the Sensitive Plant Biological Evaluation in the project file. Effects to Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Plant Species Effects are analyzed for known populations and to the integrity of sensitive species habitat types, treating habitat integrity as a proxy for the potential sensitive plants within. Direct effects to the botany resource would be in the form of acute, or isolated, short-term disturbance to individual plants or parts of a population resulting from the physical actions during project implementation (i.e. a few individuals in an unknown sensitive plant population are uprooted during tipping of trees). Short term effects for this analysis are one to two years after project implementation. Indirect or long-term effects (greater than 2 years) would denote the effect to the viability or trend of the populations and species as a result of the new ecological characteristics that the project creates after implementation is completed. These effects would generally be from changes in shade levels and hydrologic regimes. Best management practices and design criteria described in appendix A would be implemented to avoid, minimize, reduce or eliminate impacts caused by implementation of the action alternatives. These design criteria are designed to protect documented sensitive plant sites as well as sensitive plant habitat groups. Refer to appendix A for more information about best management practices and design criteria.

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

Chapter 3 Page|3-33 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

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

o 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.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) Under the no action alternative, current landscape scale trends would continue that may have long term impacts on sensitive species. In the absence of vegetation treatments and prescribed burning treatments, forested communities would continue to see increased fuel loading and potential effects from wildfire, potentially resulting in a forest less resilient to disturbance and therefore potentially able to provide less habitat for sensitive plant species. Continued conifer encroachment and subsequent shade and litter into Peck’s mariposa lily sites and habitat would continue, potentially reducing habitat suitability for this and other sensitive species that inhabit moist meadow systems.

Page | 3-34 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Direct and Indirect Effects of Action Alternatives

Impacts to Known Populations

Moonworts Design criteria described in appendix A would protect known sensitive plant sites as ATPS (areas to protect) as well as spring and RHCA habitat from ground disturbing activities. Additionally, it is unlikely that prescribed fire would carry through these moist habitats. Therefore, for common moonwort and crenulate moonwort, the proposed action should have No Impact (NI) to known moonwort populations.

Peck’s Mariposa Lily About 158 acres of known Pecks’s mariposa lily sites overlap with proposed vegetation treatments, mainly within the conifer encroachment prescription areas. Short-term impacts (3-5 years) to Peck’s mariposa lily include soil disturbance (compaction and displacement) from heavy machinery and crushing of plants by machinery or tree felling. Soil compaction and erosion can render habitat unsuitable or change hydrologic patterns in riparian habitat thus resulting in occupied microsites becoming too wet or too dry or burying plants in soil or sediment deposits. Heavy slash cover can also bury plants. Areas of exposed soil also increases invasive plant risk in riparian plant communities and can render habitat unsuitable for sensitive plants.

These short-term negative impacts would be counterbalanced by long term (5-20 years) beneficial effects. Commercial and noncommercial thinning would reduce conifer density and canopy shading in riparian sensitive plant habitat and would more closely correspond to historic stand conditions that sensitive plant species evolved with. Large populations of Peck’s mariposa lily have been observed under previously harvested, partially opened canopies on the Ochoco National Forest. While complete opening of the canopy through clearcut or shelterwood harvests appears to have detrimental effects to this species, a partially open canopy appears to be beneficial (Dewey 2011).

Fuels and slash generated from vegetation management activities would be treated within occupied Peck’s mariposa lily populations. This includes hand piling, lop and scatter, grapple piling, and pile burning. The overlap between occupied Peck’s mariposa lily and these fuels treatments is relatively small for both action alternatives and would only occur in areas treated with commercial or precommercial thinning and thus already disturbed. Design criteria measures include avoidance of grapple piling and coordination of hand piling and lop and scatter treatments with the district botanist. The measures would minimize disturbance and soil impacts in Peck’s mariposa lily habitat.

There would be no temporary road construction within occupied Peck’s mariposa lily sites, however there is the potential for temporary roads to be constructed adjacent to occupied sites or in marginal or potential Peck’s mariposa lily habitat. The impact area of temporary roads is about 12 feet in width. In the short-term (3-5 years) temporary roads would remove native vegetation and compact soils directly under the tracks, rendering this habitat unsuitable for sensitive plant species. While the intent is to restore temporary roads to a productive condition, long-term impacts (5-20 years) can persist in less resilient areas. Restoration methods can bury nutrient rich topsoil and expose mineral soil. In these areas, the plant community that returns to the temporary road may not match the cover and native species diversity of the surrounding undisturbed vegetation, making the area less suitable for sensitive plants. These areas are also at greater risk

Chapter 3 Page|3-35 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

of invasive plant introduction and spread. Temporary roads are revegetated, and further access prevented, thus limiting some of these negative impacts after successful revegetation.

In the short-term, burning slash piles can scorch soils, damaging plants, mycorrhizal fungi, and their habitat where the piles contact the ground. The larger the pile, the greater the impact to soils and sensitive plant habitat. While these effects are highly localized, they can persist into the long term (5-10 years) if soils are severely impacted. Long term (5-20 years) beneficial effects to sensitive plant habitat include a reduction in fuels and high severity wildfire risk (Arkle and Pilliod 2010).

Burn blocks for prescribed fire cover all Peck’s mariposa lily occupied sites and potential habitat within Crow. The district botanist would review burn plans prior to implementation and would work proactively with Fuels Specialists to ensure sensitive plant populations and habitat are considered in fuels treatments and prescribed fire implementation. Prescribed fire would take place in either the fall after the plants are dormant, which would avoid leaf damage, or in the spring, when moisture levels are likely to preclude fire from carrying through the habitat. Although studies are few, study results and field observations support the supposition that Peck’s mariposa lily is well-adapted to the natural fire regime, particularly since the forest stringer habitat it relies on was historically subject to natural wildfires. In a study of the effects of fire and grazing on Peck’s mariposa lily on the Ochoco National Forest, Kagan (1996) observed that cool burns appeared to reduce competition to the lily and did not affect the moisture gradient in the meadows. This burn was conducted in a high moisture year and the burn did not carry well through the majority of the study plots. Thus, there were no data on the effects of hot burns on the population. On the Winema National Forest, a wildfire burned a population of Calochortus longebarbatus var. longebarbatus, a close relative of Peck’s mariposa lily. Flowering individuals greatly increased in the year following the fire (Dewey 2011).

Short term effects of prescribed fire on Peck’s mariposa lily sites would include a decrease in litter, an increase in bare ground, and an increase in soil nutrient availability to the herbaceous layer. Long-term effects would be a decrease in overall fuel levels within Peck’s mariposa lily habitat which would likely prevent intense, hotter, more damaging fires from occurring within the meadows and meadow edges. Both short-term and long-term effects would likely be beneficial to the germination and persistence of Peck’s mariposa lily populations based on observational information and the fact that moist meadow species evolved with fire as a natural disturbance regime.

Considering the balance of short term and long-term effects from the proposed actions, overall the proposed action May Impact Individuals and Habitat but not cause a trend toward listing (MIIH). Although the treatments would generally return the vegetation characteristics of Peck’s mariposa lily habitat closer to the historic range of variability, likely increasing quality and quantity of habitat for this species in the long term, the extent of this habitat improvement is hard to quantify, and the direct ground disturbance and invasive species risks involved in treatments would likely have some negative effects.

Impacts to Sensitive Plant Habitats

Upland Coniferous Forest and Upland Woodlands Vegetation actions and temporary roads planned for these sensitive plant habitats may have limited negative direct effects on sensitive plant habitat due to acute disturbance from machinery, felling of trees, etc. during implementation. However, indirect effects will likely be beneficial, as

Page | 3-36 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

the treatments would reduce fuel loading and potentially prevent catastrophic fires that would destroy sensitive plant habitat Many of the areas proposed for vegetation treatment activities were not specifically surveyed for this project. Therefore, it must be assumed that undiscovered populations of sensitive plant species may be impacted. Since most sensitive plant species occur in specific microhabitats, the probability that sensitive plant species may occur in the project planning area in these upland general forested habitats is relatively low. None of the sensitive plant species that may occur in coniferous forest habitats on the Malheur National Forest are extremely rare on a global scale. In the short term, these actions may impact individuals or habitat, but will not likely contribute to a trend toward federal listing or cause a loss of viability to populations of sensitive plant species (MIIH). In the long term, the Proposed Action alternative including any road actions that would repair hydrological processes would have Beneficial Impact (BI) to sensitive plant species that occur within upland coniferous forest.

Warm Riparian Forest and Shrublands Prescribed fire, slash pile burning, and temporary roads in aspen habitats may damage individuals of sensitive species but burning will also have positive effects for aspen habitat. Fire will stimulate suckering of aspen and reduce young conifer cover within the stand. These indirect effects would improve sensitive plant habitat. Therefore, in the short term these actions may impact individuals or habitat, but will not likely contribute to a trend toward federal listing or cause a loss of viability to populations of sensitive plant species (MIIH). Indirectly, prescribed burning and any road actions that repair hydrological processes, should have Beneficial Impact (BI) to sensitive plant species that occur within aspen habitats. Prescribed fire would likely have No Impact (NI) on riparian shrublands because of the water requirements of riparian shrub species, it is unlikely that fire would carry through this habitat.

Sagebrush Shrubland and Lithosol Project design criteria would protect specialized habitats within sagebrush shrublands, including all lithosols. These design criteria would prevent heavy equipment use in these areas or allow it to be permitted only over frozen ground. If machinery or temporary roads are used or built in sagebrush shrubland, the potential for exotic annual grass invasion would increase, even with all off-road machinery protocols like cleaning of equipment. Exotic annual grasses easily invade bare disturbed soil in this habitat type. In the short term, these actions may impact individuals or habitat, but will not likely contribute to a trend toward federal listing or cause a loss of viability to populations of sensitive plant species (MIIH). In the long-term, the indirect effects of removing encroaching conifer should be beneficial on the shrub and herbaceous components of the habitat. This would result in improved hydrological processes and reduced runoff. Additionally, removing young, encroaching conifer will lower fuel loads, potentially preventing catastrophic fire events. If care is taken to reduce disturbance from off-road machinery during implementation, the long-term, juniper treatments would have Beneficial Impact (BI) on sagebrush shrublands and lithosol habitats.

Prescribed fire activities have the potential to harm individual sensitive species. However, because of project design criteria that would prevent direct ignition near sagebrush shrublands, fire should remain low intensity. This habitat type is adapted for low intensity fires, and lithosols would not carry fire due to extremely low fuels. None of the sensitive plant species that may occur in these habitats are considered extremely rare on a global scale. Therefore, even if project activities may impact individual plants or habitat, implementation of this alternative should not increase the need for Federal listing of any sensitive species. Therefore, prescribed fire actions may impact individuals or habitat, but will not likely contribute to a trend toward federal listing or cause a loss of viability to populations of sensitive plant species (MIIH). In the long

Chapter 3 Page|3-37 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

term, prescribed fire activities and any road actions that repair hydrological processes would have a Beneficial Impact (BI) on sagebrush shrublands and lithosol habitats.

Cliffs, Rock Outcrops, and Talus Because the project design criteria would protect cliffs, rock outcrops, and talus in the project planning area, and prescribed fire generally does not burn in this habitat type due to the low fuel levels, the implementation of the action alternatives would have No Impact (NI) to cliffs, rock outcrops, and talus habitats, or to any sensitive species that may occur there.

Springs and Seeps Proposed actions would have No Impact (NI) on seeps and springs since they would be protected through project design criteria from any ground disturbing activities.

Moist and Wet Meadows Short-term impacts (3-5 years) to moist and wet meadows include soil disturbance from heavy machinery and crushing of plants by machinery or tree felling. Soil compaction and erosion caused by logging activities and temporary roads can render habitat unsuitable or change hydrologic patterns thus resulting in occupied microsites becoming too wet or too dry or burying plants in soil or sediment deposits. Heavy slash resulting from both commercial and noncommercial thinning activities can also bury plants. Areas of exposed soil resulting from commercial thinning operations also increases invasive plant risk in meadow communities and can render habitat unsuitable for sensitive plants.

Long term (5-20 years) beneficial effects would occur from a reduction in conifer density and canopy shading and would more closely correspond to historic stand conditions. Large populations of Peck’s mariposa lily, which inhabit moist meadow complexes, have been observed under previously harvested, partially opened canopies on the Ochoco National Forest. While complete opening of the canopy through clearcut or shelterwood harvests appears to have detrimental effects to this species, a partially open canopy appears to be beneficial (Dewey 2011).

Road actions that repair hydrological processes adjacent to the road area, would potentially increase sensitive plant habitat in the dry coniferous forest nearby. However, temporary roads constructed adjacent to or on the edges of meadow habitats would remove native vegetation and compact soils directly under the tracks, rendering this habitat unsuitable for sensitive plant species. While the intent is to restore temporary roads to a productive condition, long-term impacts (5-20 years) can persist in less resilient areas. Restoration methods can bury nutrient rich topsoil and expose mineral soil. In these areas, the plant community that returns to the temporary road may not match the cover and native species diversity of the surrounding undisturbed vegetation, making the area less suitable for sensitive plants. These areas are also at greater risk of invasive plant introduction and spread. Temporary roads are revegetated and further access prevented, thus limiting some of these negative impacts after successful revegetation.

Resource protection measures would apply in some areas along the edges of meadows where there are Peck’s mariposa lily populations, including avoidance of grapple piling and coordination of hand piling and lop and scatter treatments in coordination with the district botanist. The measures would minimize disturbance and soil impacts to the edges of the habitat.

Prescribed fire would take place in either the fall when most plants inhabiting meadows are dormant, which would avoid leaf damage, or in the spring, when moisture levels are likely to preclude fire from carrying through the habitat. In the short-term, while individual plants or

Page | 3-38 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

portions of meadows could be negatively impacted by direct burning or more severe hot spots, the chances of this impact are lowered by the factors and conditions as discussed above. Over the long-term, prescribed fire and underburning would benefit the moist meadow habitat that supports Peck’s mariposa lily and potentially other sensitive species due to reduction of hazardous fuels, reduction of competing vegetation, stimulation of natural growth response, and simulation of the natural fire regime.

Therefore, activities may impact individuals or habitat, but will not likely contribute to a trend toward federal listing or cause a loss of viability to populations of sensitive plant species (MIIH). In the long term, prescribed fire activities and any road actions that repair hydrological processes would have a Beneficial Impact (BI) on moist and wet meadows habitats.

Aquatic Habitats, Intermittent and Perennial Streams No vegetation treatment actions would occur in aquatic habitats and intermittent and perennial streams in the project area. Temporary roads could have some indirect negative effects however design criteria would reduce impacts. Prescribed fire would likely have No Impact (NI) on aquatic habitats and intermittent and perennial streams because it is unlikely that fire would carry through this habitat. Any road activities that repair hydrological processes would have a Beneficial Impact (BI) on sensitive plant habitat in aquatic habitats.

Cumulative Effects of Action Alternatives The geographic scale considered for cumulative effects is the project area because plant populations generally do not move substantially over time. The temporal scale is from 150 years ago (when Euro Americans arrived in the area) to 10 years into the future.

It is highly likely that historical activities, such as grazing, timber harvest, mining, road construction and fire suppression have negatively affected populations, and altered habitats for sensitive plants. However, these effects are not quantifiable.

Species most at risk of climate change are those with small geographic ranges (e.g., local endemics, locally rare species), narrow physiological tolerances, limited dispersal abilities, strong interspecific dependencies, low genetic diversity, and those that have recently experienced population declines. Attempts to quantify the degree of change would be speculative at this point.

The combination of livestock impacts, which include trampling and direct grazing of sensitive plants, utilization of associated native plants, and habitat degradation due to hoof impacts in moist stringers and meadows, would overlap with the disturbances and impacts described above. In areas disturbed by machinery, vegetative recovery could be delayed. This could extend the time sites are vulnerable to invasive plants and the added disturbance could result in higher sensitive plant mortality. Past vegetation treatment projects may have also created ground disturbance that allowed invasive plant sites to establish. However, since the Malheur NF Invasives ROD in 2015, many sites have been treated and would continue to be treated independently of this project. Additionally, for some time protection and management of sensitive species and their habitats (in the form of project design criteria, avoidance, or other mitigation) have been included in all projects. This has, and will continue to, reduce the potential of cumulative effects to sensitive habitats. Therefore, any cumulative negative effects to sensitive and unique habitats would be minor.

Chapter 3 Page|3-39 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Invasive Plants The following is a summary of the Invasive Plant Specialist report for Crow. The entire report is incorporated by reference and can be found in the project file, located at the Emigrant Creek Ranger District, Malheur National Forest, Hines, Oregon. Invasive plants are 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 project area has been surveyed, but not exhaustively, for invasive plants. Invasive plant sites recorded in the past may have increased in size or spread to different locations. Therefore, it is likely that the extent of invasive plant infestation in the project area is larger than our current records indicate.

To date, there are 119 documented occurrences of non-native plants covering about 1,500 acres. Of those, 99 sites comprising 1,400 acres are identified as target invasive species for treatment under the 2015 Invasive ROD. These include the following species: spotted knapweed (Centaurea stoebe L. ssp. micranthos), Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare), common St. Johnswort (Hypericum perforatum), Dalmatian toadflax (Linaria dalmatica), yellow toadflax (Linaria vulgaris), and Scotch thistle (Onopordum acanthium). There are approximately 13 acres of annual invasive grasses such as cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) and North Africa grass (Ventenata dubia). All of the other occurrences are non-native plants that do not clearly meet the federal definition of “invasive” (as defined in EO 13112) in the local ecosystems and include species such as mullein (Verbascum thapsus). The vast majority of non- native and invasive plants occur along roads, in rock pits, and at dispersed campsites. Some sites in this area are patchy along road systems, but are ecologically and for management purposes considered a continuous infestation. A number of these types of sites in Crow cross the project area boundary, and in these instances the entire site will be included in the analyses because roads are a major vector for the spread invasive species infestations. Effects to Invasive Plants The spatial context for effects analysis includes all of the proposed units and haul routes of the action alternatives. The temporal context includes the timeframe when the proposed actions would occur, the past few decades as related to invasive plant management, and the foreseeable future after the operations cease.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) While some existing infestations would naturally increase in size and new infestations would arise from ongoing vectors and actions, there would be a net decrease in invasive plants due to ongoing treatment.

Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects the Action Alternatives Forest-wide invasive plant prevention standards, best management practices, and project design criteria would prevent any direct introduction of invasive plant materials or seeds as a result of the proposed actions. Therefore, there will be no direct impact to invasive plant populations – invasive plants will not be introduced or spread as a direct result of the project.

The action alternatives would have the potential to create ground disturbance and subsequent bare ground areas that would be susceptible to invasive plant establishment. There would also be an increase in vector presence. This includes temporary road construction, heavy equipment impacts to soil, creation of landings and staging areas, increase in light availability due to thinning, and other similar activities. In some cases, like slash burn pile scars, the proposed actions would

Page | 3-40 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

create small discrete areas of bare ground where the soil have been completely sterilized. Slash pile burn scars almost always have invasive plant infestations within a year after being created. In some cases, over 95% of the burn scars become infested with invasive plants (usually Canada and bull thistles). While the total area of burn scars is negligible compared to the total project area (< 0.1% of total area), the infestations can be a new source (vector) for invasive plant introductions. Therefore, the project may create potential deleterious indirect effects from ground disturbance.

Cumulatively, increases in the vector presence can create soil disturbances that are susceptible to invasive plant introduction. However, existing and future infestations would be treated before, during, and after the project is implemented. This, along with the project design criteria, would eliminate or substantially reduce the potential inadvertent spread of existing invasive plants before operations commence, and would eradicate any new infestations during and after implementation. Thus, overall beneficial cumulative effects would occur due to ongoing implementation of the treatments under the 2015 Invasive ROD. See the 2005 Pacific Northwest Region Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants Final Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision and the 2015 Malheur National Forest Site-Specific Invasive Plants Treatment Project Final Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision for details on the planning, environmental effects, and implementation strategy for invasive plant treatments. Transportation System The following is a summary of the Transportation Specialist report for Crow. The entire report is incorporated by reference and can be found in the project file, located at the Emigrant Creek Ranger District, Malheur National Forest, Hines, Oregon.

Methodology Analysis of the roads system within Crow began with the Malheur National Forest Roads Analysis Report (December 2004, Revised April 2005) and is incorporated by reference. This analysis resulted in identifying the minimum primary road system for the Forest. The analysis was designed to provide decision-makers with information needed to develop road systems that are safe and responsive to public needs and desires, are affordable and efficiently managed, have minimal negative ecological effects on the land, and are more in balance with available funding for needed management actions.

This EA also incorporates by reference the Malheur National Forest-Wide Travel Analysis (September 2015). This travel analysis reviews and analyzes the lower standard system roads not identified as the primary open-road system. It also incorporates recent NEPA decisions involving the transportation system. The Forest-wide Travel Analysis overall objective for roads is to identify needed and unneeded roads, identify roads associated with environmental and public safety risks, identify site-specific priorities, opportunities for road improvements, closures or decommissioning and identify areas of special sensitivity, unique resource values or both.

Each road in the project area was field checked and the road condition was recorded to reflect existing conditions. Information sources for transportation analysis include the transportation GIS records which house the spatial data for road locations. An inventory of road attributes for National Forest System (NFS) roads is maintained on National Forest through the I-Web database. The data is clipped through a process performed by Region 6 Data resources Management (DRM). A complete list of road attributes and definitions of these attributes is in the project record.

Chapter 3 Page|3-41 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Existing Transportation System The existing transportation system in Crow consists of approximately 200 miles of National Forest System roads. Road maintenance levels on the Malheur National Forest are based on type of traffic use. Maintenance Level 3 roads are suitable for passenger car travel. Maintenance Level 2 roads are open to high clearance vehicular travel. Maintenance Level 1 roads are roads placed in storage and closed to vehicular travel (under previous NEPA decisions or administratively closed). Decommissioned roads are roads that have been determined to no longer be needed for administrative use. About 4 miles of roads are decommissioned in the roads database but have remained operationally maintenance level 1 (closed).

Table 16 lists the current number and total mileage of roads, by maintenance level (ML), in Crow. There are no known revised statute (RS) 24778 claims for any roads in the project area.

Table 15. Existing Transportation system in Crow

Maintenance level (ML) Miles of road DEC – Decommission 4.0 ML 1 – closed 73.7 ML 2 – open 116.4 ML 3 – open 10.1 Total 204.2

Effects to Transportation System The analysis area for considering the cumulative effects on the transportation system is defined by the project area boundary because it provides a suitable boundary for the analysis. In addition, there would be a small portion of the existing road system used for log haul that is outside the project area boundary. The time period for measuring cumulative effects is 20 years forward to encompass the time needed to implement and realize the effects of the road actions completed for the project.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) Road densities and miles of road would be unchanged. Road maintenance and motorized access would continue at current levels.

Direct and Indirect Effects from the Action Alternatives Road densities and miles of open, closed or decommissioned road would remain unchanged. There are about 8.17 miles of roads that were closed by previous administrative actions. These road segments, identified as maintenance level 1, are physically closed on the ground and are not being utilized by the public. These roads may be used for haul and then reclosed. Less than 27 miles of temporary roads would be constructed, used, and then restored to ensure soil productivity is reestablished, the road has adequate drainage and ground cover to prevent erosion, the road is no longer drivable, and the road is not highly visible after approximately 5

8 Revised Statute 2477 (commonly known as "RS 2477") was enacted by the United States Congress in 1866 to encourage the settlement of the Western United States by the development of a system of highways. Its entire text is one sentence: "the right-of-way for the construction of highways across public lands not otherwise reserved for public purposes is hereby granted."

Page | 3-42 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

years following completion of project activities. About 203 miles of road maintenance would occur on haul routes including about 73.9 miles of closed roads (ML1), and 4.0 miles of decommissioned roads. At completion of use, decommissioned and closed road opened for log haul would be re-decommissioned or re-closed, respectively. The condition of haul routes would be improved to a standard needed for commercial haul by maintenance activities associated with timber harvest. Direct beneficial effects from the action alternatives would include improved road drainage and surface conditions.

Cumulative Effects of the Action Alternatives There would be no cumulative effects to road densities of past and present projects because the proposed action alternative would not change road densities or miles. Two hundred miles of roads that would normally be deferred maintenance would have maintenance performed. The cumulative effects related to road maintenance costs for the entire road system would decrease over time due to the reduction in the backlog of deferred maintenance. Terrestrial Wildlife The following is a summary of the Terrestrial Wildlife Specialist report for Crow. The entire report is incorporated by reference and can be found in the project file, located at the Emigrant Creek Ranger District, Malheur National Forest, Hines, Oregon. This section summarizes the terrestrial wildlife species found in the project area and the effects of the alternatives on these species. Rather than addressing all wildlife species, discussions focus on threatened, endangered and sensitive (TES) species, Forest Plan management indicator species (MIS), Forest Plan old growth dependent species, Forest Plan featured species, unique and special habitats, Neotropical migratory birds and landbirds. Effects to terrestrial wildlife species contrast broadly from proposed activities because species habitat preferences also contrast broadly. For example, activities that move stands with high canopy densities towards open, park-like ponderosa pine stands would create habitat for some species like white-headed woodpecker but would also create habitat that is unsuitable for other species like pileated woodpecker. Project activities that are beneficial to one species, for example white-headed woodpecker, would be detrimental to another, for example, pileated woodpecker, and visa-versa. Habitat for terrestrial wildlife species, including viability of management indicator species is therefore being assessed using the historical range of variability (HRV) 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. 2003). By managing habitat within HRV it is assumed that adequate habitat would be provided because species survived those levels of habitat in the past to be present today. The cumulative effects analysis area for all species is the project area boundary unless otherwise noted.

Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Sensitive Species Forest Service Manual 2672.4 requires the Forest Service to review all its planned, funded, executed or permitted programs and activities for possible effects on proposed, endangered, threatened or sensitive species (TEPS). There are no threatened terrestrial wildlife species in the project area. Habitat for one endangered species, gray wolf, is present within the project area. Dispersal habitat for one proposed species, wolverine is also present within the project area. Several Region 6 sensitive terrestrial species have potential habitat and/or have documented occurrence within the project area (see Table 17). The following TEPS species are not

Chapter 3 Page|3-43 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

documented or suspected to occur or have no habitat in the project area: North American lynx, American peregrine falcon, bighorn sheep, pygmy rabbit, bufflehead, Greater sage grouse, Wallowa rosy finch, bobolink, upland sandpiper, pallid bat, Morrison bumble bee, and Sullivan’s sulphur. Therefore, these species would not be affected by the project (No Effect (NE) or No Impact (NI)) for these species.

Gray Wolf – Threatened Species There have been no documented wolf sightings in Crow. Field reconnaissance and camera sets have found no evidence of wolves. Habitat for wolves is limited due to high road densities and lack of large concentrations of wild ungulates except for potential ungulate concentrations during winter months at lower elevations near private lands. Road densities exceed two miles per square mile and seasonal use from human activities in the area can be high at times. The closest known wolf pack is over 100 miles northeast of the project area in Grant County. Wolf tracks have recently been recorded within 20 miles of the project area. The project area contains many meadows, which are potential wolf rendezvous sites however, roads and human disturbances are high at times and may deter any wolf denning activity.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) The no action alternative would not alter wolf habitat or wolf prey within Crow. Since there would be no affects to big game populations, a No Effect (NE) determination is given for the no action alternative.

Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects of the Action Alternatives Because there is a low probability of wolves to establish a pack in this area due to the amount human presence, and there would be no affects to big game populations there would be No Effect (NE) for gray wolf.

Northern Bald Eagle – MIS and Sensitive Species Bald eagles were listed as threatened when the Ochoco National Forest Plan was written, but since have been delisted and now are considered a sensitive species in Region 6 and MIS on the Ochoco National Forest. There have been no documented bald eagle roosts within the Emigrant Creek watershed. A bald eagle nest is active approximately three miles west of the project within the Silver Creek watershed. There have been no documented sightings of bald eagles in Crow during field reconnaissance and there were no historic recordings of this species. Probable nesting sites for bald eagles occur further down the Emigrant Creek drainage near private property outside the project area, but within the Emigrant Creek watershed.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) Since there would be no potential for nest or roost habitats disturbed and no removal of potential roosting or perch trees there would be No Impact (NI) to Northern bald eagle.

Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects of the Action Alternatives Since there are no known bald eagle roost, nest, or foraging sites within the project area, the probability of disturbance is low. There is a low probability of incidental disturbance to foraging eagles along Forest Road 41 north of the project area if log haul occurs on this route however, design criteria would lessen the impacts. There would be no impacts to any potential prey for bald eagles. Due to protection measures and the minimal habitat for bald eagle impacted by the action alternatives, the project would have No Impact on bald eagle. Viability to existing bald eagles in the Emigrant Creek watershed or any future nesting pair of eagles would not be impacted by the

Page | 3-44 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project proposed activities. It is highly unlikely any of the proposed harvest units would be used as future winter roost but selective harvesting would accelerate development of future larger trees in the long term. Since no bald eagle habitat would be impacted and any future nesting and roost sites would be protected, this project would not contribute to a negative viability for bald eagles. Because there are no direct or indirect effects there would be no cumulative effects to bald eagles.

Table 16. Summary of Effects to Terrestrial TEPS Species

Species Habitat Requirements Scientific Name Action No Action Action No Occurrence Alternatives Alternatives Determination Determination Status

Species documented or suspected to occur or habitat in the project area Habitat generalist. Affected by Gray Wolf ungulate populations. Prefer road T HD/S NE NE Canus lupus densities < 1 mil./sq. mi. with low human disturbance Northern Bald Eagle Large bodies of water. Large conifers S HD/S NI NI Hailaeetus leucocephalus for nesting.

North American Wolverine Alpine tundra, subalpine cirque P basins for denning. Scavenger in HD*/N NI NI Gulo gulo luteus diversity of habitats during dispersal.

Lewis’ woodpecker Open woodlands near water. S Ponderosa pine savanna, burnt pine HD/S MIIH/BI NI Melanerpes lewis forests White-headed woodpecker Open ponderosa pine forest with S HD/D MIIH NI Picoides albolarvatus large trees

Townsends big-eared bat Desert shrub, juniper, and pine S forests. Associated w/caves, mines, HD**/N MIIH NI Corynorhinus townsendii buildings.

Fringed myotis Most habitat types, forested, riparian. S Roosts in caves, crevices, bridges, HD/S MIIH NI Myotis thysanodes mines, large conifer snags. Silver-bordered fritillary S Open wet meadows and bogs HD/S NI NI Boloria selene Western bumble bee S Meadows, open conifer forest. HD/S MIIH/BI NI Bombus Occidentalis

Shiny tightcoil Moist riparian areas with downed S woody debris. Primarily under HD/S NI NI Pristiloma wascoense deciduous trees. Fir pinwheel Moist grand fir, western larch under S HD/S NI NI Radiodiscus abietum downed logs, litter. Grasshopper Sparrow S Grasslands and bunchgrass prairies HD/N NI NI Ammodramus savannarum Species not documented or suspected to occur or no habitat in the project area

Bighorn Sheep Alpine meadows, grassy mountain S slopes, foothills near rugged rocky HN/N NI NI Ovis canadensis cliffs and bluffs

Chapter 3 Page|3-45 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Species Habitat Requirements Scientific Name Action No Action Action No Occurrence Alternatives Alternatives Determination Determination Status

North American Lynx Sub-alpine fir, lodgepole. No Critical T HN/N NE NE Lynx canadensis Habitat in Oregon. American Peregrine Falcon S Nests on cliffs >75 ft. high. HN/N NI NI Falco perigrinus anatum Pygmy Rabbit Dense tall big sagebrush and deep S HN/N NI NI Brachylagus idahoensis friable soils. Bufflehead Large body of water. Nests in S HN/N NI NI Bucephala albeola cavities.

Greater Sage Grouse Sagebrush obligate. Leks in openings S in sagebrush. Needs grasses for HN/N NI NI Centrocercus urophasiarus nesting. Wallowa Rosy Finch S Alpine basins above timberline. HN/N NI NI Leucosticte tephrocotis wallowa

Bobolink Mowed moist meadows, grasses, S sedges, forbs. Mesic shrubs Irrigated HN/N NI NI Dolichonyx oryzivorus hay fields. Upland Sandpiper S Montane meadows >1,000 acres. HN/N NI NI Bartramia longicauda

Pallid bat Desert grasslands and shrub-steppe S with rock outcrops. Uses rock HN/N NI NI Antrozous pallidus crevices/caves.

Morrison bumble bee Open scrub habitat, Feeds on S rabbitbrush, thistles, sunflowers, HN/N NI NI Bombus morrisoni alfalfa. Sullivans Sulphur Occurs on clovers (Trifolium) and S HN/N NI NI Colias Christina sullivani sweetvetches (Hedysarum) * No source habitat, only dispersal; ** Foraging habitat, no roost sites E = Endangered, T = Threatened, S = Sensitive, P= Proposed, C = Candidate HD – Habitat Documented or suspected or near enough to be impacted by project activities HN – Habitat Not within the project area or affected by its activities D – Species Documented in general vicinity of project activities S – Species Suspected in general vicinity of project activities N – Species Not documented and not suspected in general vicinity of project activities NE =No Effect, NLAA =May Effect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect, LAA =May Effect, Likely to Adversely Affect, BE =Beneficial Effect, BI=Beneficial Impact, NI =No Impact, MIIH =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

North American Wolverine – Proposed Species Informal wolverine surveys, with bait and cameras, have been conducted periodically across the Emigrant Creek ranger district for the last 28 years. No wolverines or evidence of presence have been documented during these surveys. There has been no evidence of wolverine sightings within the project area or the Emigrant Creek watershed. There is no wolverine denning habitat in the project area. The lower portion of the Emigrant Creek watershed burned in 2007 and is not considered dispersal habitat for wolverine. The northern portion of the project area could be dispersal habitat for a young male wolverine but the project area is nearly 50 miles from the

Page | 3-46 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Strawberry Mountain Wilderness and at least 30 miles from the Black Canyon Wilderness. Crow may be used as dispersal habitat for animals traveling between suitable denning habitat areas however, the probability is low.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) Since no fuels reduction activities would occur to modify habitat or potentially disturb a transient wolverine, there would be No Effects (NE).

Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects of the Action Alternatives Since there is no source or reproductive habitat in the project and there is no direct linkage to any reproductive habitat the probability of wolverine being in the area is extremely low. While habitat modification is likely, and there may be displacement of prey, it can’t be determined there would be any effects to wolverine or wolverine habitat; therefore the action alternatives would have No Effect (NE). Connectivity is expected to be maintained throughout the project area, which could conceal any dispersing wolverine if one was to wander through project area.

White-Headed Woodpecker – Sensitive Species and MIS White-headed woodpecker surveys in potential habitat using protocol described by Saab and Dudley (2003), identified sixteen nests and 20 birds during 2018. About 50 percent of the nests were in or adjacent to the 2007 Egley wildfire complex in the southern portion of the project.

Course-scale analysis by Wales (2014) using vegetation parameters in GIS, estimated about 10,630 acres of primary habitat and roughly 8,670 acres of secondary habitat in Crow. Habitat appears to be abundant throughout the project area.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) No Action Alternative would leave stands with high canopy densities unsuitable for this woodpecker’s nesting habitat. Because no vegetation activities would occur with no action and habitat is relatively abundant there would be No Impact (NI).

Direct and Indirect Effects from Action Alternatives Direct effects to nesting habitat are discussed in the snag section and in Primary Cavity Excavator section with other Management Indicator Species (MIS). Disturbance during nesting season could cause abandonment because this species nests later than other woodpeckers and lower in snags which makes disturbance more likely. Prescribed fire most likely would not affect nestlings since burning usually occurs prior to June before “green up”. Fall burning would have no effect on nesting woodpeckers. Loss of nesting snags is likely if fire occurs near late decayed snags, because this woodpecker nests in soft snags easily consumed by fire, where cavities are close to the ground.

Treatments planned in the action alternatives concur with conservation objectives for ponderosa pine restoration and habitat enhancement for this woodpecker (Altman, 2000; Wisdom, 2000) except for removal of large ponderosa pine trees in the proposed action alternative. Frenzel (1998) in the Deschutes and Winema National Forests found nesting to occur in open canopy less than 15 percent canopy. Hollenbeck et al. (2011) developed a habitat suitability index for white- headed woodpeckers suggesting large ponderosa pine trees along with temperatures and weather conditions, determined the highest fledgling success. The proposed action alternative proposes harvesting trees over 21 inches DBH under certain conditions so removal of large ponderosa pine trees would impact habitat by affecting future snag recruitment and foraging habitat for this bird.

Chapter 3 Page|3-47 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Harvesting of fir species greater than 21 inches DBH would not impact white-headed woodpeckers at any measurable amount. Alternative 3 does not cut any trees over 21 inches diameter at breast height.

The action alternatives would also create favorable habitat for white-headed woodpeckers. Thinning and burning accelerates the development of old structure ponderosa pine which are preferred foraging habitat for white-headed woodpecker. The action alternatives would treat just over 90 percent of the white-headed woodpecker habitat, short-term negative effects from disturbance would be expected.

White-headed woodpeckers are similar to other Picoides like blacked-back woodpeckers in they require some thick high-density areas next to nesting habitat to forage during the breeding season. Un-thinned leave pockets in the units and prescriptions in wildlife habitat areas like connectivity would leave foraging habitat for white-headed woodpeckers. Since there is potential to cause direct impacts to nesting birds and habitat would be modified, especially by cutting large ponderosa pine in the proposed action, , the action alternatives 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). However, habitat would be improved from the treatments in dense stands of fir by changing the composition to more ponderosa pine dominant and creating more open stands. Moreover, the reduction in risk of a large wildfire could benefit habitat. Low to moderate intensity fire is preferred by this woodpecker.

Cumulative Effects from Action Alternatives Cumulative effects analysis area is the Emigrant Creek watershed, including adjoining project area Green Ant. Because white-headed woodpeckers are MIS (management indicator species) effects are evaluated at the forest level. Restoration of open ponderosa pine forests benefits this species of woodpecker. Future vegetation treatments and prescribed fire planned on the Ochoco and Malheur National Forests are expected to improve habitat for this species creating open stands and snag habitat for foraging and nesting.

Road treatments on previous projects retain snag habitat for nesting. Malheur wood cutting policy allowing 16 cords of firewood per household contributes to the loss of old growth ponderosa pine snags (refer to snag section for more information on snag retention). The Emigrant Creek Ranger District Danger Tree EA project has the potential to remove snags considered danger trees along 2- and 4-digit roads in the project area.

Since the proposed vegetation and fuels reduction treatments would enhance habitat for white- headed woodpeckers and long-term source habitat is expected to improve in the future, Crow would not contribute to a negative trend in viability on the Ochoco National Forest.

Lewis’s Woodpecker – Sensitive Species and MIS The 2007 Egley fire complex created potential habitat for Lewis’s woodpeckers in the Bear Canyon area and along the western boundary. No Lewis’s woodpecker nests, or woodpeckers were found during surveys.

A course-scale analysis estimated secondary habitat at approximately 200 acres with most of the habitat within the Bear Canyon RHCA, which may be considered primary habitat due to the wildfire in 2007. There is approximately 25 acres of habitat along Emigrant Creek near Pole Camp adjacent to Forest Road 43. Few cottonwoods are present in the project area, but trees are not developed enough for nesting substrate for Lewis’ woodpeckers.

Page | 3-48 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) No action could have both positive and negative consequences to Lewis’s woodpecker habitat. By leaving stands at a higher risk of a stand replacement fire and a wildfire occurred habitat would be created for this fire dependent species. Conversely, this alternative would not enhance the growth of large ponderosa pines and would allow the establishment of less desirable fir species. Habitat suitability for Lewis’ woodpecker would be minimal, if at all, until a disturbance such as stand replacement fire occurred. No action alternative would have No Impact (NI) since it cannot be determined when the next stand replacement event would occur.

Direct, and Indirect Effects of the Action Alternatives There is potential to disturb nesting birds in the southern portion of Crow in the Bear Canyon drainage since potential source habitat for Lewis’ woodpeckers was created from the Egley Fire in 2007. About 154 acres of secondary habitat is proposed for treatment under the action alternatives. Proposed vegetation treatments would restore open ponderosa pine habitat needed for foraging. Conversion of multi-stratum old forest stands to open stands creates openings for foraging. Application of prescribed fire creates future snags, maintains open stands, and stimulates shrubs like ceanothus all beneficial to Lewis’s woodpeckers. Use of prescribed fire is a conservation strategy recommended in Partners in Flight conservation plans for this woodpecker species (Altman, 2000). Thinning from below enhances growth of remaining trees to develop future old growth pine forests. Vegetation treatments in the lower elevations that reduce juniper and other conifer competition enhance shrub production and subsequent mast production benefitting Lewis’ woodpecker. Because proposed activities would improve habitat for this species of woodpecker there would be a Beneficial Impact (BI), with the exception of Proposed Action due to the removal of large ponderosa pine over 21 inches. A MIIH determination is given for the Proposed Action, even though the impacts are expected to be minimal due to the low number of large ponderosa pine that would be cut. Fall prescribed fire would be preferred over spring burning in the southern portion of the planning area because the burn could be hotter and enhance shrub production more due to less moisture in the fuels under usual conditions.

Cumulative Effects of the Action Alternatives The cumulative effects analysis includes the Emigrant Creek watershed with viability assessment based upon forest level analysis. Projects and ongoing activities that have adverse effects include roadside hazard tree removal and firewood cutting. While fire suppression can reduce the probability of large fires it is inevitable there will be more wildfires creating habitat for this woodpecker in the watershed and forest wide. Since Crow would be applying prescribed fire along with many other Rx burns occurring on the forest and habitat was created from past and present wildfires (2020 Frog Fire on the Maury’s) habitat is abundant for Lewis’s woodpecker therefore Crow would not contribute to a negative trend in viability on the Ochoco National Forest.

Townsend’s Big-eared Bat – Sensitive Species Potential roost sites for this bat are rare on the Emigrant Creek ranger district and few detections have been recorded on the forest. There are scattered cliffs and rocky outcroppings along the slopes of Emigrant and Little Emigrant Creek drainages. It is probable there are caves within the rocky areas that could provide material roosts for this bat however no caves or mine tunnels were found during the field surveys. No detections of Townsend’s bat were recorded during acoustical surveys.

Chapter 3 Page|3-49 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) There would be no incidental removal or disturbance to potential snag roosts from harvesting or thinning equipment, since no activities would occur. Lack of treatments in the dry ponderosa pine forests could result in a stand replacement fire potentially reducing forage sources for this bat. Since no mining tunnels or caves were found during field reconnaissance, and this species appears to be rare on the forest, there would be No Impact (NI).

Direct and Indirect Effects of the Action Alternatives Opening forest canopy can benefit bats by creating flyways and may enhance foraging opportunities. Primary impact to sensitive bats may come from snag removal. Because there is potential to impact roosting habitat, the action alternatives 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); however BMP’s should ameliorate the potential impacts.

Cumulative Effects of the Action Alternatives The cumulative effects analysis area is the Emigrant Creek watershed. The watershed has an abundance of snags created by the Egley fire. The Emigrant Creek Ranger District Danger Tree EA project has the potential to remove snags considered danger trees along 2- and 4-digit roads in the project area. However, since no bats were detected during surveys, there are known caves or buildings, and snags are prevalent in the watershed there are no anticipated cumulative effects to sensitive bats from Crow.

Fringed Myotis – Sensitive Species Bat acoustical surveys were conducted, and there were no recordings of fringed myotis. There are approximately 25 water developments for livestock such as ponds, troughs, and springs in the project area providing foraging for bats. Beaver dams are prevalent along Emigrant Creek creating small ponds and pools that may provide foraging and watering areas for bats.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) There would be no incidental removal or disturbance to potential snag roosts from harvesting or thinning, since no activities would occur. Lack of treatments in the dry ponderosa pine forests could result in a stand replacement fire potentially reducing forage sources for this bat. Since no mining tunnels or caves were found during field reconnaissance, and this species appears to be rare on the forest, there would be No Impact (NI).

Direct and Indirect Effects of the Action Alternatives Opening forest canopy can benefit bats by creating flyways and may enhance foraging opportunities. Fringe myotis tend to fly near RHCA’s but there are no planned vegetation treatments in these areas. Primary impact to sensitive bats may come from snag removal. Because there is potential to impact roosting habitat, the action alternatives 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); however design criteria should ameliorate the potential impacts.

Page | 3-50 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

the project area. However, since no bats were detected during surveys, there are known caves or buildings, and snags are prevalent in the watershed negative cumulative effects would be minimal.

Silver-bordered Fritillary – Sensitive Species This species is documented in the Strawberry Wilderness which is over 30 miles northeast of Crow. There has been no documentation of silver-bordered fritillaries in the project area. It is unknown if violets, which are main vector species for fritillaries, are present within the meadows in the project area. There is approximately 190 acres of wet or moist meadow habitat in Crow.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) The no action alternative would not impact meadows in the short or mid-term therefore there would be No Impact (NI) for Silver-bordered fritillaries. Over the long-term potential meadow habitat could degrade from the encroachment of conifers and juniper.

Direct and Indirect Effects of the Action Alternatives No mechanical vegetation treatments would occur in potential habitat. It is doubtful prescribed fire would occur in potential habitat or cause a change in vegetation due to the wet nature of the meadows. No loss of flowering plants in the meadows is expected. Therefore the action alternatives would have No Impact (NI).

Cumulative Effects of the Action Alternatives There would be no cumulative effects to silver-bordered fritillary from this project, since there are no expected direct or indirect effects.

Grasshopper Sparrow – Sensitive Species Only two grasshopper sparrow observations have been recorded in Harney County, both near Malheur National Wildlife Refuge by Foster Flats approximately 100 miles south of Crow. Crow contains approximately 250 acres of bunchgrass habitat primarily in the head of the Bear Canyon drainage near Donnelly Camp. The likelihood of grasshopper sparrows occurring in Crow is low.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) Since there has been no documented occurrence of this sparrow in the project area and only small isolated habitat occurs, the no action would have No Impact (NI).

Direct and Indirect Effects of the Action Alternatives Since there has been no documented occurrence of this sparrow in the project area and only small isolated habitat occurs, the action alternatives would have No Impact (NI).

Cumulative Effects of the Action Alternatives There would be no cumulative effects to grasshopper sparrow from this project, since there are no expected direct or indirect effects.

Shiny Tightcoil – Sensitive Species No surveys were conducted and based on information in Natureserve, there are no documented occurrence in Harney County Oregon where Crow is located. Whiskey, Latigo, Emigrant, Crowsfoot, and Burnt Cabin Creek drainages all contain a deciduous tree component that could provide habitat for this snail.

Chapter 3 Page|3-51 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) No action would have No Impact (NI) on shiny tightcoil.

Direct and Indirect Effects of the Action Alternatives This snail would occur in moist riparian habitat and no mechanical vegetation management is planned in this habitat type. Prescribed fire would also not be expected to impact this snail due to the wet nature and no direct ignition in riparian habitats. Therefore the action alternatives would have No Impact (NI) on the shiny tightcoil.

Cumulative Effects of the Action Alternatives There would be no cumulative effects to shiny tightcoil from this project, since there are no expected direct or indirect effects.

Western Bumble Bee – Sensitive Species No surveys were conducted and based on information in Natureserve, there are no documented occurrence in Harney County Oregon where Crow is located. Few prairies exist on the western portion of the project area near Forest Road 41. These prairies are grazed by domestic sheep, which could impact flowering plant productivity during specific times of the year since sheep tend to forage on flowering plants.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) No action would have No Impact (NI) on western bumble bee.

Direct and Indirect Effects of the Action Alternatives Western bumble bees nest underground but sometimes in old logs. Skidding of logs during timber extractions and application of fire has the potential to affect bees or their habitat. Crushing of some flowers used by bees could also occur during harvest operations. Opening of canopy through thinning should increase nectar producing plants and improve habitat for bees. Since there would be mixed effects the action alternatives 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); and Beneficial Impact (BI) for bumble bees.

Cumulative Effects from Action Alternatives Past livestock grazing may have affected grass, forb, and sedge composition within meadow habitat in the project area. Introduction of non-native grasses and invasive plant species may have also affected meadow habitat. In the past several decades, with changes in grazing management, habitat has improved but grazing in forest and higher elevation meadows would continue to potentially impact habitat associated with western bumblebees.

The Emigrant Creek Ranger District Danger Tree Removal Project would only remove designated hazard trees along 2- and 4-digit roads in the project area. This project would have no cumulative impacts to western bumblebees.

Invasive plant treatments, as currently authorized by the Malheur National Forest Site-Specific Invasive Plant Treatments Record of Decision, would be beneficial to the persistence of native vegetation and thus would have a beneficial impact to the habitat of the western bumblebee.

Page | 3-52 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Fir Pinwheel – Sensitive Species No surveys were conducted and based on information in Natureserve, no documented occurrence in Harney County Oregon where Crow is located. The most probable habitat for this snail may be along Emigrant Creek where many rocks and talus slopes occur.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) No action would have No Impact (NI) on fir pinwheel.

Cumulative Effects of the Action Alternatives There would be no cumulative effects to fir pinwheel from this project, since there are no expected direct or indirect effects.

Management Indicator Species (MIS) Management indicator species are species selected because their welfare is presumed to be an indicator of the welfare of other species using the same habitat or whose condition can be used to assess the impacts of management actions on a particular area, or other species of selected major biological communities. This analysis uses management indicator species and direction identified in the Forest Plan. Forest-wide standards and guidelines of the Forest Plan directs land managers to “protect habitat from adverse modification through curtailment of conflicting activities, modification of activities, seasonal restriction of activities, or avoiding the area” if the species use of the area is because it is essential habitat for that species. Management Indicator Species (MIS) were selected for emphasis in planning and 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. For project-level planning and environmental analysis the use of habitat abundance and quality, and the distribution of habitat have been used to estimate project effects on MIS. It has been determined by court decision that where population monitoring data are not available, due to lack of funding or feasibility of monitoring populations, the amount and quality of habitat can be used as a proxy for determining viability effects of projects on MIS (Lands Council v. McNair, 2010). In order to use habitat as a proxy the project analysis must at a minimum include: 1) a clear relationship between the species and its habitat based on habitat relationship models that utilize the best available science; 2) the amount of habitat available at the Forest scale; 3) species presence in the project area; 4) the amount of habitat being impacted at the project level in terms of both quality and quantity; and 5) a determination of the project impact on viability at the Forest scale. The following management indicator species for the Ochoco National Forest are present or have habitat in the project area.

Primary Cavity Excavators (PCE) Primary cavity excavators were selected to serve as an indicator for species that are dependent upon standing dead and down decadent wood for nesting, roosting, and foraging. By providing

Chapter 3 Page|3-53 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment adequate dead wood habitat for these birds, it is assumed that adequate habitat would be provided for other species that rely on deadwood for all or part of their life histories (ie. secondary cavity nesters like bluebirds, swallows, etc.). Habitat modeling performed by Wales (2014) will be used to determine the acres of potential habitat for the known species of PCE within Crow. Because these MIS were selected to represent dead and defective wood habitat, this analysis and discussion focuses on their primary habitat components- snags and downed logs. Additional information on cavity-excavating birds’ habitat associations, distribution and life history requirements is summarized in Mellen-McLean(2012a) and Marshall et. al (2003).

Snags and Downed Logs Snags are standing dead trees that provide habitat for over 50 species of birds and mammals in the Blue Mountains. Current Forest Plan direction, as amended by the Eastside Screens, is to maintain snags at 100% of biological potential for all primary cavity excavator species that occur on the Forest.New information about the ecology, dynamics, and management of decayed wood has been published since the forest plan was amended, and the state of the knowledge continues to change. However, until the Forest Plan is amended to reflect the new science, 100% biological potential is the minimum number of snags that need to be maintained through the life of the stand rotation. Integration of the latest science is incorporated into this analysis using DecAID version 3.0 (Mellen-McLean et al. 2017) which 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.

Snags were inventoried at random locations in various wildlife habitat types described in DecAid. Snags were calculated and compared to reference conditions and to all data plots illustrated in DecAid for each wildlife habitat type. The Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir (PPDF) and Eastside Mixed Conifer (EMC) Wildlife Habitat Types (WHT) occur in the project area. Structure types for the analysis include large structure stands, small/medium structure stands and open structure stands. Results of the DecAID snag distribution analysis are displayed in the wildlife specialist report in the project file.

Summary of the DecAID snag data suggests snag distribution is limited at the higher densities in both snag size classes in all the structure types and timber stand types except the large structure ponderosa pine/Douglas fir stand types.

In the PPDF WHT, the snag data suggests snag distributions are above or at reference conditions for densities of large (>20 inches DBH) snags in the 0-2, 2-4, 4-6 and >6 snags/acre categories. The only exceptions to this are in the 4-6 snags/acre category in the small/medium structure stands and the >6 snags/acre in the open structure stands where distributions are below reference conditions. Additionally, the area of Forest that contains 0 snags/acre (>20” DBH) is below HRV meaning that the frequencies of snags on the landscape are much higher compared to reference conditions or unharvested plot data.

In the PPDF WHT, where snags are >10” DBH, the scenario is very similar to the large snag category. There is less area with no snags than what occurred historically and except for the >16 snags/acre category all categories exceed historical conditions.

The data may not be reflective of the higher concentrations of snag apparent in the burned portion of the planning area because samples were collected in the un-burned timber stands where potential vegetation management may be planned to reduce probability of another stand replacement wildfire. Emigrant Creek watershed south of Spring Canyon Creek drainage in the

Page | 3-54 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

southern end of Crow received a stand replacement wildfire in 2007 creating an abundance of snag habitat for most wildlife requiring decadent habitat components.

Large structure ponderosa stands are the only stand type that is not meeting minimum snag densities. Based on the science in DecAid snag levels in the ponderosa pine forest type is above the 80 percent tolerance levels indicating snags are abundant in the project area, even though densities may be below forest standards. In the mixed conifer timber stands snag levels are estimated to be between 30 and 50 percent tolerance levels in the large and open structure but below the 30 percent tolerance level (TL) in the small/medium stand type. Crow, like much of the Emigrant Creek Ranger District, is located at the southern portion of the Blue Mountains and snag levels are expected to be low in the mixed conifer stands.

Snag levels are between 30 and 50 percent tolerance levels for cavity nesting birds in the smaller diameter snag sizes and between 50 and 80 percent TL for cavity nesting birds in the large diameter (>20-inch dbh) snags. Snag levels for species like pileated woodpeckers and Williamson’s sapsuckers are lower than the 30 percent TL recorded in DecAid.

Down woody material (dwm) is important as wildlife habitat. Thomas et al (1997) stated that 179 vertebrate species in the Blue Mountains use downed logs as reproductive, denning, foraging, and other habitat uses. Mammals as large as black bear and elk use woody material for denning and cover for newborn calves respectively. Small mammals require logs for cover and squirrels use logs for seed cone caches. Raptors, such as goshawks use logs for plucking posts prior to consuming prey. Primary cavity excavator’s forage on dwm and depending on size of material may nest in the limbs. For more information on downed logs refer to Bull et al (1997).

While several authors have stressed the importance of logs and downed material for wildlife, the availability of downed logs are limited in dry ponderosa pine ecosystems, where fire intervals were frequent. Agee (2002) and Korol et al (2002 and unpublished data) have estimated historic downed log densities in ponderosa pine at approximately 1.0 and 0.6 per acre respectively. Forest Plan standards for ponderosa pine ecosystems are 3-6 downed logs/pieces per acre at least 12 inch in diameter at small end and 20 feet long.

Downed logs were inventoried using techniques described in Bull and Torgersen (1997). Data was analyzed to compute percent cover to compare to reference conditions (un-harvested plot data) and to estimate downed log densities for Regional Foresters Amended standards. Results of the surveys are fully displayed in the Wildlife Specialist report.

Downed log distribution in the ponderosa pine/Douglas fir plant association types are well distributed throughout the different wildlife habitat types in the project area. This is indicative of fire exclusion and past harvesting practices where unmerchantable downed woody material was left on the landscape. Frequency in the small/medium and large structure types within the ponderosa pine wildlife habitat types are much higher than in unharvested plots recorded in DecAid. Of the sample plots taken only nine percent of them had absence of downed logs compared to over 30 percent in the reference plots.

In the mixed conifer stands downed logs are less distributed and abundant as ponderosa pine stands are in Crow. In the large structure stands there is excess of downed logs in the zero to one percent where reference distribution levels were at seven percent compared to 38 percent in the sampled plots. The data suggests a lack of concentrated logs but downed logs are scattered on the landscape. Scattered logs are good for small mammals to hide and move throughout the project area. Scattered logs will provide many foraging opportunities for birds, small mammals, and

Chapter 3 Page|3-55 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

wildlife as large as black bears that may be in the project area. Small mammal and insect dispersal potential is high under these un-disturbed downed woody material conditions.

Downed log levels are above standards in the ponderosa pine stands and at the minimum levels in the mixed conifer stands. Large structure mixed conifer stands are slightly below forest standards of 15 downed logs per acre. Typically, large structure stands produce the highest downed log densities. Lack of disturbance is most likely the reason for lower densities in the late structure stands.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) Snag habitat and downed wood habitat for PCE’s would continue to fluctuate depending on natural disturbances. In dense overstocked stands large ponderosa pine snag recruitment is likely due to stress and insect and disease outbreaks. Recruitment of larger snags in the mid to long term may be limited due to suppressed stands. Risk of wildfires would increase over time as tree densities and ladder fuels increase. Some PCE’s are dependent on fire, while other species like pileated woodpeckers would be displaced by wildfires.

Table 17 – Primary Cavity Excavator Species Habitat acres impacted by action alternatives o

Not -

Primary Cavity Excavator Habitat in Habitat by action action by

area . Habitat Habitat .

Species PAB A ction Habitat Habitat located Treated r es Watershed # nest sites project area project res of of res in Remaining alternatives Ac alternatives Acres of Habitat of Acres Habitat project watershed action action watershed Treated in recorded # obs Acres of Habitat in Habitat of Acres Ac Impact to Foraging Foraging to Impact Impact to Breeding Breeding to Impact

pileated woodpecker 5,398 8,130 2,435 5,695 7 20 -- -- hairy woodpecker 16,795 45,348 15,039 30,309 4 13 m m black-backed woodpecker 11,978 28,152 10,611 17,541 0 0 -- m secondary habitat Black-backed woodpecker ~1950 ~~15,115 0 1 -- -- primary habitat Williamson’s sapsucker 7,912 24.747 7,156 17,591 0 4 m m white-headed woodpecker 2,139 6,385 1,958 4,427 16 21 m - Lewis’ woodpecker 213 2,843 154 2,689 0 0 m + downy woodpecker /red naped 3,763 10,038 276 9,762 1 4 + n sapsucker Northern flicker 8,360 29,768 7,584 22,184 0 2 + m cavity nesting birds 32,366 112,717 28,961 83,756 0 31 m m -- = negative impacts, + = positive impacts, m= mixed impacts, n= no impacts or no measurable impacts.

Direct and Indirect Effects of the Action Alternatives The action alternatives have potential to reduce snag habitat for PCE’s from harvesting operations and from prescribed fire (Pilliod, 2006). Vegetation thinning treatments that reduce smaller diameter trees would affect foraging habitat for most of the PCE’s. Operations in spring and early summer could cause nest abandonment and may displace nesting birds and other cavity users. Prescribed fire has similar abandonment effects when implemented during breeding seasons. While some studies found a decline in snag habitat Horton and Mannan (1988) found a 20-fold increase in new smaller snags (<15 cm) following prescribed fire with a 64% increase in

Page | 3-56 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

woodpecker foraging as a result of the insect activity post treatment. Recruitment of large snags is likely following prescribed fire due to root scorching from accumulation of duff. Some PCE’s benefit from prescribed fire, while others are displaced by fire.

Removal of trees over 21 inches DBH in the proposed action alternative could further reduce future nesting habitat for some PCE’s. Harvesting of the large fir species may not have measurable impact compared to removal of large ponderosa pine since pine is a more desirable species for nesting habitat. Proposed treatments within aspen stands would enhance habitat in the mid to long term since aspen provide nesting habitat for many of the PCE’s especially the sapsuckers.

Downed wood habitats are likely to decrease during prescribed fire operations in the short to mid- term depending on burn intensity, ignition source, timing, and moisture content of the down woody material. There could be some loss of downed logs during harvest operations, but the impacts would be minimal since machinery is usually on previous disturbed sites and most equipment operators attempt to avoid downed logs where possible.

Cumulative Effects of the Action Alternatives Past management practices have created current habitat conditions for a variety of PCE’s. Primary concern for most PCE’s is the retention and future recruitment of snag habitat for nesting, foraging, roosting, and future downed wood. Past harvesting practices that removed old growth ponderosa pine had adverse effects to nesting and foraging habitat for most PCE’s.

Thinning of smaller diameter trees occurred throughout the project area in the past. These past treatments increased stand vigor and thus reducing tree mortality. However, thinning practices leave clumps of untreated areas which provide future foraging habitat for PCE’s. Open stands are more preferred for white-headed woodpecker, northern flickers, and white-breasted nuthatches. Hairy woodpeckers, although considered generalist, prefer edge habitat, which is created by thinning practices. Due to the influx of insects associated with fire, hairy and black-backed woodpeckers sometimes benefit by prescribed fire. Past prescribed fire and planned have the potential to benefit many of the PCE’s occurring in the project area, especially species of genius Picoides.

Primary cavity excavators preferring more open conifer stands benefit the most with fuels reduction treatments. Species of PCE (i.e. red-breasted nuthatch) that prefer more dense mixed conifers may have benefitted from fire suppression and overstocked dry ponderosa pine. Additionally, forest expansion from fire suppression may have benefited the tree gleaners by increasing habitat.

Road construction associated with past timber harvesting has contributed to the loss of large trees and snags needed for PCE. Some of the drainages, have road systems along riparian area degrading potential for riparian hardwoods, which are essential habitat for sapsuckers and downy woodpeckers.

Fuel wood cutting remains to be a source of snag reduction and Crow would not improve the retention of snag habitat for PCE’s and associated species since no road treatments are proposed with the action alternatives.

Future snag density projections for treatment alternatives were estimated using FVS modeling and the results are illustrated in Figures 18 and 19 for the next five decades. Application of prescribed fire was modeled hence the increase in snag densities resulting from the treatments.

Chapter 3 Page|3-57 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Thinning alone would not increase the snag densities, but with prescribed fire, snag recruitment is increased. Many scientists have found an increase in snag densities following prescribed fire applications after forest thinning’s (Hessburg et. al., 2010, Harrod et. al 2009).

Retention of snags would be a concern over time especially along road systems. Emigrant Creek Ranger District wide hazard tree project may remove snags along the Forest Roads 43, 41, and secondary roads off these roads. Firewood cutting would continue in the project area so snags near road systems would be reduced. Road maintenance for log haul may increase firewood cutting in the area, which can reduce snag densities and negate the increase in snag recruitment from prescribed fire. However, log decks and thinning slash from desirable fuelwood species can provide fuelwood for wood cutters and may aid in snag retention.

In summary, cumulative effects to snag densities would be positive as indicated from FVS modeling due to application of prescribed fire with any of the action proposals. Lack of disturbance, past harvesting practices, and fuelwood cutting have reduced snag densities in the Emigrant Creek watershed. Prescribed fire will create snag patches that are deficit within the project area supported by science (Hessburg, 2010). Lack of road treatments coupled with road improvements from harvest operations will continue to be a concern for snag retention.

Lewis’s and White-headed Woodpecker These woodpeckers are discussed in the TES species section.

Northern Bald Eagles Bald eagles are discussed in the TES species section.

Figure 16 - Snag densities >20 inch dbh projected with FVS modeling by decade

2 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 NA 1 PA 0.8 Alt 3 Snags per Acre Snags 0.6 Fir30 0.4 0.2 0 Year 2019 2029 2039 2049 2059 2079

Page | 3-58 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Figure 17 - Snag densities >10 inch dbh projected with FVS modeling by decade

10 NA 8 PA 6 Alt 3

4 Fir30

Snags per acre Snags 2

0 Year 2019 2029 2039 2049 2059 2079

Northern Flicker Northern flickers are considered MIS for old growth juniper because they are one of the few primary excavators of this habitat type. This PCE requires open habitat and is considered a habitat generalist however, it also needs specialized habitats. During field reconnaissance two flickers were recorded in the project area, but no flicker nests were found.

There are approximately 8,975 acres of northern flicker habitat based on modeling within Crow. Most of the juniper woodlands occur on the western most boundary of the project. Previous vegetation projects like Wallow and W2 created open conifer stands more favorable to flickers. The 2018 Box Fire burned approximately 100 acres within the project area that provides nesting habitat for this species.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) No action alternative would leave stands dense and the understory shrubs would decline over time reducing food availability for flickers.

Direct and Indirect Effects of the Action Alternatives Fuels reduction vegetative treatments would improve habitat for flickers which prefer more open habitat types. They forage on the ground and are mast eaters so removing conifers would enhance shrub production and subsequent mast production. Prescribed fire could reduce foraging habitat by consuming downed logs that contain ants, which are a food source for flickers.

Flickers also nest in juniper and shrub-steppe habitats. Juniper treatments may affect nesting habitat however, juniper with old growth characteristics would be retained and could be utilized for nesting by flickers.

Cumulative Effects of the Action Alternatives The proposed treatments combined with past or foreseeable future would improve habitat for flickers and not contribute to a negative trend in viability for northern flickers on the forest.

Chapter 3 Page|3-59 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Golden Eagle and Prairie Falcon These raptors nest on ledges and rock cliffs so they are MIS for cliffs, talus slopes and rimrock features. Ochoco LRMP states protection or reduction in disturbance to these birds using these features. No golden eagles were sighted during field surveys and nesting habitat on cliffs or ledges for golden eagles is limited. Therefore, no further analysis is necessary for golden eagles.

Prairie falcons’ nest on cliffs or outcrops adjacent to open county like grasslands and open sagebrush where ground squirrels and other small mammals are present. These falcons’ nest on much lower cliffs than eagles. One prairie falcon nest was identified during field surveys. The nest was found in the southern portion of the project in the Bear Canyon Creek drainage. Most likely the falcons are utilizing the open habitat created from past wildfires from 2007. There are other cliff formations along the Emigrant drainage in the southern part of the project area that could have potential nesting habitat for this falcon.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) No action would have no effects to prairie falcons.

Direct and Indirect Effects from the Action Alternatives Since these birds nest on cliffs where management activities are unlikely to occur and protection measures from disturbance are described in the forest plan, there would be no impacts to prairie falcons.

Cumulative Effects from Action Alternatives Because there are no direct and indirect effects to prairie falcon there are no cumulative effects; therefore, Crow would not contribute to a negative trend in population viability for prairie falcons.

Pileated Woodpecker The pileated woodpecker is a MIS for old growth habitats. Habitat for pileated woodpeckers has increased across the Blue Mountains due to an increase in dense multi-canopy stands resulting from fire suppression (Wisdom et al, 2000). However, densities of large diameter snags have declined from historical levels from past harvesting practices and current firewood cutting policies. Loss of pileated habitat to stand replacement fires in the past decade is apparent on both the Malheur and Ochoco National Forests.

Due to effective fire suppression and the increase in density of fir trees, habitat occurs in many of the drier ponderosa pine stands where historically may not have been utilized by pileated woodpeckers. Both the Malheur and Ochoco National Forests have a surplus of old forest multi- layered stands compared to the lack of more open single stratum stands of old growth.

Ochoco Forest Plan describes approximately 19,570 acres of old growth allocated for pileated woodpeckers and an additional 19,570 for feeding areas distributed throughout the forest. In addition, research natural areas and wilderness areas are considered distributional needs for woodpeckers (Ochoco LRMP, 1989). On the Malheur Forest roughly 72,690 acres of old growth habitat is managed for old growth dependent species like pileated woodpeckers. There are approximately 129,600 acres of pileated habitat on the Malheur Forest and about 63,480 acres of pileated habitat currently available on the Ochoco National Forest.

Page | 3-60 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

About 2,700 acres of pileated habitat occurs within Crow based on modeling. Surveys were conducted in 2018 following protocol described in Saab and Dudley (1998). Twenty woodpeckers were located, and seven nests were identified, with buffers placed around the nest tree.

Two nests were found in the allocated old growth areas (MA-F6). There are five old growth management areas within Crow. These management areas were surveyed for pileated habitat suitability and for presence of woodpeckers. Old growth D4-12 was determined to not be suitable primarily due to a stand replacement fire (Egley complex) in 2007. Most of the old growth management areas in Crow lack large trees (trees >20 inches dbh) on an acre basis by one to two large trees per acre to meet the objectives for large trees. Pileated woodpeckers or sign of woodpeckers were detected in all old growth management areas during field reconnaissance.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) The lack of vegetation treatments with no action is favorable for pileated woodpeckers unless a stand replacement fire occurs. Decades of fire suppression has improved and expanded habitat for pileated woodpecker. This action could leave potential habitat at a risk of stand replacement fire, which could eliminate habitat for pileated as occurred in 2007 with the Egley complex.

Direct and Indirect Effects from Action Alternatives There would be a reduction in source habitat for pileated woodpeckers from the proposed activities. The reduction of habitat would predominately come as a result of commercial and noncommercial activities that reduce stand densities and complexity. Approximately 45% of pileated woodpecker habitat in the project area would be treated in the action alternatives. In the long-term, canopy closure is expected to recover to some extent, as the retained trees expand their crowns in diameter and depth in response to the release from competition. Thinning would help promote the development of larger trees by reducing competition factors and could facilitate the development of higher quality foraging and nesting habitat in the long term. Noncommercial thinning that occurs in grand fir and Douglas-fir PAGs is not expected to affect habitat in the short term because trees less than nine inches DBH are not commonly used for foraging or nesting.

The proposed action alternative would also harvest trees greater than 21 inches DBH in pileated woodpecker habitat thus reducing nesting and roosting habitat since large ponderosa pine and grand fir structure is required for nesting and roosting. In the long-term habitat may be slightly reduced because thinning would select against grand fir which is a desirable forage species.

Prescribed burning may have varying effects on habitat suitability by reducing downed wood that provides a foraging substrate (Bull et al. 2005).

Nesting and roosting for pileated woodpeckers in allocated old growth areas and riparian zones would not be impacted. Additionally, old forest multi-stratum (OFMS) stands would continue to be above HRV and would provide source habitat for pileated woodpeckers. Allocated old growth stands would be treated with non-commercial under-story thinning which would help sustain the stands but maintain old growth habitat for species that require these stand types. Some cover reduction is anticipated especially in the mixed conifer stands where composition of firs would be selectively cut.

Chapter 3 Page|3-61 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

treatments with reduction in mid to high canopy trees. Dual treatments reducing all size class of trees would adversely affect concealment, reduce wood fiber needed for small mammal habitat and dispersal, and increase probability of predation on avian and small mammals. In road systems, especially in RHCA’s the increase in disturbance and displacement can occur with more open vegetation. The prescription would meet the Forest Plan Amendment and would retain 2/3 site potential and comply with current regulations.

Pileated woodpecker feeding areas are located near allocated old growth areas for woodpecker foraging and rearing. Approximately 78 percent of designated feeding areas (~1275 acres) are planned for vegetation treatments with about 900 acres (55%) planned for commercial treatments. Forage reduction and an increase in predation are likely results to pileated woodpeckers and other avian species requiring higher density stands. These are short to mid-term affects that may reduce fecundity until stands develop into more complex structure that are treated.

Cumulative Effects from Action Alternatives Past, present and future conversion of OFMS stands to more historic open pine stands would continually reduce pileated woodpecker habitat on the Emigrant Creek Ranger District. These activities remove cover, nesting and sometimes foraging habitat for pileated woodpeckers. Fuels reduction projects could have long term benefits for this species by reducing the risk of a stand replacement fire, which would eliminate habitat.

While both the Malheur and Ochoco National Forest plans identify dedicated or allocated old growth management areas set aside for pileated woodpeckers, some of the old growth areas are not suitable habitats for pileated woodpeckers because they occur in dry pine sites or lack habitat components pileated woodpeckers require.

Late and old structure stands would likely remain above HRV in the multi-stratum stand structure and would provide source habitat for pileated woodpeckers and associated old growth dependent species. Identified connectivity corridors, and untreated stands would also provide dispersal and protection habitat for most wildlife. Overall there would be a small negative trend in pileated woodpecker habitat. The loss of habitat would be insignificant at the scale of the Forest, and thus continued viability of the pileated woodpecker is expected on the Ochoco National Forest.

See also the cumulative effects on pileated woodpeckers addressed in the snag section above including firewood cutting and roadside hazard tree projects.

Rocky Mountain Elk and Mule Deer Rocky Mountain elk and mule deer are species that are commonly hunted and were chosen as terrestrial MIS for populations of big game and their habitat (USFS, 1989). The objective of the Ochoco National Forest is to manage elk and deer habitat to meet the population objectives of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife to the extent practicable.

Ungulate Populations Big game management on the Ochoco National Forest is a cooperative effort between the Forest Service and the ODFW where the Forest Service manages habitat while ODFW manages populations. The agencies cooperate by managing game according to pre-established Management Objectives for each big game management unit. The management objective is the number of elk and deer that ODFW manages for, to prevent depletion of big game animals, and to provide optimum recreational and aesthetic benefits for the public including quality hunting and

Page | 3-62 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project wildlife viewing opportunities. Crow falls within the Silvies Game Management Unit which is 1.15 million acres. Mule deer and elk are distributed throughout the project area. Wildfire areas burned in 2007 enhanced forage production for these ungulates and may have concentrated animal use. The Burnt Cabin cooperative travel management area (Green Dot) is within the project area and restricts access to green dot roads during hunting seasons to aid in buck/bull escapement. Populations of deer and elk are regulated by Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife (ODF&W). Oregon stated biologist monitor populations of ungulates through hunter harvest reports and aerial and ground surveys to determine recruitment, survivability, and ratios of bucks and bulls annually. In general mule deer populations have been below management objectives and elk populations have been above management objectives for the past decade. Extreme winter conditions in 2015/2016 caused a declined in mule deer populations in southeastern Oregon. Persistent snow along with cold temperatures causes mortality to mule deer. Elk winter in higher elevations and can tolerate harsh winter conditions better than deer.

Cover Cover for big game is measured using GNN data with crown cover estimates. Crown cover percentages 40 percent and greater is considered cover. Cover estimates based on GIS analysis are above Ochoco Forest minimum standards. Cover is above optimal levels of 40 percent. As cover exceeds optimal levels, forage availability can be reduced. Cook (1998) suggests thermal cover may not be as important as once stated in previous studies by Thomas et al. (1979). Hiding cover from predators and hunting pressure may be more important for elk than vertical cover. Cook et al (1998) stated that forest management should focus on forage resources and related production potential of forest successional stages and vulnerability of ungulates to harvest and harassment. Hillis et.al. (1991) recommended a 250-acre contiguous forest block at least ½ mile from open road suggesting security is important for elk.

Roads Roads can have negative impacts to big game populations depending on human use, seasons of use, and intensity of use. Harassment associated with roads can displace animals, increase disturbance, and increase animal energy reserves needed for winter survival. Hunter access reduces survivability, reduces escapement of bulls and bucks, and can increase poaching opportunities

A GIS analysis estimated there are approximately 2.4 miles per square mile of open roads in the project area. During field reconnaissance, road status was documented and described in the transportation system section of this document. Forest standards for road densities at the maximum level is 3.0 miles per square mile. Lyon (1983) stated road densities above 2 miles per square mile reduce effectiveness of elk habitat by 55 to 80 percent. Rowland (2004) proposed using distance bands from open roads in the habitat effectiveness model to better represent the impacts roads have on elk distribution. It appears the farther away from open roads the more secure elk are.

Security for elk seems to be effective at about ½ mile from open roads depending on terrain and vegetation features and the amount of traffic on the roads. Elk security was estimated at about 1,550 acres with the entire habitat located in the Bear Canyon drainage. Many of the roads were closed after the Bear Canyon fire in 2007. Approximately 120 acres of elk security occurs in the Whiskey Creek drainage.

Chapter 3 Page|3-63 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Habitat Effectiveness Index (HEI) Ochoco National Forest plan uses a habitat effectiveness index (HEI) model designed by Thomas (1988) to evaluate land management projects to compare effects of alternatives. The HEI model is outdated and has flaws but does contain some habitat components or human disturbance factors that influence elk and deer distribution. The HEI model is a road density model with an index range from one to 180 implying the highest number would support the greatest population of elk. HEI is only a model and does not reflect elk population numbers which fluctuate from hunting harvests, recruitment rates, winter conditions, predation, disease, forage production, and other factors. The HEI model incorporates cover and road densities into the calculations. Ochoco National Forest plan has minimum standards for cover and road densities.

Table 18 - Forest Plan Standards for big game cover, road density, and HEI by Alternative

3 orest orest orest orest P lan P lan P lan Action F F F Existing Existing Standard Standard Standard Proposed Proposed No Action No Condition/ Condition/ Alternative Alternative

Ponderosa Cover Quality % 45 41 45 41 45 41 Pine/Douglas Cover Quantity % 37 12 15 12 16 12 Fir PAGs HEI 42 7 7 7 7 7 Cover Quality % 47 54 47 54 47 54 Mixed Conifer Cover Quantity % 22 33 13 33 13 33 PAGs HEI 15 46 7 46 7 46

All Cover Cover Quality % 47 47 47 47 47 47 PAGs Cover Quantity % 59 21 27 21 29 21 Combined HEI 40 14 34 14 34 14 Open Road 2.42 3 2.42 3 2.42 3 Density 1: HEI values are average values for the watershed based on values within HEI Tables – PIN #11 (September 13, 1990). 2: Forest Plan Standard and PIN #11 Objectives for the 4th decade. 3: Numbers in Grey are below FP Standards.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) Cover for big game would most likely increase over time until a stand replacement fire or other disturbance mechanism occurs. Since cover estimates are based on canopy closure, which is vertical structure, cover estimates for elk may be inflated or not represented of usable cover. Lack of vegetation disturbance reduces forage quantity and quality as conifers continue to shade out grasses and forbs. There would be no reduction in hiding cover so displacement of elk from the area is much less than the action alternatives.

Direct and Indirect Effects from Action Alternatives Where populations are above management objectives the goal for ODF&W is to reduce populations through regulated hunting. If the habitat is not effective at maintaining animals for potential harvesting, regulating populations becomes more difficult. Displacement of big game onto private lands is a concern for ODF&W biologists.

Proposed treatments could provide some improvement in forage for the short term once prescribed fire is implemented.

Page | 3-64 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

There would be some direct disturbance to big game during implementation of the vegetation treatments, but the impacts would be short term and localized. Cover reduction, estimated from vertical crown closure with GIS modeling, is minimal following vegetation treatments and prescribed burning. Overhead cover would provide some security for big game, but the reduction in hiding cover from smaller diameter trees would have the greatest impact on big game distribution. Leave patches, connectivity corridors, non-commercial thinning units and untreated stands ameliorates some cover reductions.

Seasonal use by elk is expected but during the late summer and early autumn when recreational activities increase, displacement is likely. Vulnerability of elk is increased with the reduction in hiding cover and no reduction in road densities. Mule deer are more vulnerable to adverse effects related to roads than elk. Most of Crow is within the Cooperative Road Closure Area (Burnt Cabin) and receives fair amount of hunting pressure during elk and deer seasons. The green dot road system prohibits traffic on many roads during hunting seasons, making the area more desirable for some hunters that prefer less disturbances from vehicles. Elk security would remain limited to the Bear Canyon area within the Egley Complex burn. While no roads would be treated, reduction of hiding cover near open roads would impact mule deer by increasing vulnerability, reduction in rearing habitat, especially adjacent to riparian areas, displacement to less desirable habitat, disturbance and incidental harassment, and possible poaching.

Mule deer require much higher nutritional forage than elk, nutritional forage improvement would be minimal in most units. Application of prescribed fire can improve nutritional forage in the short-term but can also impact shrubs. Some shrub species respond positive to burning like snowberry and buck brush (Ceanothus sp.). Felling of trees from logging and thinning can improve short term forage with the availability of moss and lichens on the felled trees.

Cumulative Effects from Action Alternatives The cumulative effects analysis area for big game species is the Silvies hunt unit since population assessments by ODF&W are regulated by hunt units. The Silvies hunt unit is over a million acres, so Crow is a small area compared to unit. A high percentage of the Silvies unit burned in 2007 reducing vertical structure and eliminating cover for big game. Crow is proposed to reduce fuel loading and the risk of a large landscape wildfire that would alter big game habitat both positively and negatively. Previous projects such as Egley Danger Tree EA, Green Ant, Wallow, and W2 treated some of the roads in the project area there is security for big game in the southern portion of Crow. However, since no new security areas are proposed and hiding cover reduction is expected to reduce the risk of a large wildfire, the cumulative effects are expected to be slightly negative due to absence of security and high likelihood of displacement to less desirable areas. Nevertheless, the action alternatives are not expected to affect populations of any wild ungulates.

Late and Old Structure Stands (LOS) and Connectivity Late and old structure stands are described in the Forest Vegetation section of this document. Regional Foresters Amendment #1 (1995) requires the creation and maintenance of connectivity between all late old structure stands to facilitate wildlife movements and dispersal of young. Connectivity corridors should be at least 400 feet wide and connect in two different directions from LOS stands. Connectivity corridors are available throughout most of Crow but the Bear Canyon fire in 2007 may have fragmented portions of the southern boundary of the planning area.

Chapter 3 Page|3-65 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) Connectivity would not be limited to the designed areas as proposed. However, a large-scale stand replacement fire could eliminate connectivity.

Direct and Indirect Effects from the Action Alternatives The action alternatives are expected to maintain connectivity as directed in the Regional Foresters amendment with established routes between allocated old growth (MA-6) and LOS stands in the project area. Treatments in connectivity corridors would leave stand densities at two-thirds site potential.

There are proposed vegetation treatments in designated connectivity throughout the project. Approximately 77 percent (~6,000 acres) would receive treatments converting stands to more fire resilient and sustainable structure. Approximately 5635 acres (~72%) could have commercial treatments with reduction in mid to high canopy trees. Treatments reducing all size class of trees would adversely affect concealment, reduce wood fiber needed for small mammal habitat and dispersal, increase probability of predation on avian and small mammals.

Cumulative Effects of the Action Alternatives Connectivity corridors have been created in the adjacent Green Ant project and would be created in any other adjacent projects. Establishment of connectivity corridors would facilitate wildlife movements and dispersal of young.

Other Species Identified in the Forest Plan The Forest Plan provides standards and guidelines for an additional suite of species identified as other species. This section analyzes the affects to the Other Species identified in the Forest Plan but does not include species already analyzed as Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, Sensitive, or Management Indicator Species including bald and golden eagles, prairie falcons, and species associated with dead and downed logs (Primary Cavity Excavators).

Pronghorn Antelope Ochoco LRMP lists antelope as species to manage habitat on the forest in accordance with ODF&W population objectives. There are no standards or guideline for antelope or antelope habitat in the Ochoco LRMP. ODF&W antelope population estimates for Silvies unit is 1,400 (Klus, 2019).

In Crow antelope are present on the western portion of the project near Donnelly Butte in the various prairies like Swain, Boone, and Duffy. There may be antelope in some of the old burns and in 2019 there was an approximate 100 acres managed wildfire that will provide forage (new plant growth) for antelope. The northern portion of the project is not suitable habitat for pronghorns, but incidental use may occur from solitary bucks.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) Pronghorn habitat is slowly being lost due to forest encroachment and lack of fire on the landscape.

Direct and Indirect Effects from Action Alternatives The action alternatives create open canopy conditions and enhance habitat for antelope especially west of Forest Road 43 and south of Forest Road 4365 where the prairie habitat is prevalent.

Page | 3-66 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Prescribed burning should enhance forage plants however bitterbrush, an important browse species, can be negatively impacted by prescribed burning depending on the timing and intensity of burning.

Cumulative Effects from Action Alternatives Cumulative effects analysis area for this species is the Silvies hunt since this ungulate is managed by Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Since antelope require more open habitat any project that reduce conifer densities most likely benefit pronghorns. Fire either from managed wildfire, prescribed fire, or wildfires all enhance vegetation for pronghorns. Past fires have increased plant diversity and aided in antelope distribution in the Silvies hunt unit within the project and surrounding area. Competition from grazing, primarily sheep, can have negative impacts on forage availability. Short to mid-term positive cumulative effects to antelope habitat is expected due to forage enhancement which could also improve fawn rearing condition.

Raptor Habitat Including Hawks and Owls Raptors are birds of prey, of which numerous species occur or have been seen throughout the project area. The Forest Plan provides guidance for: the protection of nests, the protection of habitat surrounding nests, and minimizing disturbance to nesting or roosting individuals.

No formal surveys were conducted in the project area with the exception of owl surveys. Nocturnal surveys for flammulated owls were conducted in potential habitat. This owl needs grassy opening in old growth ponderosa pine forests but utilizes patches of thick young trees for roosting. Flammulated owls nest in cavities in large pine snags. Thirty observations of flammulated owls were recorded but no nest trees were located.

Incidental nests were found for three red-tailed hawks and one great-horned owl during field surveys. Appropriate nest protection measures would take place to protect nest sites. Unlike accipiter’s, red-tailed hawks and great-horned owls prefer extensive open timber stands and will nest in a single tree with open canopy. Red-tailed hawks and great-horned owls are habitat generalists.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) Leaving timber stands in higher densities can benefit some raptors such as the accipiter’s. Other hawks require more open timber stands to search for prey such as red-tailed hawks. In the event of a stand replacement fire, habitat loss is likely for accipiter’s (sharp-shinned, Cooper’s, and goshawks) that are present in project area.

Direct and Indirect Effects from Action Alternatives Any known or future discovered raptor nest would have seasonal restrictions during operations and receive appropriate buffering around nest tree or stand to protect nest site and eliminate disturbance during the nesting period to comply with Forest Plan and Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The action alternatives would favor birds that require more open habitat compared to forest hawks requiring more complex dense stands. Prescribed fire during spring and early summer is likely to affect nest sites that have not been found through field reconnaissance.

Cumulative Effects from Action Alternatives Except for the accipiter group of raptors, proposed treatments from Crow in addition to past projects like Green Ant, Wallow and W2 have created more open stand conditions conducive for raptors like red-tailed hawks and owls like great-horned. Flammulated owls require dense thickets

Chapter 3 Page|3-67 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

for roosting but prey on insects in grassy openings like the prairie habitat around the Donnelly Butte. Thinning coupled with past treatments is likely to reduce roosting habitat for this owl and could cause displacement. Flammulated owls and American kestrels are secondary cavity nesters requiring snag habitat for nesting. Cumulative effects addressed in the snag section apply to these raptors.

Accipiter’s require high density stands for nesting but prey on a variety of small mammals and birds in mixed wildlife habitat that contain a diversity of prey. Since RHCA’s would remain untreated nesting habitat for these raptors would remain in RHCAs. The southern portion of the watershed was burned 2007, which eliminated most habitat for accipiter’s.

Northern Goshawk The northern goshawk is a raptor and the Forest Plan provides guidance for: the protection of nests, the protection of habitat surrounding nests, and minimizing disturbance to nesting individuals.

About 10,327 acres of potential habitat (primary, secondary and post fledging areas, of which there is overlap) for goshawks was estimated with vegetation modeling (Wales, 2014). Approximately 2,700 acres of primary habitat was surveyed in 2018 and 2019 using standard protocol described in Woodbridge and Hargis (2006). Nine nests were found, with two of them being alternate nests. Nest stands and about 2,626 acres of post fledging areas (PFA) were established. One nest was found in the Bear Canyon burn where low intensity fire occurred.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) Lack of treatments in nesting stands in the short-term may be beneficial until a major disturbance occurred. The Egley wildfire complex burned over 10 goshawk nesting territories.

Direct and Indirect Effects from Action Alternatives The wildlife report illustrates the approximate acres of proposed treatments in the goshawk PFAs and potential source habitat within Crow. Approximately 81 percent of PFAs would receive some sort of vegetation treatment. Sixty-six percent of the treatments are commercial treatments and about 34 percent are noncommercial thinning treatments. Of the treated goshawk PFAs acres, about 43 percent falls within connectivity corridor treatments where the vegetation is managed at higher canopy densities for old growth-dependent species. The residual basal area target in these stands would be based upon two-thirds site potential based on site productivity as measured by plant association and determined on a stand-by-stand basis.

Twenty-nine percent of commercial treatments in PFAs under the proposed action alternative include the removal of trees greater than 21 inches diameter. Proposed treatments would not degrade LOS status and would not drop acreage for OFMS below the HRV.

Within potential source habitat, about 58 percent of source habitat would receive some sort of vegetation treatment. Eighty-seven percent of the treatments within source habitat are commercial treatments and about 13 percent are noncommercial thinning treatments. Of the commercially treated acres, about 31 percent falls within connectivity corridor treatments where the vegetation is managed at higher canopy densities for old growth-dependent species. The residual basal area target in these stands would be based upon two-thirds site potential based on site productivity as measured by plant association and determined on a stand-by-stand basis. Under the proposed action alternative about 42 percent of the commercial treatments would remove trees over 21

Page | 3-68 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

inches DBH. Proposed treatments would not degrade LOS status and would not drop acreage for OFMS below the HRV.

Proposed treatments in goshawk PFAs and source habitat would cause a decline in prey habitat, perch trees for hunting and potential future nest trees from the reduction in crown density and complexity. Treatments that remove trees greater than 21 inches DBH under the proposed action would have the greatest impact to goshawk habitat. Understory thinning or precommercial treatments may enhance habitat by creating a more open understory for locating prey.

Cumulative Effects from Action Alternatives The cumulative effects analysis area for goshawks is the Emigrant Creek watershed since these bird’s territories are approximately 6,000 acres in size. Past large stand replacement fires reduced nesting and fledgling rearing habitats. Past logging that removed large ponderosa pine structure degraded goshawk nesting habitat and affected foraging habitat due to need of large structure for prey. Loss of snag habitat reduces prey availability for goshawks.

Goshawk habitat modeling estimated there are approximately 15,580 acres of habitat existing in the Emigrant Creek watershed including both primary and secondary habitat types. Crow would treat about 39 percent of the primary and secondary habitat within the watershed. Most of the remaining habitat lies within riparian corridors since the southern portion of the watershed was burned in the Egley complex fires in 2007. Since over 60 percent of goshawk reproductive habitat would be treated with Crow and previous commercial treatments have occurred in the watershed and within the project area in addition to stand replacement fire in the past two decades, reproduction of goshawk in the short to mid-term may decline due to lack of complex vegetation. Commercial harvest units removing trees up to 30 inches would have the most measurable impacts to habitat especially in the LOS stands due to loss of large structure and potential nesting trees. Alternative 3 would have fewer impacts on this raptor.

Species Associated with Dead and Downed Logs Dead and downed logs habitat were addressed in the MIS section under Primary Cavity Excavators due its importance as a forage source for PCE’s.

Species Associated with Various Plant Communities and Successional Stages Diversity of wildlife habitats is the objective of the various succession plant stages. Many wildlife forage in open and sometimes early succession plant communities, but may reproduce or nest in denser older forests. Some species require large old structure, while others may require dense young stands of timber. See forest vegetation section for descriptions and variances in timber stand types available in the project area.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) No action would benefit species that prefer dense stands and negatively effects species that prefer more open stands. There would be a higher risk of stand replacement fire or insect and disease outbreak.

Direct and Indirect Effects from Action Alternatives These alternatives would benefit species that prefer more open stands and negatively effects species that prefer dense stands. There would be a reduction in stand complexity in the proposed treatment units from commercial thinning operations. Removal of large trees under the proposed action would reduce vertical complexity and lower canopy cover affecting nesting habitat for

Chapter 3 Page|3-69 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

avian species. Fir trees provide cover for rodents and smaller mammals. More open canopy conditions allow for enhancement of understory vegetation like grasses, forbs, and shrubs. Grasses produce seeds for birds, rodents, and forage for ungulates. Shrubs produce mass and browse.

Cumulative Effects from Action Alternatives Past harvesting practices have converted large structure ponderosa pine stands to earlier succession stages, reducing habitat for wildlife requiring large ponderosa pine structure. Southern portion of project area was burned at various intensities creating various structural stages. However, these past disturbances have not created enough stand initiation successional stages to meet the HRV levels.

Conversion of stem exclusion closed canopy to open canopy removes young trees that provide horizontal complexity. These dense thickets are important for nesting birds also. Some of the past thinning projects leave small patches of trees in the unit but they are not large enough to meet many of the wildlife habitat needs. Due to loss of horizontal (hiding cover) from past thinning projects (Wallow, W2) coupled with Egley fire complex wildfires, the proposed treatments are expected to have negative cumulative effects species that require dense forests.

Prescribed fire would alter different successional stages both benefitting and having short term negative effects to wildlife habitat. Enhancement of plant diversity is likely favoring foraging habitat for many wildlife. Improvements in habitat for pollinators anticipated. Prescribed fire in stem exclusion stands is important for sustainability of species like black-backed woodpeckers.

Prescribed fire in OFMS dominated by grand firs is likely to have adverse impacts to species requiring high complex stand types. With decades of fire suppression these stands are susceptible to stand replacement fire, however these stands are currently providing diverse habitats for many wildlife from rodents and flying squirrels to large ungulates. The extent of the action alternatives to move OFMS to more open conditions may have adverse effects to wildlife preferring large multi-strata structure.

Species Associated with Springs, Bogs, and Other Unique Habitats Springs, seeps, bogs, and other wet areas are addressed in the aquatic section and the sensitive plant section. Ochoco LRMP states these special areas would be identified on a project level analysis with protection measures given appropriately.

About 540 acres of meadow habitat occurs in the project area with 350 being considered dry meadows and 190 acres considered wet or moist meadows. Swain prairie was prescribed burned to enhance wildlife habitat over 10 years ago and was supported by Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation.

Aspen is considered a unique habitat type due to the decline in the Blue Mountains. There are approximately 245 acres of aspen in the project area. Approximately 133 acres of aspen occur in the Crowsfoot subwatershed in 74 stands. Many of the aspen stands received small diameter conifer reduction treatments. Aspen treatments are described in the design criteria.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) No action would have no effects to springs, bogs and other unique habitats.

Page | 3-70 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Direct and Indirect Effects from Action Alternatives There would be no impacts to moist areas due to buffers placed around the springs and seeps. An improvement in aspen regeneration is expected. Prescribed fire would stimulate regeneration of aspen and improve aspen stand development.

Cumulative Effects from Action Alternatives The cumulative effects analysis area is the project area. Past, present and future vegetation actions are beneficial to these unique habitats because they make more water available in springs and restore aspen stands.

Landbirds Including Neotropical Migratory Birds (NTMB) Neotropical migratory birds (NTMB) nest in the United States but winter south of the Tropic of Cancer. There has been public concern about population trends for various species of birds. The reliability of the Breeding Bird Surveys (BBS), which are surveys interpreted to measure trends, are limited due to the rarity of certain bird species and the limited number of routes. The appropriate Bird Conservation Plan and Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC ) species list for the project area was reviewed. Those species and habitats that are within the project area are incorporated and effects disclosed in this analysis. Refer to Table 34 for a detailed list of BCC that are known or likely to be present in the project area. Crow is within Bird Conservation Region 10 (BCR-10, Northern Rocky Mountain Region).

Bald eagle, Lewis’s, and white-headed woodpeckers are addressed in the TES section. Golden eagles are addressed in the golden eagle/prairie falcon in MIS section. Williamson’s sapsucker is addressed in MIS section. All the birds of prey species would be addressed in the raptor habitat including species surveyed like flammulated owls. Habitat concerns and evaluations were previously addressed for these species. Various habitat types and associated NTMB are addressed below.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) for All NTMB Species No direct effects to nesting birds or habitat alterations would occur. NTMB requiring high stem densities and complex conifer overstory would benefit from no action. Species requiring open forest conditions or need shrubs or mast for nesting/foraging would see a decline in habitat over time.

Shrub-steppe Species Juniper and shrub steppe habitats are limited in Crow because the project area is in the upper reaches of the Emigrant Creek watershed in more mesic ponderosa pine and mixed conifer plant associations. Some of the riparian along Emigrant Creek and Little Emigrant Creek has some patches of shrub-steppe habitat. The western boundary of Crow is much drier and contains some juniper and sagebrush habitat on the border of Silver Creek watershed.

Loggerhead shrikes, pinyon jays, green-tailed towhee are NTMB that may be present or have potential habitat in Crow. Common nighthawks are ground nesters in open non-forested habitats with the prairies and scab-flats providing potential nesting and foraging habitat for nighthawks.

Direct and Indirect Effects from Action Alternatives Migrant birds occurring in shrub-steppe habitats are usually shrub obligates. These birds depend on sagebrush and other shrubs to survive. The proposed conifer encroachment vegetation

Chapter 3 Page|3-71 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

management and juniper treatments would reduce conifer competition and enhance regeneration of the upland shrub habitat. Reduction in juniper may also have negative impacts on species that depend on juniper berries. Juniper berries provide food source for robins and solitaires during winter months and may be the only mast source during these months. Juniper also provide nesting substrate where conifers are less dense. Juniper can outcompete many of the shrub species which provide cover and mass for birds. Green-tailed towhees are species of concern that occupy shrubby habitats. Juniper reduction should improve habitat for species requiring shrubs for cover and nesting. Holmes et.al. (2017) found an increase in Brewer’s sparrows and green-tailed towhees after juniper treatments in southeastern Oregon.

Prescribed burning could have mixed effects on migratory bird habitat because of the potential to reduce shrub component. Some shrubs such as snowberry respond positive to burning but others such as bitterbrush could decline after burning.

Riparian Species Riparian habitats are the most productive habitats for many of the migratory birds. Thomas et. al (1979) stated riparian areas are the most critical wildlife habitat in the Blue Mountains. Because of the plant density and diversity, it may be the only habitat in Crow where these species may be found: willow flycatcher, varied thrush, Wilson’s warbler. Hummingbirds are likely to occur along Emigrant Creek and major tributaries where canopy is open for flowering plants to grow. Calliope hummingbirds forage on nectar produced by flowering plants like Indian paintbrush. Dense forest lacks these flowering plants.

Direct and Indirect Effects from Action Alternatives Since no mechanical vegetative treatments are planned in riparian habitat no impacts are expected. Prescribed burning is expected to have minimal effects due to no active lighting in riparian area. Prescribed fire is expected to creep around in riparian areas having minimal impacts on vegetation.

Forest or Forest Edge Species Cassin’s finch is a forest nester requiring conifer seeds for food. Open ponderosa pine forests producing good cones are needed for this species. Other species such as pine siskins, which have indicated population declines in some areas, are seed eaters and require seed producing trees. Reduction in ponderosa pine and high stem densities of firs, mainly grand firs, reduces habitat for this migratory bird.

Olive-sided flycatchers are focal species for forest edges and openings created by wildfires. Bear Canyon wildfire of 2007, Silver Complex wildfire of 2007, and Box fire of 2018 created fire edge habitat and numerous snags for foraging habitat for flycatchers. Olive-sided, like other flycatchers, utilize large snags for foraging and establishing territories. This is another species where the conservation plan suggests retention of large snags following a disturbance is necessary for foraging.

Direct and Indirect Effects from Action Alternatives Conifer reduction would enhance grass and seed production for species nesting in forest stands. In the mid to long term an increase in pinecone seed production is anticipated which provides food for seed eating birds of concern like Cassin’s finch and pine siskins. There would be a reduction in some nesting habitat structure, but it is un-likely it would have measurable impacts to nesting birds since many trees and areas would be left unthinned.

Page | 3-72 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Prescribed fire would have both negative and positive impacts to neo-tropical birds. Pilliod et. al. (2006) synthesized studies on fuels reduction effects on various wildlife species and some general results are as follows :(1) aerial, ground, and bark insectivores clearly favored burned habitats, whereas foliage gleaners preferred unburned habitats; (2) species with closed nests responded more favorably to burned habitats than species with open-cup nests; and (3) those nesting on the ground and canopy layers generally favored burned habitats compared to shrub nesters.

Prescribed fire may create some edge habitat and where variable intensity of fire occurs habitat would be created for flycatchers, especially olive-sided flycatchers. Fire can also enhance habitat for bluebirds, which are secondary cavity nesters that occur in old burns.

Cumulative Effects from Action Alternatives Since neo-tropical land birds migrate through many miles of various habitats several factors can cause population declines outside the scope of this project. For instance mortality on many species of birds from house cats or feral cats and collisions with windows and other human structures is much higher than any of the mortality factors associated with vegetation treatments or prescribed fire. Past harvest activities had various adverse effects to NTMB, but the proposed prescriptions would not remove substantial amount ponderosa pine. Combination of both commercial and non-commercial thinning with spring burning can have some measurable effects on birds if is done in a short time frame in the same area. This would be an exception due to the amount of back log for prescribed fire on the Emigrant Creek Ranger District.

Table 19. Bird Species of Concern, Bird Conservation Regions 10* Bird Species Preferred Habitat Predominantly a montane species found in open shrub sapling seral Calliope Hummingbird stages (8-15 years) at higher elevations and riparian areas. Wooded areas with fairly high canopy and well-developed understory. Rufous Hummingbird Feeds on columbine, paintbrush. Ponderosa Pine, Cottonwood riparian or Oak habitats with an open Lewis’s Woodpecker canopy, brushy understory, dead and down material, available perches and abundant insects. E. Cascades, mid to high elevation, mature open and mixed Williamson’s Sapsucker coniferous - deciduous forests. Snags are a critical component. Mixed conifer forests ( < 40 % canopy cover) dominated by old White-headed Woodpecker growth Ponderosa Pine and open habitats where standing snags and scattered tall trees remain. Willow Flycatcher Associated with riparian shrub dominated habitats, especially (b) non-listed subspecies or brushy/willow thickets. In SE WA also found in xeric brushy uplands. population of T or E species. Inhabits grasslands, pastures with fence rows, ag. fields, sagebrush Loggerhead Shrike with scattered juniper and open woodlands. Requires elevated perches throughout for hunting. Pinyon Jay In OR, Pinyon-juniper woodland, sagebrush, and scrub oak habitats. Brewers Blackbird Open areas such as grasslands, shrublands, pastures, meadows. Nest in open landscapes: sagebrush, rocky scablands, forest Common Nighthawk clearings, old burns, unused gravel roads In OR prefers vigorous shrub stands with high shrub species diversity Green-tailed Towhee interspersed with trees.

Chapter 3 Page|3-73 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Bird Species Preferred Habitat Un-managed old growth Douglas-fir forests and riparian areas. Micro- Varied Thrush sites selected for ground foraging have little cover. Well -developed understory of moist-site shrubs, usually riparian Wilson’s Warbler areas. Nests in alders and other dense shrubs like willow thickets. Bald Eagle Associated with large bodies of water, forested areas near the ocean, (a) ESA delisted along rivers, and at estuaries, lakes and reservoirs. Occupy habitats with low tree densities and topographic relief in Ferruginous Hawk sagebrush plains of the high desert and bunchgrass prairies in the Blue Mtns. Inhabits shrub-steppe, grassland, juniper and open ponderosa pine Golden Eagle and mixed conifer/deciduous habitats preferring areas with open shrub component for foraging. Mid to high elevation fir forests with open canopy. Found more in Evening grosbeak thinned stands of Douglas fir. Feeds on conifer seeds and catkins of deciduous trees. Associated with ponderosa pine forests and mixed conifer stands with Flammulated Owl a mean 67% canopy closure, open understory with dense patches of saplings or shrubs. Nests on limbs of Douglas-fir and ponderosa pine. Feeds on conifer Pine Siskin seeds and catkins of alders. Open conifer forests (< 40 % canopy cover) and edge habitats where Olive-sided Flycatcher standing snags and scattered tall trees remain after a disturbance. Open, mature coniferous forests of lodgepole and ponderosa pine, Cassin’s Finch aspen, alpine fir, grand fir and juniper steppe woodlands * BCR 10 (Northern Rockies, U.S. portion only) (a) ESA delisted, (b) MBTA protection uncertain or lacking

Aquatics and Water Quality The following is a summary of the Fisheries Biological Evaluation report for Crow. The entire report is incorporated by reference and can be found in the project file, located at the Emigrant Creek Ranger District, Malheur National Forest, Hines, Oregon. The biological evaluation contains an analysis of existing and desired aquatic habitat conditions for the Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction (Crow) Project area and an analysis of effects from proposed activities on aquatic threatened, endangered, and Region 6 sensitive species, Ochoco National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Ochoco Forest Plan; USDA Forest Service 1989) aquatic management indicator species (MIS), and aquatic habitat.

INFISH Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas The Inland Native Fish Strategy Environmental Assessment and Decision Notice.” (USDA Forest Service 1995; herein referred to as INFISH); amended the Forest Plan by establishing riparian habitat conservation areas (RHCAs), establishing numeric riparian management objectives (RMOs), and establishing standards and guidelines for managing activities in RHCAs. Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCAs) receive primary emphasis for riparian-dependent resources, and management activities are subject to specific standards and guidelines. Refer to the Fisheries Biological Evaluation report for further definitions of RHCAs.

Page | 3-74 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Primary Habitat Elements Important aquatic habitat elements as defined by INFISH include: (1) pool frequency, (2) water temperature and stream shading, (3) width-to-depth ratio, (4) bank stability, and (5) large woody debris. These habitat elements are important in maintaining aquatic habitat function and health and are linked to physical and biological processes within the watershed. Following is a summary of primary habitat elements, for more information refer to the Crow Fisheries Biological Evaluation.

Pool Frequency Pool frequency is a gauge of aquatic habitat diversity, and an indicator of the degree to which streams are capable of supporting a varied and complex community of fish species. Stream surveys indicate that of the 21 stream reaches we have data for, pool frequency objectives are not met in any of the surveyed stream reaches. Pool spacing is higher for reaches compared with potential channel types in the project area, and there is an overall deficiency in quality pools (greater than 1 meter deep). This indicates a loss of pool habitat and general hydrological function as a result of past management activities, especially riparian logging and road building.

Water Temperature and Stream Shading Water temperature influences the metabolism, behavior, and health of fish and other aquatic organisms. Water temperature monitoring data is available for six creeks in the analysis area: Bear Canyon, Emigrant, Crowsfoot, Burnt Cabin, Latigo, and Whiskey creeks. Temperatures were recorded in 2018 and 2019. Temperature loggers were deployed in early June and collected early October.

The Ochoco Forest Plan standards for water temperature is less than 68 degrees Fahrenheit (°F). The State of Oregon standard for water temperatures is a 7-day average maximum of 20 degrees Celsius (°C) or 68°F within redband trout habitat. The INFISH RMO is for maximum water temperatures to be below 59°F within adult holding habitat and below 48°F within spawning and rearing habitats.

Mean maximum water temperatures are above the suitable range for redband trout in all the stream reaches that have monitoring data for except for Burnt Cabin Creek. Emigrant Creek, Crowsfoot Creek, Latigo Creek, and Whiskey Creek meet State of Oregon and Amendment 29 standards but do not meet INFISH RMOs.

Riparian stream shading is critical in regulating water temperature extremes and providing instream cover against predation. Stream surveys indicate that shade standards/canopy cover are being met in 2 of the 21 stream reaches that were surveyed.

Width-to-Depth Ratio INFISH 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 being met in half (10 out of 20) stream reaches we have data for.

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

Chapter 3 Page|3-75 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

indicate that bank stability objectives are being met in 17 out of the 21 stream reaches that were surveyed.

Large Woody Debris Riparian forests, especially individual trees that are within one-half to three-quarters 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. Large woody debris and coarse woody debris play an important role in forested stream reaches and for maintaining beaver-created meadows (Burchsted et al. 2010) by dissipating stream energy, trapping sediment, trapping riparian hardwood and hydric plant seeds, and providing suitable microclimates for seed germination (Osei et al. 2015). Woody debris provides stream grade stabilization, initiates streambed aggradation and channel braiding, and forms pools (Polvi and Wohl 2013, Cluer and Thorne 2014) – all of which increase habitat complexity.

The most recent data for large and course woody debris are derived from Forest Service Region 6 stream surveys which require at least part of the wood to be within bankfull for the piece of wood to be counted during the stream surveys (USDA Forest Service 2015c). Stream surveys indicate that large wood objectives are being met in 5 of the 21 stream reaches that were surveyed.

Aquatic Threatened, Endangered, Sensitive and Management Indicator Species Forest Service Manual 2672.4 requires the Forest Service to review all its planned, funded, executed or permitted programs and activities for possible effects on proposed, endangered, threatened or sensitive species.

No threatened or endangered aquatic species are known to inhabit the project area. Additionally there are no designated or proposed critical habitats for Threatened or Endangered species in the project area or watersheds in the project area.

Sensitive Aquatic Species A sensitive species is an animal or plant species identified by the Regional Forester for which species viability is a concern either 1) because of current or predicted downward trend in population numbers or density, or 2) because of current or predicted downward trends in habitat capability that would reduce a species’ existing distribution (R6 Sensitive). Sensitive species that occur within the project area include redband trout, and Columbia spotted frogs.

Management Indicator Species (MIS) Management Indicator Species (MIS) are species of vertebrates and invertebrates whose population changes are believed to best indicate the effects of land management activities. Through the MIS concept, the total number of species found within a project area is reduced to a subset of species that collectively represent habitats, species and associated management concerns. The MIS are used to assess the maintenance of populations (the ability of a population to sustain itself naturally) and biological diversity (which includes genetic diversity, species diversity, and habitat diversity), and to assess effects on species in public demand. The Ochoco Forest Plan identifies the following aquatic species as MIS for healthy stream/riparian habitats: redband/rainbow trout, steelhead, and brook trout (USDA Forest Service 1989).

Page | 3-76 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Aquatic Species with Special Management Status Relative to Analysis Area Interior redband trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss gairdneri) (Region 6 sensitive, MIS) is documented to occur in all perennial creeks within the project area. The Columbia spotted frog (Rana luteiventris) (Region 6 sensitive) is considered present in all subwatersheds of the Malheur National Forest (including the Snow Mountain portion of the Ochoco National Forest) and is known to occur within the project area.

The following species have not been found within the project area nor do they have suitable habitat and will not be discussed further in this environmental assessment. For more information on these species refer to the Aquatic Biological Evaluation in the project files.

• Brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) (MIS) • Middle Columbia River steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) (threatened, MIS) • Columbia River bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) (threatened) • Pacific lamprey (Entosphenus tridentatus) (Region 6 sensitive) • Westslope cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii lewisi) (Region 6 sensitive). • Western ridged mussel (Gonidea [G] angulata) (Region 6 sensitive) • Shortface lanx (Fisherola nuttalli) (Region 6 sensitive) • Harney Basin duskysnail (Colligyrus [C] depressus) (Region 6 sensitive)

Water Quality Water produced within the project area is generally of moderate to high quality but some areas show evidence of fine sediment accumulation and increasing average temperatures from past and ongoing management activities. Other water quality concerns that have been observed include nutrient and bacteria sources from livestock, wildlife, and recreation uses. Impacts generally occur during times of concentrated use at concentrated use areas.

As of 2017, ODEQ has not completed analysis of Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) and/or Water Quality Implementation Plans for the Oregon Closed Basins, including the Silver watershed. TMDLs are needed to initiate corrective measures.

The Ochoco National Forest is obligated to fulfill the Agency’s Clean Water Act responsibilities and provide assurance that management activities in 303(d)‐listed water bodies would contribute to the maintenance of good water quality or restoration of poor water quality. Bear Canyon Creek is on the 303d list for biological criteria. No streams are currently listed on the 303d list in Crow for temperature.

Oregon DEQ recognizes that even with effective management, some sites will pose short term challenges for passive restoration. These challenges may include locations with a severely down cut channel or a water table that is no longer near the plant root zone. In these instances, the department will rely primarily on riparian area management and implementation plans and actions. Furthermore, if improving trends are compromised by natural disturbance factors such as flooding, ice jam scouring, and wildfires, DEQ still considers Land Management Agencies to be in compliance with the TMDL. Oregon DEQ also recognizes that restoration efforts have been underway in the Oregon Closed Basin for many years. It is also widely acknowledged that much more work is needed, and that success depends on a united proactive approach that involves all stakeholders in the basin.

Chapter 3 Page|3-77 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Effects to Aquatics and Water Quality Environmental changes resulting from these actions would be consistent with the Clean Water Act, INFISH and Forest standards. Minimal watershed and aquatic impacts from harvesting activities are likely to occur due to the implementation of design features, BMPs, INFISH RHCA stream buffers and monitoring strategies associated with these project activities. Negligible direct, indirect, and cumulative effects on water quality (sediment and temperature) and quantity (magnitude, timing, and duration) that could affect aquatic species are anticipated, if this project is implemented. Activities associated with the action would have no measurable negative effects to aquatic habitat on the district.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) Under alternative 1, no management activities would occur in the project area. There would be no impact/no effect to redband trout and Columbia spotted frog. Although there would be no direct or indirect effects from the no action alternative (and thus no cumulative effects either), some environmental outcomes would still occur as a result of taking no action. The hazard of a stand- replacement wildfire would be higher and could result 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, water temperatures, and sediment.

Direct and Indirect Effects of the Action Alternatives For the purposes of this analysis, the component parts of the action alternatives are organized into the following project elements shown below: • Timber felling (includes commercial thinning, late and old structure treatments, connectivity corridor treatments, lodgepole pine thinning, small diameter thinning, juniper encroachment, conifer encroachment, plantation thinning) • Prescribed burning • Temporary roads, crossings, and landings • Road maintenance and use (includes maintenance, reconstruction, haul, water drafting, and opening and closing roads)

Descriptions regarding proximity of project elements to aquatic resources are stated in only the first of the primary habitat elements below (pool frequency) for brevity.

Pool Frequency

Timber Felling The timber felling project element includes commercial thinning, late and old structure treatments, connectivity corridor treatments, lodgepole pine thinning, small diameter thinning, juniper encroachment, conifer encroachment, and plantation thinning. Where trees targeted for removal have commercial value, ground based equipment would be used based on terrain and access constraints. Cut trees would be transported to landing zones via ground-based equipment and skyline yarding would not occur. Skid trails would be determined before logging and are subject to approval by the sale administrator. Under both action alternatives, the areas proposed for commercial harvest would be harvested via tractor systems.

Page | 3-78 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

All timber felling activities would occur outside of RHCAs under both action alternatives, therefore no meaningfully measurable effects to pool frequency are expected. The remaining analysis focuses on actions that would occur within RHCAs.

Prescribed Burning Both mechanically treated and untreated stands would be exposed to prescribed burning as fire is reintroduced into the project area. Treated stands would see a combination of burning piled material and underburning. Stands not being mechanically treated would be managed primarily with the use of prescribed burning. Prescribed burning would also be used to stimulate the growth of aspen and other fire-adapted vegetation.

As conditions and stand characteristics allow, unplanned ignitions within the project area would be used to meet the objectives of prescribed burning. Prescribed burning could occur within RHCAs to help restore plant species composition and structure that would occur under natural fire regimes. No firelines would be constructed within RHCAs or draw bottoms. Fire would be allowed to back in to RHCAs from adjacent upslope areas. Most fuels treatment activities would have beneficial effects to aquatic resources by reducing surface fuels, thinning trees, stimulating growth of aspen and other hardwoods, and increasing the canopy base height.

Project design criteria in burn plans specify that berms shall be pulled on all firelines and specify the frequency of waterbars on firelines based on slope. Using these techniques, mortality of understory trees would occur in burned patches, but few overstory trees would be killed. Methods would be implemented as described in the Fire and Fuels section to protect large trees, prevent fire intensities that would be high enough to consume trees or downed wood large enough to function as large woody debris in stream channels, and retain a high percentage of the shrub and tree cover directly shading streams.

Burning activities could result in delivery of fine sediment to stream channels but would not be sufficient to result in a meaningfully measurable reduction of pool habitat. The reduction in stocking densities following burning activities would also increase the vigor of larger trees in the overstory for future large woody debris to create pools; this effect would be positive, but not meaningfully measurable.

Temporary Roads, Crossings, and Landings Under both action alternatives, less than 2 miles of temporary road construction would occur within 50 feet of a CAT 1-4 stream to access some timber harvest units.

There are approximately 24 potential temporary road segments that are within RHCAs (category 1, 2, and 4 RHCAs). The number of skid trail crossings are unknown at this time, but effects will be mitigated with project design criteria.

Temporary roads that cross streams and potential crossings of streams, including fords and installation of culverts, shall be completed, utilized, and rehabilitated following site-specific methods prescribed by a hydrologist or fisheries biologist. Crossings (skid trail or road) and temporary road construction in RHCAs would be considered on a site-specific basis, approved by a hydrologist or fish biologist, and would be subject to some of the following measures to protect stream channels and banks and minimize channelization of sediment/water at the skid trail approaches to those streams. These measures are designed to reduce impacts but are not expected to be 100 percent effective in preventing sediment yield, or channel bank damage.

Chapter 3 Page|3-79 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

• Bridges (corduroy, temporary), culverts, slash placement, and rocking • Restrictions on season of use • Restrictions on slope percentages

Temporary roads and crossings would be rehabilitated after use. Rehabilitation would eliminate future use of the road with the objective of restoring hydrological function. Temporary roads would be restored by some combination of the following to ensure 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. • Re-contouring 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 area to achieve a minimum of 35 percent ground cover. • Placing slash, boulders, and logs on the roadbed or crossing. • Disguising all visible entrances with pieces of cull logs, tops of cut trees, and/or rocks, etc. to prevent vehicle use.

Temporary roads could have a discountable effect to aquatic resources due to one or more of the following reasons: (1) they would be located outside of RHCAs; (2) they would be in a category 1 RHCAs, but more than 150 feet from stream channels; (3) they would cross a category 4 RHCA over 0.3 miles upstream of aquatic species habitat; (4) they would be on existing roadbeds requiring minimal disturbance to bring them to a useable state; or (5) implementation of project design criteria would minimize impacts of temporary roads on pool frequency.

Temporary roads and crossings that may impact aquatic species habitat include the following:

• One segment of temporary road that crosses a category 4 RHCA tributary to Burnt Cabin Creek approximately 0.17 miles upstream of aquatic species habitat. • One segment of temporary road that crosses a category 4 RHCA tributary to Burnt Cabin Creek approximately 0.28 miles upstream of aquatic species habitat. • One segment of temporary road that crosses a category 4 RHCA tributary to Whiskey Creek approximately 0.17 miles upstream of aquatic species habitat. • One segment of temporary road that crosses a category 1 RHCA (Whiskey Creek) • Two separate segments of temporary road that crosses a category 1 RHCA (Emigrant Creek) • One segment of temporary road that parallels a category 1 RHCA (Emigrant Creek) for approximately 1 mile • One segment of temporary road that parallels a CAT4 RHCA tributary to Emigrant Creek approximately 0.1 miles upstream of aquatic species habitat. • One segment of temporary road that parallels a CAT4 RHCA tributary to Bear Canyon Creek approximately 0.28 miles upstream of aquatic species habitat. • One segment of temporary road that parallels a category 1 RHCA (Bear Canyon Creek) • One segment of temporary road that parallels a CAT4 RHCA tributary to Bear Canyon Creek approximately 0.3 miles upstream of aquatic species habitat. • Multiple unknown potential crossings that intersect RHCAs.

Page | 3-80 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

A study done on the Malheur National Forest by Robert McNeil, Soil Scientist, in 1999 found that under normal conditions, sediment was found no farther than 32 feet from road disturbance. The study concluded that buffer widths of 50 feet or less are sufficient to protect streams from sediment from existing roads, except near scabs. “Not normal conditions” in the study were 1) scabs (non-forested areas with shallow soils limited ground cover), or 2) where runoff hit an abandoned road (McNeil 1999).

With implementation of project design criteria, construction of these temporary roads and utilization of these crossings would not result in a meaningfully measurable reduction in pool frequency.

No new landings are proposed within RHCAs under both action alternatives. Previously used landing zones within RHCAs would be avoided but may be considered on a case-by-case basis after site specific approval by a fisheries biologist or hydrologist. Limiting these activities to areas outside of RHCAs would prevent adverse impacts to existing and future pool habitat.

Road Maintenance and Use The Road Maintenance and Use project element includes maintenance, reconstruction, opening and closing roads, hazard tree removal, and brushing for sight distance. Approximately 16 miles of road maintenance and use under both action alternatives would occur for haul on open and closed native surface roads within 50 ft or less of a CAT 1-4 stream.

Approximately 17 miles of haul routes and road maintenance would occur in category 1, 2, and 4 RHCAs. Road maintenance would occur on all haul routes. Maintenance of the road would also help prevent road failure and sediment entry from road failure. With implementation of project design criteria, delivery of fine sediment resulting from road maintenance and use would be minimized but could still result in a meaningfully measurable reduction in pool frequency.

Water withdrawals for dust abatement during haul activities would occur and would be in accordance with project design criteria. Use of these project design criteria would ensure that water withdrawals do not result in a reduction in pool habitat.

Existing decommissioned roads would not be reconstructed within category 1, 2, or 4 RHCAs.

Some haul routes may use existing closed roads and re-close them after haul. With implementation of project design criteria, delivery of fine sediment resulting from use and re- closure of closed roads would be minimized but can still result in a meaningfully measurable reduction in pool frequency.

Use of closed roads would be limited to infrequent management and other permitted activities. Closures may be by earth berm, sign, gate, or no physical closure. Maintenance would be performed for future management. Road closure actions include construction of drainage structures that would be self-maintaining after closure. Closing roads would help decrease sediment contribution from the road by improving drainage of the road.

Some road maintenance and use would have a discountable effect to aquatic resources due to one or more of the following reasons: (1) they would be located outside of RHCAs; (2) they would be in a category 1 RHCAs, but more than 150 feet from stream channels; (3) they would cross a category 4 RHCA over 0.3 miles upstream of aquatic species habitat; (4) they would be on existing roadbeds requiring minimal disturbance to bring them to a useable state; or (5) implementation of project design criteria would minimize impacts of road use on pool frequency.

Chapter 3 Page|3-81 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Since these roads would remain part of the Forest road system, the benefits of the closures would likely not be permanent. However, closure of these road segments meanwhile would likely reduce delivery of fine sediment to the streams. Because of the low risk of sedimentation from road closures and reduction in vehicle travel resulting in vegetation covering the roadbed, effects to pool frequency from road closure actions are expected to be positive, but not meaningfully measurable.

Water Temperature and Stream Shading

Timber Felling All timber felling activities would occur outside of RHCAs under both action alternatives, therefore no meaningfully measurable effects to water temperature and stream shading are expected. The remaining analysis focuses on actions that would occur within RHCAs.

Prescribed Burning The majority of fuels treatment activities would occur outside of RHCAs and would have beneficial effects to aquatic resources by reducing surface fuels, thinning trees, stimulating growth of aspen and other hardwoods, and increasing the canopy base height. Best management practices for low intensity burning include retention of at least 90 percent of stream shade. The prescribed burning would occur when moisture and climate conditions would minimize the potential for a high-intensity burn. With a low-intensity burn, very little stream vegetation providing shade is expected to be consumed under the moister conditions encountered in riparian areas associated with perennial streams. In a recent study, Beche et al. (2005) found that a fall prescribed fire within the riparian zone of a mixed-conifer forest in El Dorado County, California was patchy in terms of intensity, consumption, and severity. Additionally, they found that although 49.4 percent of all tagged trees (greater than 11.5 centimeters or 4.5 inches) and snags were scorched by the prescribed fire, only 4.4 percent of all tagged trees were dead 1 year after the prescribed fire. In general, the trees killed by the prescribed fire were small and located near areas of high litter accumulation (Beche et al. 2005). The amount of shade lost during low- intensity burns is insignificant and is expected to not be enough to affect stream temperature.

Temporary Roads, Crossings, and Landings Some temporary roads and crossings could have a discountable effect to aquatic resources (see discussion under Pool Frequency section). Sites requiring the removal of shade-providing trees for temporary road construction and crossings are limited in size and frequency, and the majority of shade-providing trees removed adjacent to streams occur along intermittent streams, reducing the likelihood that removal of these trees would result in a change in water temperature because intermittent streams go dry before water temperatures in occupied threatened, endangered, sensitive, and MIS habitat downstream become limiting to fish. Some temporary road construction in RHCAs could occur on existing roadbeds requiring minimal removal of trees that could shade streams. The removal of shade associated with construction of temporary roads would have a negative effect to stream shading and water temperature that would not be meaningfully measurable.

No new landings are proposed within RHCAs under both action alternatives. Previously used landing zones within RHCAs would be avoided but may be considered on a case-by-case basis. Limiting these activities to areas outside of RHCAs would prevent adverse impacts to existing and water temperature and stream shading.

Page | 3-82 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Road Maintenance and Use Road maintenance, reconstruction, haul, water drafting, and opening and closing roads would have a neutral effect to stream shading and water temperatures with adherence to project design criteria. As closed roads are deemed needed for future management and are accessed infrequently, trees would not likely grow of a sufficient size within the roadbed to provide shade. Water withdrawals for dust abatement during haul activities would occur. Water drafting can occur only as long as supply is adequate to provide for both fish and withdrawal. Water withdrawals would be in accordance with project design criteria, the use of which would ensure that water withdrawals do not result in a measurable increase in water temperatures.

Width-to-Depth Ratio and Streambank Stability These indicators are grouped since they are affected similarly by project elements.

Timber Felling All timber felling activities would occur outside of RHCAs under both action alternatives, therefore no meaningfully measurable effects to width-to-depth ratio and streambank stability are expected. The remaining analysis focuses on actions that would occur within RHCAs.

Prescribed Burning A minor short-term decrease in streambank stability would occur as a result of prescribed burning activities in RHCAs until vegetation recovers. However, it is unlikely that burned patches along streambanks would be of sufficient sizes or quantities to result in meaningfully measurable decreases in bank stability. These impacts would not be of a scale that would result in destabilization of stream channels, thus a neutral effect to width-to-depth ratios from fuels treatments is anticipated. Over the long-term, as fire invigorates riparian shrub growth, bank stability would increase. No effects to bank stability or width-to-depth ratios are expected from pile burning and biomass removal, due to proximity of these activities away from stream channels.

Temporary Roads, Crossings, and Landings Construction of approximately 2 miles of temporary roads within 50 feet or less of a CAT 1 – 4 are proposed (see discussion under the Pool Frequency section). This work along with project design criteria would minimize damage to streambanks or sediment delivery, but some measurable effects to bank stability or width-to-depth ratios could still occur. Installation of temporary culverts on a category 4 RHCAs tributary to category 1 RHCAs could cause highly localized effects to bank stability and width-to-depth ratios that could be negative and meaningfully measurable.

No new landings are proposed within RHCAs under both action alternatives. Previously used landing zones within RHCAs would be avoided but may be considered on a case-by-case basis. Limiting these activities to areas outside of RHCAs would prevent adverse impacts to existing width-to-depth ratios and streambank stability.

Road Maintenance and Use The possible minor amounts of sediment entering channels from road maintenance activities would be negative, but not meaningfully measurable because the amounts will not affect floodplain connectivity, streambank stability, or width-to-depth ratios at the site or reach scale.

Chapter 3 Page|3-83 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Large Woody Debris

Timber Felling All timber felling activities would occur outside of RHCAs under both action alternatives, therefore no meaningfully measurable effects to large woody debris are expected. The remaining analysis focuses on actions that would occur within RHCAs.

Prescribed Burning The majority of fuels treatment activities would occur outside of RHCAs. Where prescribed burning does occur within RHCAs, the majority would be low-intensity fires, using techniques that would achieve mortality of understory trees in burned patches but kill few overstory trees. Methods would be implemented as described in the fuels section to protect large trees. Fire intensities would not be high enough to consume trees or downed wood large enough to function as large woody debris in stream channels. The reduction in stocking densities following burning activities would increase the vigor of larger trees in the overstory. Consumption of coarse woody debris near stream channels greater than 4 inches diameter at breast height would be minimized. Beche et al. (2005) found that prescribed fire did not change the amount or movement of large woody debris in their study reach relative to unburned streams. Short term effects are negative, but not meaningfully measurable. Accelerated growth of remaining conifers in response to thinning of overstocked stands would contribute to restoration of large woody debris recruitment. Long term effects to large woody debris would be positive, but not meaningfully measurable.

Temporary Roads and Landings Most temporary roads would have a discountable effect to fisheries resources (see discussion under Pool Frequency section). Sites requiring the removal of trees that could be recruited as large woody debris for temporary road construction are limited in size and frequency. Conifers would be felled into streams where feasible as described above. In most cases, trees that can only safely be felled across the road often have a lean away from the stream channel and would be less likely to fall into stream channels where they could function as large woody debris. Further, only a small percentage of conifers removed would be close enough to the channel to provide large woody debris. Temporary road construction would have a negative effect on large woody debris that would not be meaningfully measurable.

No new landings are proposed within RHCAs under both action alternatives. Previously used landing zones within RHCAs would be avoided but may be considered on a case-by-case basis. Limiting these activities to areas outside of RHCAs would prevent adverse impacts to existing and future large woody debris.

Road Maintenance and Use Activities would not likely result in a reduction of large woody debris to category 1, 2, or 4 RHCA stream channels because in most cases, trees that can only safely be felled across the road often have a lean away from the stream channel and would be less likely to fall into stream channels where they could function as large woody debris. Where conifers are felled into the stream, they would immediately function as large woody debris. The effects of this action would not be meaningfully measurable.

Page | 3-84 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Table 20. Action Alternatives summary of project element effects of the Crow Project to the primary habitat elements Primary habitat Timber Prescribed Temporary roads Road maintenance elements felling burning and landings and use

Pool frequency Neutral NNMM1 NMM3 NMM (short term)

Pool frequency Neutral PNMM2 N/A N/A (long term) Water temperature Neutral NNMM NNMM NNMM and stream shading (short term) Water temperature Neutral PNMM N/A N/A and stream shading (long term) Large woody debris Neutral NNMM NNMM NNMM (short term)

Large woody debris Neutral PNMM N/A N/A (long term) Width-to-depth Neutral Neutral NMM NMM ratio Bank stability Neutral PNMM NMM NMM

1 NNMM = Negative, not meaningfully measured 2 PNMM = Positive, not meaningfully measured 3 NMM = Negative, meaningfully measured 4 PMM = Positive, meaningfully measured

Aquatic Species Crow contains redband trout spawning, rearing, and migration habitat. At certain times and under various conditions, it is possible for components of project elements to directly affect this species. The project activity that may directly affect this species is water drafting. Direct effects to redband trout from the remaining project elements are not expected. Project design criteria for water drafting include those specified in the Aquatic Restoration Biological Opinion.

Water withdrawals for dust abatement during haul activities would occur. Proposed water drafting sites are minimum of 0.3 miles upstream of aquatic species habitat. 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, and early August) when road dust is an issue; disturbance of spawning fish is unlikely since fish in the project area do not spawn at this time. Water drafting could potentially decrease stream flow and thus the amount of water available for fish and mussels. 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. National Marine Fisheries Service 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 would be done in a manner to minimize overflowing and discharge of wash into stream. The maximum withdrawal

Chapter 3 Page|3-85 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

from one site in an 8-hour period would be 18,000 gallons of water. Project design criteria include the National Marine Fisheries Service screening criteria and water drafting guidelines. These guidelines would avoid or minimize the potential harm to fish and mussels.

Crow 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 project design criteria, the short-term nature of this risk, the timing of ground disturbing 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.

Aquatic and Riparian Habitat Use of the five primary habitat elements to determine effects to threatened, endangered, and sensitive 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 threatened, endangered, and sensitive 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 effects determination.

The scientific literature reports that suspended sediment and turbidity influences on fish range from beneficial to detrimental. Elevated total suspended solids have been reported to enhance cover conditions, reduce piscivorous fish and bird predation rates, and improve survival, but elevated total suspended solids 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 exposure can cause physiological stress response that can increase maintenance energy and reduce feeding and growth. Mussels are affected in a similar fashion.

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

When heavy equipment is operating in the riparian areas or stream, there is also the potential for fuel or other contaminant spills. Operation of bulldozers, excavators, and other equipment requires the use of fuel and lubricants which, if spilled into the channel of a water body or into the adjacent riparian zone, can injure or kill aquatic organisms. Petroleum-based contaminants (such as fuel, oil, and some hydraulic fluids) contain polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, which can be acutely toxic to salmonids at high levels of exposure and can cause acute and chronic sub-lethal effects on aquatic organisms.

Refueling and servicing equipment outside the riparian area reduces the chances of spilling toxic fuels and lubricants. Development and implementation of a pollution and erosion control plan would limit adverse effects of a toxic material spill by ensuring that spill response materials are on site during all construction activities. Ensuring that all heavy equipment that would operate near creeks are cleaned and free of leaks would also reduce the introduction of contaminants into

Page | 3-86 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

the aquatic environment. Limiting the activities to instream work periods would also greatly reduce the chance of affecting adult fish, as these periods are designated to avoid times when adult salmonids are present.

Cumulative Effects of the Action Alternatives Past and ongoing action effects are mostly due to roads (including former logging railroads), past grazing, and past riparian harvest. Lesser effects may be due to current grazing, irrigation withdrawals (temperature), and riparian firewood cutting (large woody debris). Ongoing grazing activities could potentially contribute sediment to streams. Thus, the cumulative effect of both action alternatives would be a relatively small increase in total sediment production. The effect of the remaining four project elements on the remaining five primary habitat elements was either negative and not meaningfully measurable or neutral. It is unlikely that these negative and not meaningfully measurable effects would result in measurable adverse cumulative effects when considered with range management activities. With full implementation of Malheur 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.

The effects of use and maintenance of roads which are not decommissioned would remain about the same as at present. Measurable improvements in stream shading are expected to occur in the long term (beyond 10 years) once the synergistic benefits of the action alternatives and cumulative effects of improvements in passive riparian management are realized.

Effect Determinations Effect determinations for threatened, endangered, sensitive, and MIS within the project area are presented below and summarized in Table 22. Determinations are made depending on Federal listing status and determinations are for threatened and endangered species, Region 6 sensitive species, and designed critical habitat.

Redband Trout Determinations: • Interior redband trout sensitive species determination (sensitive): may impact individuals, but not likely to result in a loss of viability in the planning area, nor contribute to a trend toward federal listing • Redband trout MIS determination: continued viability at the Forest scale.

Because this project impacts less than approximately 2.6 percent of suitable redband trout habitat in relation to the distribution throughout the Malheur National Forest managed land, 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 is not likely to cause a trend towards federal listing or loss of species viability to the population or species at the Forest scale.

Columbia Spotted Frog Determination:

Chapter 3 Page|3-87 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

• Columbia spotted frog sensitive species determination (sensitive): may impact individuals, but not likely to result in a loss of viability in the planning area, nor contribute to a trend toward federal listing

Because this project impacts a small percentage of suitable spotted frog habitat (approximately 2.6 percent) 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 alternatives may impact individuals or habitat but is not likely to cause a trend towards federal listing or loss of species viability.

Table 21. Aquatic Species with Effects Determinations Aquatic species Status1 Alternative 1 (no Alternatives 2 action)2 and 33 Interior redband trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss gairdneri) S, MIS NI MII Columbia spotted frog (Rana luteiventris) S NI MII 1 Status: S = sensitive, MIS = management indicator species 2 Alternative 1 (no action) effects: NI = no impact 3 Alternatives 2 and 3 effects: MII= may impact individuals, but not likely to result in a loss of viability in the planning area, nor contribute to a trend toward federal listing Soils The following is a summary of the Soils Specialist report for Crow. The entire report is incorporated by reference and can be found in the project file, located at the Emigrant Creek Ranger District, Malheur National Forest, Hines, Oregon. Soil survey transects were conducted in 2019 and 2020 to determine the percentage of detrimental soil impact within specific stands in Crow. The Silver fire and Bear Canyon fire, both from 2007, have left visible burn marks on the landscape but have had 12 to 13 years to rehabilitate before these surveys. The soil survey results for all stand units are below the 20% threshold in accordance with the Forest plan.

Detrimental Disturbance Measured transects show disturbance from past management activities, usually from skid trails, roads, or landings. Of the impacts from previous activities that were observed, soil productivity was no longer detrimentally affected by past disturbances. Some disturbance percentages were high, but the majority of the proposed units are within Forest Plan standards for surface disturbance levels. Harvest units 120, 156, 171, 186, 1029, and 1170 currently have high detrimental disturbance (13-16%) and may reach or potentially exceed disturbance levels when the expected impacts to soil from heavy equipment are included (additional 2-6%). These units would be monitored using the Forest Soil Disturbance Monitoring Protocol during and after treatment to evaluate soil disturbance and mitigate detrimental soil impact exceedance where possible.

Much of past detrimental soil disturbance has been ameliorated by time. Overall, the soil conditions in Crow are within Forest Plan standards for allowable detrimental disturbance. Many areas surveyed showed minimal signs at all of detrimental soil conditions despite past activities. Based on this information, the soil productivity element receives a Functioning-At-Risk rating for the entire project area.

Page | 3-88 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Harvest Equivalent Area The Equivalent Harvest Area (EHA) method is part of the Ochoco Forest plan (1989) to predict if streams would be hydrologically capable of handling changes in flow from vegetation management activities. Crow has been designated a moderately sensitive watershed with an EHA threshold of 30%. Effects to Soils Based on topography, drainage patterns and the effects analysis, the analysis area includes three subwatersheds with the following streams and their tributaries: Bear Canyon Creek, Emigrant Creek, Crowsfoot Creek, Burnt Cabin Creek, Latigo Creek, Whisky Creek and Spring Canyon Creek. Measurable effects from proposed activities are unlikely to extend downstream of this area. Table 22 below shows a general overall summary of effects to soils.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) The no action alternative would have no direct or indirect and therefore no cumulative effects to soils because no activities would occur.

Direct and Indirect Effects of Action Alternatives Thinning and harvest conducted with machinery can compact soils, resulting in reduced infiltration and decreased hydraulic conductivity (Cullen et al, 1991). Road systems, skid trails, and landings can accelerate hillslope runoff by concentrating flow and altering the natural drainage system. Substantial increases in sediment yields are not expected with the action alternatives due to best management practices, project design criteria, and riparian protection measures. By following BMPs, design criteria and protective measures (including recommendations for using existing roads, landings, and skid trails) ground disturbance levels would be maintained below Forest Plan standards. Continued monitoring during and after vegetation treatments would occur for units 120, 156, 171, 186, 1029, and 1170, where existing detrimental disturbance is at its highest allowable extent.

Table 22. Summary of Effects to Soils

Alternative 1 – Alternative 2 – Proposed Alternative 3 No Action Action

Soil Neutral Neutral Neutral Condition: No additional impacts Due to design criteria and Due to design criteria and Detrimental BMPs – Ochoco Forest Plan BMPs – Ochoco Forest Plan Soil Standards would be met. Standards would be met. Disturbance Units 120, 156, 171, 186, Units 120, 156, 171, 186, 1029, and 1170 will continue 1029, and 1170 will continue to be monitored during and to be monitored during and after vegetation treatment. after vegetation treatment

For example, it is estimated that skid trails for action alternatives operations would occupy less than 11% of each unit. The amount of compaction depends much more on soil moisture than on soil type. Skidding would increase detrimental impacts by 4.5%, because skid trails usually are about 50% to 80% compacted, and because existing skid trails would be re-used where they were appropriately located. If the unit happens to be harvested over deep snow or on deeply frozen

Chapter 3 Page|3-89 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

soil, compaction would be about 0.5%. Use of feller-bunchers on dry soil would increase detrimental impacts by 1.5% (McNeil, 1996), to a total of 6%. Based on this information, the estimated detrimental soil impacts within identified units would range from 2-6%, depending on timing of logging activities. Harvest of slopes greater than 35% would result in little increase in detrimental impacts, perhaps 2% of the area, because non-ground-based logging systems would be used.

Road use, maintenance, closure, and culvert replacement would have no effect on soil. Temporary road construction would heavily impact soil in the small area of soil in the road prisms, but this impact may be reduced when the temporary roads are decommissioned. For road decommissioning (both temporary and system roads), if subsoiling is used, subsoiling would partially recover past detrimental impacts. Other methods of decommissioning would permit some recovery over the coming decades, for the small area of soil in the road prisms.

Landscape level prescribed burning is designed to help improve watershed function and ecology within the project area. In the foreseeable future, fire will promote the establishment of grasses and forbs by reducing conifer and juniper competition and making inorganic forms of nitrogen immediately available for plant uptake. Due to burn plan design, few adverse effects from prescribed burning are expected on uplands and riparian areas. The potential for sediment transport to stream channels may increase during the first year following a prescribed burn.

DeBano et al. (1998) states that low to moderate intensity fires have minimal effects on soil infiltration, citing sources that document infiltration rates as near normal in areas affected by low intensity fires. Prescribed burns from the action alternatives would generally be low to moderate intensity, resulting in little change to soil structure or infiltration capacity and minimal amounts of surface runoff. These types of fires only burn portions of the surface litter component resulting in minimal surface erosion. Any spring burns would occur after snowmelt and before plant growth begins. Regrowth will be effective in preventing soil erosion and downstream sedimentation. Fall burns would permit little or no regrowth prior to snowmelt, but observations of other fall burns within the general area in the same vegetation types indicate that surface erosion is minimal when fires are of low to moderate intensity. Due to varying conditions and fuel densities, the burns are expected to spread in a mosaic pattern, burning some areas and bypassing others. As a result, patches of unburned ground distributed across the landscape will act as sediment capture sites until the burned patches revegetate.

Equivalent Harvest Area Crow is 33,933 acres in total. Commercial harvest is planned for up to 21,024 acres and precommercial thinning for 7,148 acres. The formula and calculations for the EHA method are documented in the Soils Specialist Report. The largest impact is projected to be the 10-year commercial harvest with a value of 28%, which is under the 30% threshold for the project area watershed. The 40-year commercial harvest EHA value is projected to be 5%, and at 50 years the EHA calculation is less than 1%.

The EHA calculations for commercial harvest in Crow are all under 30% at 10, 40, and 50 years and therefore in compliance with the Forest Plan.

Pre-commercial thinning is a much lower impact to the landscape than commercial harvest. The EHA calculations were performed for PCT activities to ensure compliance with the Forest Plan. EHA calculations at 10, 20, and 30 years were 0.31%, 0.17%, and 0.02% respectively, all under the 30% threshold for Crow.

Page | 3-90 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Cumulative Effects of Action Alternatives Based on the information in this assessment and analysis of effects, adverse cumulative effects from the proposed activities are not expected during common runoff events. Because of regulations regarding RHCAs and associated BMPs, and project design criteria, insignificant sediment increases are expected from soil disturbances, and insignificant temperature increases are expected from proximal harvest. Best Management Practices (see Appendix A) are included to maximize resource protection, reduce soil impacts, and limit concentrated runoff, and should mitigate any expected on-site impacts. These effects are also not of a type or extent that would combine with ongoing human activities or foreseeable projects on the Forest and produce long- term, cumulative impacts. Furthermore, numerous activities having restoration components (aspen treatments, conifer encroachment, juniper reduction, RHCA treatment, and access and travel management activities) would be implemented as part of the action alternatives providing essential progress towards desired conditions.

Soil detrimental impacts from the proposed operations add to impacts of past and ongoing actions. Existing detrimental disturbance shows the detrimental impacts from all past and ongoing actions. To find the maximum cumulative impacts following project activities, 2-6% would be added to the detrimental disturbance (as described above). Continued monitoring during and after vegetation treatments would occur for units 120, 156, 171, 186, 1029, and 1170, where existing detrimental disturbance is at its highest allowable extent. These units would be monitored using the Forest Soil Disturbance Monitoring Protocol during and after treatment to evaluate soil disturbance and mitigate detrimental soil impact exceedance where possible. Therefore, maximum cumulative detrimental impacts are expected to meet Forest Plan standards in all units due to BMPs, design criteria and mitigation.

Livestock grazing, recreation, and firewood cutting would continue to impact a negligible amount of soil in harvest units, as recovery from past use balances impacts from future use. The negligible detrimental impacts from cross country travel would decrease even more with implementation of the Travel Management Project. It is unlikely that noxious weed treatment would detrimentally impact soil, because it would not use heavy equipment, and herbicides would become inactivated as described in the Noxious Weed EIS. Environmental Justice Each Federal agency is required to make environmental justice part of its mission (CEQ 1997, p. 1). The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the forest planning process are the primary ways the Forest Service incorporates environmental justice into its activities. 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 Forest Service defines environmental justice in accordance with USDA departmental regulations (USDA 1997). Environmental justice includes the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies (U.S. EPA 2013).

An environmental justice population is a group of people that meets the criterion for low-income or minority under Executive Order 12898 (Clinton 1994). An environmental justice population may be both low income and minority. Fair treatment means that environmental justice populations do not bear a greater burden of environmental harms and risks than the general population from Forest Service programs and policies. Meaningful involvement has four parts:

Chapter 3 Page|3-91 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

(1) potentially affected environmental justice populations have opportunities to participate in decision making processes affecting their environment or health; (2) the contributions of environmental justice populations may influence the agency’s decision; (3) the concerns of all participants are considered in the decision-making process; and (4) the decision makers seek out and facilitate the involvement of environmental justice populations (U.S. EPA 2010). Minority Populations

The USDA departmental regulations define minority as “a person who is a member of the following population groups: American Indian or Alaskan Native; Asian or Pacific Islander; Black, not of Hispanic origin; or Hispanic” (USDA 1997, p. 2). In its direction on environmental justice in NEPA, the CEQ defines a minority population 2 ways, however the Forest Service has recommended this definition: A minority population may be an identifiable group that has a meaningfully greater minority population than the adjacent geographic areas, or may also be a geographically dispersed/transient set of individuals such as migrant workers or Native Americans (CEQ 1997). For NEPA analysis, identifying meaningfully greater means making efforts to measure the study area population in relation to the general area population. A difference of more than 5 percent between the study area and the surrounding geographic area may indicate a minority population.

Minorities comprise 5.7% of Grant County and 9.4% of Harney County, compared to 13.3 percent in Oregon, and 23.7 percent in the United States (USDC Census Bureau 2019). Harney County’s minorities is comprised mainly (4.4%) of American Indians. Although the data suggests that neither Grant nor Harney Counties have a meaningfully greater minority population than the adjacent geographic areas, Harney County’s American Indian population may indicate a minority population because the Burns Paiute Reservation is a small-scale minority community located within a larger county that is predominantly non-minority. American Indians therefore may be vulnerable to disproportionate negative impacts of this project. Low-Income Populations

According to CEQ, a low-income population is a community or a group of individuals living in geographic proximity to one another, or a set of individuals (such as migrant workers or Native Americans), where either type of group experiences common conditions of environmental exposure or effect (CEQ 1997). USDA departmental regulations (USDA 1997, p.2) state that low- income populations in an affected area should be identified with the annual statistical poverty thresholds from the Census Bureau’s annual current population reports (Series P-60) on income and poverty. The U.S. Census Bureau (U.S. Census Bureau 2019) defines low-income populations by the percentage of people living below poverty in a given area, which is consistent with the CEQ’s environmental justice guidance.

Grant County has approximately 16.4% people living below the poverty line. Harney County has approximately 15.1% people living below the poverty line. The state of Oregon has approximately 12.6% people living below the poverty line (USDC Census Bureau 2019). The data suggests that neither county has a low-income population that may be vulnerable to disproportionate negative impacts of this project.

Page | 3-92 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Effects to Environmental Justice

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) The No Action alternative would have no positive impact on local economies. This alternative would support no federal contract work or timber harvesting-related employment. The No Action Alternative does little to maintain or improve the current economic conditions in Harney and Grant counties. Unemployment rates would remain high. Continued declines in Forest Service work force and budgets as well as a lack of related employment would have effects on the local economy.

Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects from Action Alternatives In this assessment, American Indians were identified with potential to be impacted by this project. There is no quantifiable information on how much use the area receives from these populations other than the information shared by the Burns Paiute Tribe. Because firewood gathering is an important heat source for households in Grant and Harney County and the action alternatives do not close or decommission any open roads, there would be no impact to firewood gathering. The action alternatives would also not affect continuation of traditional tribal practices. There are no changes to road densities therefore there would be no anticipated direct and indirect social effects to American Indians due to change of motorized access. Displacement due to implementation of timber harvest would not disproportionally affect tribal members. Additionally, the action alternatives would have a positive impact on employment opportunities and income. However, the distribution of economic impacts would depend on the location of the timber purchaser who is awarded the contracts, the availability of equipment and skills in the economic impact zone, and the location and availability of wood processing facilities and related infrastructure. Economics The following is a summary of the Economics Specialist report for Crow. The entire report is incorporated by reference and can be found in the project file, located at the Emigrant Creek Ranger District, Malheur National Forest, Hines, Oregon. Although individuals and communities over a wide geographic area use national forest resources, 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. Effects to Economics The social and economic effects of the proposed management alternative were assessed in terms of viability of harvestable timber, employment supported, and income provided.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) The no action alternative would have no direct or indirect and therefore no cumulative effects to economics because no activities would occur.

Chapter 3 Page|3-93 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Direct and Indirect Effects from the Action Alternatives

Viability of Harvest

TEA_ECON program is an economic analysis tool that allows the user to perform timber sale accounting at the project 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. The TEA_ECON program was run for harvest viability on units that have a commercial component.

As shown in Table 23, alternative 2 would produce revenue, estimated at $137,266, and alternative 3 would produce revenue estimated at $114,390. The costs would be $3,266,927 for alternative 2 and $2,722,439 for alternative 3. This would produce an estimated present net value of $(3,129,661) for alternative 2, and $(2,608,049) for alternative 3 for the commercial component. (Numbers in parentheses reflect deficit revenue and values.)

Table 23. Economic Effects

Measure No Action Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Timber volume (ccf) 0 122,016 101,680 Acres by harvest method Ground based 0 20,336 20,336 Total acres 0 20,336 20,336 Total present value benefits Average bid price ($/ccf) 0 1.17 1.17 Discounted revenues ($) 0 137,266 114,390 Discounted cost ($) 0 3,266,927 2,722,439 Present net value ($) 0 -3,129,661 -2,608,049 Present net value/acre ($) 0 -153 -128 Total present value costs FS prep and administration ($/ccf) 0 26.77 26.77 Stump to truck ($) 0 81.76 84.22 Log haul ($) 0 115.04 115.04 Brush disposal ($3/ccf) 0 366,048 305,040 Road maintenance/Erosion control ($1/ccf) 0 122,016 101,680 Temporary roads (miles) 0 26.67 26.67 Employment Direct jobs 0 345 302 Indirect jobs 0 207 181 Total jobs 0 552 483 Income Direct ($) 0 $9,602,659 $8,409,569

Indirect and induced ($) 0 $5,765,256 $5,048947 Total ($) 0 $15,367,915 $13,458,516

Page | 3-94 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Employment and Income In general, the primary effect on timber harvest-related employment would occur from harvesting trees associated with the action alternatives over the next year. 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.

As Table 37 shows, alternative 2 would generate $15,367,915 and alternative 3 would generate $13,458,516 in direct, indirect, and induced local income. Based upon the commercial volume harvested, alternative 2 would support approximately 522 jobs and alternative 3 would support approximately 483 jobs, (both direct and indirect) over the 2-year period.

Economic Efficiency Table 23 shows action alternative 2 would have a present net value of $(3,129,661) and a net value per acre $(153). Action alternative 3 would have a present net value of $(2,608,049) and a net value per acre $(128). This economic analysis assessed the action alternatives in terms of harvest viability, local employment and income, and economic efficiency as measured by cost effectiveness.

Cumulative Effects from the Action Alternatives Past actions such as the Regional Foresters Eastside Forest Plans Amendment 2 (1995) and PACFISH and INFISH in 1995 amended the Forest Plan and has resulted in a trend of overall decline in the Malheur National Forest‘s annual offering of timber volume since the 1990 Forest Plan went in to effect. The action alternatives would provide some potential short-term economic relief by utilizing commercially thinned sawlogs and biomass. This material could potentially be used to support the Malheur National Forest Ten-Year Integrated Resource Stewardship Contract (IRSC) and mills operating in the area. The amount of local economic relief would be determined by whether the purchaser is local or distant, what mills(s) local or distant actually received the logs, 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 foreseeable projects in the two counties in various stages of planning that potentially may add to the Forest’s annual timber offerings for 2020 or beyond. For example, the Boundary project, Cliff Knox, Ragged Ruby, Austin and Bark projects on the Malheur National Forest. These ongoing and foreseeable projects are expected to add cumulatively to the employment and income of Grant and Harney counties within the life of the Crow project. Scenery Management The following is a summary of the Scenery Management Specialist report for Crow. The entire report is incorporated by reference and can be found in the project file, located at the Emigrant Creek Ranger District, Malheur National Forest, Hines, Oregon. Crow contains approximately 322 acres of visual management corridor (retention) and 2,810 acres of visual management corridor (partial retention). These areas are visible or potentially visible along major travel routes (forest roads 41 and 43) where the traveling public has a high-to- medium sensitivity to scenery. As one travels on forest roads 41 and 43, timbered hills and timbered draws are the dominate features. The visual condition has been slightly altered from past

Chapter 3 Page|3-95 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

harvest activities with minor changes in canopy structures displayed on the distant landscape. No large created openings are visible from past harvest. Vegetation within the project area consists mainly of ponderosa pine, with some mixed conifer, aspen, juniper/ponderosa pine mix and non- forested vegetation. Effects on Scenery Management

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) In the long term, if mortality increases, there could be a gradual change in color and texture. The green background could gradually change to a gray color until the dead trees fall down and are replaced by new trees. If a stand replacement fire were to occur, there would be a dramatic change in color and texture.

Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects of Action Alternatives

Landscape Character The action alternatives would result in changes to the forested areas on the landscape. Commercial and noncommercial thinning would occur, as well as landscape scale prescribed burning. The result would be a return to a more historic range of variability, as outlined in the vegetation section. Both commercial and non-commercial thinning would result in more open, park like stands of ponderosa pine, and to a lesser extent Douglas fir and grand fir more accurately resembling historic tree composition. Over time, the remaining large trees would continue to grow adding additional old growth trees across the landscape.

Following mechanical treatments, prescribed burning would result in some of the large trees carrying new or larger fire scars, and keeping undergrowth burned back to maintain that open, park like large tree structure. Some areas in the project have had mixed severity fire in the past few decades. This has resulted in a mixture of scenes including areas of large standing dead trees (snags) and areas with abundant down wood caused from high severity fire associated with the Egley complex in 2007.

Vegetation projects of this scope have been implemented around the same vicinity as Crow, providing a blended consistency to the casual visitor. Evidence of commercial thinning and non- commercial thinning such as stumps, landings, and skid trails may be visible short term (1-3 years) but would be similar to the existing landscape and consistent with forest visitor expectations of this landscape. Though changes to the forested areas on the landscape in the project area would occur, the existing landscape character would be sustained and within the limits of its historic range. Treatments would aim to replicate historic tree spacing and design criteria like skips and gaps would help achieve this. Areas of skips would result in higher density pockets in a unit where clumps of un-treated trees would occur, and gaps would create small openings in the units.

Scenic Integrity Visual Management Corridors (MA-F26, and Developed Recreation Sites (MA-F13)

Under the action alternatives 313 acres of vegetation treatments would occur in the Visual Management Corridor (Retention) and 1,970 acres would occur in Partial Retention. Prescribed burning would occur on 2,309 acres of Visual Management Corridors (1,990 Partial Retention, and 318 Retention).

Page | 3-96 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Evidence of mechanical vegetation treatments would be visible after implementation activities, including skid trails, temporary roads, landings, stumps, slash, blackened ground, scorched bark and red pine needles. Temporary roads would be rehabbed to the specifications outlined in the transportation report. Botanical design criteria would require revegetation of bare ground in skid trails and temporary roads, and in 1-3 years following completion of implementation new grasses and forbs would aid in camouflaging those sites. In order to maintain scenic integrity levels, landings would not be permitted in Visual Management Corridors (MA-F26) or in Falls and Emigrant Creek Campgrounds.

Stumps are often visible after commercial and noncommercial thinning. In order to maintain scenic integrity levels, stumps would not exceed four inches in height within 100 feet of Forest Road 41 and Falls and Emigrant Creek Campgrounds. Stumps would likely be visible for 1-3 years until grasses, forbs, and shrubs grow high enough to provide vegetative screening.

Slash would be left on the ground, placed in handpiles, or placed in large machine (grapple) piles and may be visible for up to one year before pile burning occurs. Pile burning and prescribed burning may result in blackened ground surfaces, scorched bark on remaining trees, and burned (red) needles on lower branches of trees. However, effects from burning would only be visible for 1-3 years until new grass and forb growth returns and the trees begin to drop their needles. Grapple piles tend to burn more intensely, having deeper soil heat penetration that may result in a visibly barren area for up to 10 years. In order to maintain scenic integrity levels, grapple piles would not be permitted in the Visual Management Corridors (MA-F26) and Falls and Emigrant Creek Campgrounds.

Proposed biomass activities would improve the growth and vigor of the existing ponderosa pine developing future large diameter trees. Risks of insects and disease to existing large ponderosa pine trees would be reduced by removing understory competition resulting in more growing space and less stress. The combination of thinning and underburning would decrease the risk of large- scale disturbances from insects and stand-replacing fires.

Much of the Visual Management Corridor’s tree texture is probably denser than historical conditions. Past actions including fire suppression and timber harvest have resulted in changes in species compositions and vegetation continuity across the landscape. Cumulatively, this project would help reduce landscape tree densities without creating sharp texture contrasts that would be highly evident when positioned next to untreated areas.

No foreseeable vegetation or fuels management activities are identified that would add cumulatively to the proposed activities in Visual Management Corridors. Recreation The following is a summary of the Recreation Specialist report for Crow. The entire report is incorporated by reference and can be found in the project file, located at the Emigrant Creek Ranger District, Malheur National Forest, Hines, Oregon.

Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) 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 1979). ROS categories are used as guidance for the management and future development of recreational facilities.

Chapter 3 Page|3-97 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Table 24. Recreation Opportunity Spectrum in Project Area

ROS Class % Project Area Roaded Modified 86 Roaded Natural 10 Semi-Primitive Motorized 4

Recreational Seasons of Use Peak recreational use periods on the district are mid-May to mid-September and for hunting from August through November. Camping, driving for pleasure, and other dispersed activities such as woodcutting, often continue beyond the typical seasons unless snow makes motorized access to the area impractical. During deer and elk hunting seasons, hunting and related camping becomes the dominant recreational activity on the district. Snowmobile use primarily occurs from December through February.

Recreation Facilities and Activities Recreation on the Malheur National Forest is focused where there is water or access to trails or dispersed recreation. The most popular recreation activities on the Forest are driving for pleasure, hunting, hiking and walking, viewing wildlife, relaxing, primitive camping, and viewing natural features (USDA Forest Service 2010).

Developed Recreation Sites Two developed recreation sites are located in the project. Falls Campground and Emigrant Campground are located on the east boundary of the project, along FSR 4300. Both campgrounds are fee sites with fire rings, picnic tables, and vault toilets. Both campgrounds have heaviest use during hunting season.

Additionally, there are 3 other sites that formerly were developed, but have been decommissioned. While not fee sites, they are still frequented by forest visitors. Conditions of these sites vary, from having fire rings and tables, to having no amenities. Donnelly Camp, Pendleton Springs Camp, and Alder Springs Camp are these sites.

Dispersed Recreation Sites Dispersed recreation sites are not static – meaning the number of sites and location of sites are constantly changing as new sites are developed by forest visitors; sites are removed or damaged by natural disturbances (e.g. fire, flood, windblown trees); sites are removed to protect resources (e.g. water quality); sites are naturally reclaimed by vegetation due to lack of use; or road conditions deteriorate and sites become inaccessible. The project area includes 16 known dispersed recreation campsites. Dispersed camping occurs throughout the project area but is most heavily concentrated along Maintenance Level 3 roads and commonly used Maintenance Level 2 roads, especially when water is nearby. Maintenance Level 2 roads are described as “high clearance vehicle” roads. Emigrant Creek, Burnt Cabin Creek and Crowsfoot Creek are the most prominent sources of water within the project area. Dispersed camping with motor vehicles is most popular along or near FSR 4630, 4357 and smaller 7-digit roads around and between those roads. Heavy use in some dispersed camping areas is evidenced by denuded vegetation and multiple rock fire rings.

Page | 3-98 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Snowmobile Trails There are 2 snowmobile trails that total approximately 26 miles in length within the project area. Both snowmobile trails follow existing road, primarily open road. However, trail S-5341 follows closed road 4155035 for approximately 0.27 miles. The other trail is S-5339. Both trails connect to each other and extend outside the project area to forest boundary to the south.

Cooperative Travel Management Area The Burnt Cabin TMA (72B) overlaps approximately 14,080 acres of Crow (nearly the entire TMA), and covers almost all of the area north of FSR 4300 where the road bisects the project area east to west. The TMA, often referred to as a “green dot” area (due to the open roads being marked by “green dots”), is an area of seasonal closure to motorized use that corresponds with hunting seasons. It is cooperatively administered by Malheur National Forest and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. For 2018, the period of restrictions is September 26 through October 10, and October 21 through November 11. During those periods, the only roads open to motorized travel within Crow portion of the Burnt Cabin TMA are FSRs 4300, 4380, 4360200, 4360225 and portions of the 4360 and. The objectives of the TMA are to protect soils and habitat, minimize harassment of wildlife, maintain adequate buck and bull escapement, and promote quality hunting.

Wildlife Management Unit For hunting, Crow is 100% within Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Silvies Wildlife Management Unit (Unit 72). Effects on Recreation

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) Under the no action alternative, no planned projects would occur within Crow. Roaded modified, roaded natural, and semi-primitive motorized areas would remain the same, thus maintaining their recreational valor for the present. Current visitor use would remain consistent. Over time the resiliency of the forest would be reduced by increased fuel loading which could result in more wildfire outbreaks and/or intensity, causing risk to public safety during and post fire. As a result the recreation appeal would be reduced, accessibility prohibited where human safety or environmental integrity would be a risk, and recreational opportunities hindered (Vaux et al. 1984). High intensity fires stall the rejuvenation of plant life in relation to less intense fires thus, potentially reducing big game utilization of these areas, and resulting in a decline of hunters visiting the forest as well as the visual appeal of this area. Insect killed trees also decreases the aesthetics by viewers while decreasing human safety. Because healthy forests are the backdrop to a multitude of outdoor recreation activities, ecological resilience of the forests is crucial in providing the desired array of recreation opportunities (Krieger 2001).

Direct and Indirect Effects from the Action Alternatives

Vegetation Treatments Proposed vegetation treatments would have a direct effect on recreation due to activities such as: cutting, skidding, and decking logs, hauling commercial woody material on forest roads, distributing non-commercial woody material and logging slash, and the operation of heavy machinery within the vicinity of developed recreation sites and dispersed campsites. Recreation

Chapter 3 Page|3-99 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

use across the Forest often involves using travel routes while exploring more than one location. Therefore, it is expected that the typical visitor could be exposed to some degree of harvest and treatment activities while traveling through the area. Visitors to the area could experience increased noise levels from machinery and logging activities. 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. Hunters may experience these effects in addition to temporary displacement of big game during the hunting season. These effects would be short- term, probably less than 2-4 years, only during implementation. Visual evidence of treatment activities may be apparent to the casual forest visitor at or near some of the dispersed campsites. Dispersed recreation sites that are regularly used are within the area, these areas will exhibit a relatively natural appearance, even though management activities (such as timber harvest) may be highly visible nearby. 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.

Proposed vegetation treatments will occur on a small scale in the vicinity of developed recreation sites. Treatments can take place for safety reasons within or near developed recreation sites. As discussed, each prescription listed under the proposed action would reduce ladder fuels and hazard trees which would improve safety for recreationists at developed campsites.

Plowed winter haul routes may restrict recreation access to snowmobile users. These plowed areas could create a large snow berm, depending on the snow year, that could prevent snowmobile users and groomers to be able to access popular snowmobile areas. Some areas may be temporarily inaccessible for snowmobilers due to logging activity. Depending on haul routes users may be able to circumnavigate logging activity to other places for access.

Each prescription listed under the proposed action would reduce ladder fuels, biomass, and some hazard trees. This would improve the safety of recreationists at developed and dispersed recreations sites during the fire season. The open understory conversion would make cross- country hiking, cross-country skiing, and snowmobiling easier while enhancing the users experience by being able to access more desirable terrain. Furthermore, more grass and forb growth would increase with the reduction of the thick over-story canopy, providing big game and small mammal forage and increasing landscape character. This could increase wildlife sightings by wildlife viewers and big game hunter success in the fall. The landscape integrity would also be improved by reintroducing fire back onto the landscape and restoring aspen.

Prescribed Burning Prescribed burning activities would occur during the spring or fall, some of this extending beyond Crow to create viable holding fire lines. The result would appear as a mosaic with unburned fuel left behind, providing wildlife cover. Reducing fuel loading throughout the project area would increase public safety when they are recreating or camping at dispersed sites, especially during the dry summer and fall months. The reduction in fuels could have a short-term negative impact on the viewshed and hunter success, but over time would ultimately enhance the recreational value and big game habitat for this area. In contrast, leaving the hazardous fuels present and risking a fire ignition could result in a high intensity fire that would affect the viewshed and resources for a much longer timeframe, potentially for the lifespan of the average person. During prescribed burning smoke may negatively impact visibility, air quality, access to certain areas, and wildlife presence in certain hunting areas. Recreationists, especially hunters during fall burning, may be impacted by congestion, noise, and dust from the increase of traffic associated with the burn.

Page | 3-100 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

The activities under this alternative would help to restore historical forest structure, composition, and density, and create more resistant and resilient vegetative conditions. Instead of deferring treatments, which would increase the risk of insect and disease infestations and high severity fire, the proposed action would begin to address the need for restoration and enhance the recreational setting. The direct effect of these actions would be primarily on visuals however, there would be indirect effects through vegetation enhancement, increased wildlife habitat and safety through fuels reduction. Outside of the times when silvicultural and burning activities occur, the proposed action would not directly affect access roads to Crow.

Forest Road Activities Confirmation of past administratively closed roads would have little effect on current or future recreational activities or the ROS. The roads are already closed therefore would have no effect on motorized access. Each segment is very short, with no known dispersed sites, and would have no effect or potential effect on current or future recreational opportunities or the ROS. Recreational driving and access would benefit from road maintenance that would occur for haul routes. Temp roads would be rehabilitated after logging activity was complete therefore, would have no effect on long term recreation. However, depending on season of use temporary roads could interfere with hunting opportunities by moving wildlife from these areas normally inaccessible by the public.

Cumulative Effects from the Action Alternatives The Skull 120 gravel bike race is an annual event permitted and conducted annually. The race has been growing in numbers bringing a new recreation user group to the area. The race is conducted in mid-June and has the potential to host a total of 200 riders. The effects of the proposed vegetation, prescribed burning, and other associated activities would not have a compounding effect on the race in the short or long term.

Cumulative effects of the proposed actions are not likely to have adverse or significant 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, convenient locations for forest visitors to seek similar opportunities. Displacement of recreation activities would be short- term and minimal and would not be compounded by any other known actions. Removal of ground fuels and fuel ladder reductions would reduce the future risk of uncharacteristic wildfire, and thus reduce the chance of closures that would limit forest access and recreation opportunities. Range Resources The following is a summary of the Range Specialist report for Crow. The entire report is incorporated by reference and can be found in the project file, located at the Emigrant Creek Ranger District, Malheur National Forest, Hines, Oregon. Crow is located within portions of six livestock grazing allotments on the Malheur National Forest. All grazing allotments (Allison, Donnelly, Silver Creek, Snow Mountain, Izee, and Blue Creek) are administered by the Emigrant Creek Ranger District in Hines, Oregon. Livestock grazing in the project area is currently permitted by six Term Grazing Permits. The allotments are usually grazed between May 21 and October 15 under annual authorizations, depending on climatic conditions and the attainment of forage use objectives.

Rangeland within the project area consists of dry plant associations of mixed conifer and bunch grasses. Forage consists of cool-season grasses such as Idaho fescue and bluebunch wheatgrass.

Chapter 3 Page|3-101 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Elk sedge and pine grass are abundantly present in upland habitats where Douglas fir and ponderosa pine are present. Encroachment of mixed conifers has decreased desirable forage for livestock, especially in dense lodgepole pine sites within the Allison allotment and upper reaches of Emigrant Creek. Most of the desirable livestock forage is in the form of a variety of hydric sedges in riparian zones, especially in the later summer season when adjacent upland forage is dry. Desirable riparian dependent species are increasing as livestock management is focused toward reducing utilization of greenline vegetation such as carex species and willows.

There are 22.5 miles of permanent livestock control fences, approximately 6 spring developments with troughs, and up to 25 earthen pit tanks have been previously mapped within the project boundary. Effects to Range Resources

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) Indirectly as the canopy continues to close and shade out desirable forage as well as intercepting precipitation, there would be a decrease in the quality and availability of forage in the allotments as a result of no treatment. Forage would also be impacted from accumulating duff. Herbaceous seed production is also reduced in closed woodlands (Miller, et al, 2005). The continued decrease in forage would eventually result in a change in grazing as the carrying capacity would decrease, meaning a reduction in the number of livestock that could graze without causing damage would need to occur, possibly causing a hardship to permittees that graze these allotments.

Direct and Indirect Effects of Action Alternatives There would be no change to existing term grazing permits from implementation of the action alternatives. Proposed road activities would not impact the permittee because existing road status would not change. The project would cause temporary livestock displacement as well as increased availability of forage for ungulates to graze. The livestock displacement would be short term. Cattle numbers may see a reduction for the year of the project but could return to full numbers the next year. There is also the possibility of damage to existing range improvements such as fences or water troughs from prescribed burns or falling trees. The proposed vegetation treatments would open the tree canopies allowing more sunlight to reach the forest floor. The additional sunlight would cause an increase in desirable upland species that are present in the project area including bluebunch wheatgrass, elk sedge, Idaho fescue, and pinegrass.

Cumulative Effects of Action Alternatives The cumulative effect from the proposed treatment and burning will be positive for rangeland resources in the increased vigor and amount of future available forage. Past actions in the project area include past harvest, livestock grazing, past road activities, wild and prescribed fires, historic fire suppression, and recreation activities. Future activities include ongoing grazing, and recreation in addition to the proposed action. Cumulative effects would include an increased availability of forage for ungulates to graze. The proposed vegetation treatments would counter historic fire suppression efforts that have allowed an increase in the canopy closure that has slowly reduced the amount of forage available for grazing.

Page | 3-102 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Cultural Resources The following is a summary of the Heritage Specialist report for Crow. The entire report is incorporated by reference and can be found in the project file, located at the Emigrant Creek Ranger District, Malheur National Forest, Hines, Oregon. The project area is located within the southern portion of the Blue Mountains physiographic province dividing the Columbia Plateau to the north and the Northern Great Basin to the south (Baldwin 1976). The southern Blue Mountains were utilized by people representing the adaptive traditions of both the northern Great Basin and the southern Columbia Plateau (Burtchard 1998). Ethnographic information indicates that the Great Basin Northern Paiutes were the principle users of the project area, but the area also had seasonal use by Columbia Plateau tribes, specifically the Warm Springs and Umatilla (Reid et al. 1989). The Northern Paiute were divided into many bands and the project area lies within the Wada’tika (meaning seed eaters) band territory. The Wada’tika used a wide range of resources that included seeds, roots, berries, fish, game, insects, and a variety of plants. Upland resources were primarily harvested May – October because of heavy snowfall. The Burns Paiute tribe is composed of people who are descendants of the Wada’tika band (Couture 1998).

A predictive model was applied which divided the project area into high, moderate, and low probability zones. Zones refer to the likelihood of cultural resource site presence. There are 17,475 acres of high probability land, 8,726 acres of moderate probability, and 7,676 acres of low probability. Surveying efforts are focused on those areas identified as high probability.

Cultural resource identification efforts in the vicinity of the project area have focused on three primary types of resources: pre-contact archaeological sites, post-contact archaeological sites, and places that support resources of contemporary tribal interest. A review of the heritage files was completed and a total of 217 previously identified cultural resource sites have been recorded in the project area. Of these 217 sites, there are 143 pre-contact sites, 69 post-contact sites, and 5 multicomponent sites. There are 119 sites considered eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places, 59 sites are not eligible, and the eligibility of 39 sites is unevaluated.

The dominant pre-contact site within the project area is the lithic scatter. Lithic scatters are surface assemblages that contain debitage (waste flakes from stone tool manufacturing) and/or formed stone tools (e.g., projectile points or bifaces) and occasionally ground stone. Post-contact sites located in the project area are primarily related to livestock grazing.

The Burns Paiute Tribe has expressed interest in ponderosa pine cambium peeled trees. These culturally modified features are considered an important link to the Tribe’s ancestral and historic past. Whenever possible these trees should be left as is, but if they need to be removed, consultation with the Tribe must occur. Effects on Cultural Resources The spatial context for effects analysis includes National Forest System lands administered by the Emigrant Creek Ranger District within Crow. The proposed action does not have potential to have indirect effects (i.e., visual, auditory, atmospheric) on cultural resources that are distant from the project activities. Due to the nature of cultural resources the temporal context for effects analysis is long term. On the ground implementation will not occur until the State Historic Preservation Office consultation has been conducted under the Programmatic Agreement among the United States

Chapter 3 Page|3-103 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region (Region 6), the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and the Oregon State Historic Preservation Officer regarding Cultural Resource Management in the State of Oregon by the USDA Forest Service dated June 2004. Therefore, the project would be consistent with the National Historic Preservation Act.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) A consequence of the no action alternative would be the potential for high intensity wildfires to change or damage cultural resources.

Direct and Indirect Effects of the Action Alternatives The action alternatives are expected to have no or cause few direct effects on known heritage sites within the project area. In most cases, eligible and potentially eligible (unevaluated) sites would be avoided during the life of the project. Sites would not be avoided by prescribed fire (with the exception of fire sensitive post-contact sites), pre-commercial thinning by hand and chainsaw over lithic scatter sites, and where over snow logging is conducted over lithic scatter sites. By following project design criteria these actions would not adversely affect cultural resource sites. The proposed alternatives could possibly cause direct effects on undiscovered heritage resources. This possibility is addressed in the project design measures which states that project activity would be halted, the resource be evaluated, and a mitigation plan developed. Also, there could be a direct effect on ponderosa pine cambium peeled trees if it is determined the cultural feature is a hazard tree and needs to be removed. Removal of the cambium peeled tree would occur in consultation with the Oregon SHPO and the Burns Paiute Tribe. The primary indirect effect of the action alternatives on heritage resources would be the potential for increased erosion of the site matrix for those sites with intact buried components. Since known sites would be avoided or protected through approved project design criteria and extensive soil protection project design features are in place, no or minimal indirect effect on known or unknown heritage resources are expected. Also, indirectly, reducing the accumulations of fuels would reduce the severity of potential wildfires and would enhance the long-term stability of archaeological and historical resources within the project area.

Cumulative Effects of the Action Alternatives Past, ongoing, and foreseeable actions that have affected and may continue to effect heritage resources in the project area include wildfires, fire suppression, timber harvest, grazing, recreation, and road construction. Past impacts include artifact displacement and breakage, soil compaction and associated erosion, and trampling of artifacts. Some level of artifact removal by workers and recreational visitors has most certainly occurred, and likely continues at a reduced rate. Proposed hazardous fuel reduction activities may decrease the fuel load which would decrease the intensity and duration of fire allowing for little or no adverse effect to cultural resource. Potential impacts that cultural properties might incur from foreseeable future actions would be mitigated per stipulation III A. of the 2004 Programmatic Agreement with the Oregon SHPO. Special Areas and Undeveloped Areas The following is a summary of the Special Areas and Other Underdeveloped Areas specialist report for Crow. The entire report is incorporated by reference and can be found in the project file, located at the Emigrant Creek Ranger District, Malheur National Forest, Hines, Oregon.

Page | 3-104 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

There are no wilderness areas, wilderness study areas, areas with wilderness characteristics or MA 1B areas (identified during the forest plan revision process), Wild & Scenic Rivers, National Recreation Areas or Research Natural Areas within the project area; therefore there would be no direct, indirect or cumulative effects to these areas. There are no Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRA) within the Crow project area boundary. However, the Utley Butte Inventoried Roadless Area on the Malheur National Forest is located directly adjacent to the northern tip of Crow. There are no activities proposed adjacent to this area; therefore, there would be no direct, indirect or cumulative effects to the Utley Butte Inventoried Roadless Area.

Areas with Undeveloped Character Areas with undeveloped character include acres of land that have no history of harvest activity and do not contain open forest roads and are not inventoried roadless areas, or a designated wilderness area. They are stand-alone polygons of varying acreages all less than or equal to 4,999 acres within the project area. There are no Forest-wide or management area standards specific to undeveloped lands in the Forest Plan. All lands, including undeveloped lands, are managed consistent with Forest-wide standards and guidelines and by designated Forest Plan management area allocations.

Crow was reviewed for areas of undeveloped character using GIS generated maps. One hundred forty-eight individual polygons were identified as other undeveloped lands. Individual polygons of other undeveloped lands less than an 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 one acre are better disclosed as part of the other resources environmental effects analysis in previous sections in this chapter. The table below shows the number, size class, and acres represented. One polygon greater than 5,000 acres was identified that is associated with the Utley Butte Inventoried Roadless Area. This polygon is 9,593 acres and all but 33 acres is outside the Crow project area boundary. No mechanical vegetation treatments are proposed within this polygon, therefore there would be no direct, indirect or cumulative effects.

About four percent of other undeveloped lands in the project area are considered non-forest or non-vegetation. The majority of the approximate 11,460 acres of other undeveloped lands in the project area are allocated in Forest Plan management areas F22 General Forest (9,436 acres), F6 Old Growth (1,096 acres), with much small portions in, F26 Visual Management (910 acres) and F13 Developed Recreation (9 acres). No activities are proposed within F6 Old Growth. All other allocations allow that timber be managed on a scheduled or non-scheduled basis, all types of prescribed fire may be used to accomplish management objectives, and road maintenance are permitted within Forest Plan standards and guidelines. Past management and current developed conditions within the project boundary reflect the intent and decisions made in the Forest Plan (as amended) and reflects consistency with Forest Plan management area allocations. Any areas with unique ecological values within the project area are currently maintained for those values with Forest Plan standards and guidelines for management area allocations such as F6 Old Growth, F26 Visual Management Corridors and RHCAs.

There are no special or unique resource values in these undeveloped lands identified by project resource specialists in their environmental analysis for the implementation of any alternative analyzed in detail. These areas do not have high quality or undisturbed soil, water or air, they are not sources of public drinking water, do not contain a diversity of plant and animal communities, are not source habitat for threatened, endangered, proposed or candidate species, do not contain primitive non-motorized classes of dispersed recreation, are not reference landscapes, are not natural appearing landscapes with high scenic quality, and have no other locally identified unique

Chapter 3 Page|3-105 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

characteristics. However, resources are present in these other undeveloped land such as, soils, water quality, vegetation, fuels, air quality; plant and animal communities, habitat for threatened, endangered, and sensitive species; noxious weeds, roaded modified and roaded natural recreation, semi-primitive motorized recreation, scenery, and cultural resources. The affected environment for each of these resources is the same as disclosed in previous sections of this chapter and not reiterated here.

Table 25. Undeveloped Lands in the Crow Project Area Non Total Acres Forested Number of Total Acres in Treated in Size Class Acres in Polygons Acres Project Action Project Area Alternatives Area 114 1 to 99 acres 2,503 2,310 47 1,915 29 100 to 499 acres 7,491 6,030 187 5,266 4 500 to 999 acres 2,692 1,335 15 835 1 1,000 to 4,999 acres 1,752 1,752 205 1,336 1 Greater than 5,000 acres 9,593 33 20 0 148 TOTAL 24,030 11,460 474 9,379

Effects on Undeveloped Areas The cumulative effects analysis boundary for areas with undeveloped character is the full extent of those areas. Therefore, undeveloped character extends beyond the project area boundary but is bounded by the farthest out polygons. The temporal scale for undeveloped character is considered long term because depending on the size of ponderosa pine stumps they can remain visible on the landscape for about 50 years in a dry upland forested sites.

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) The affected environment would remain unchanged, except by natural processes and ongoing management activities. Consequences of no action may occur because the landscape would continue developing complex fuel loads. A wildfire may burn more extensively and kill more trees within timbered stringers in grass/tree mosaic. There would be more dramatic impacts (more acres turned black) to visual quality caused by a wildfire compared to a prescribed fire, however, it would be a natural occurrence and expected condition of the landscape.

Direct and Indirect Effects of the Action Alternatives Table 26 below is a summary showing the changes in acres after implementation of hazardous fuel reduction activities for other undeveloped lands by alternative. This table only includes other undeveloped lands within the project area, because other undeveloped lands outside the project area would not be impacted by proposed activities.

Page | 3-106 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Table 26. Undeveloped Lands in Crow Project Area by Alternative Acres Remaining After Percent of Area Acres Prior Acres Percent Alternative Hazardous After to Activity Changed Change Fuel Implementation Reduction Activities No Action 11,460 11,460 0 100% No change Proposed Action 11,460 2,081 (-9,379) 18% (-82%) (Alternative 2) Alternative 3 11,460 2,081 (-9,379) 18% (-82%)

Under the action alternatives (alternatives 2 and 3), hazardous fuel reduction activities would occur on approximately 9,379 acres of other undeveloped lands, making these areas no longer considered undeveloped (Table 26). Effects to undeveloped areas greater than 1,000 acres are also displayed in Table 25 and Figure 18. Under the action alternatives, hazardous fuel reduction activities would occur on about 1,336 acres in undeveloped areas greater than 1,000 acres. About 4 temporary roads for a total of 1.03 miles (0.45, 0.17, 0.25, and 0.16 miles) would be constructed in undeveloped areas greater than 1,000 acres. These temporary roads would be closed and restored after harvest and related activities are complete. Because temporary roads are not permanent roads and are restored after use, they would have no impact to the designation of other undeveloped lands. Prescribed burning in other undeveloped lands would also have no impact to the designation of other undeveloped lands.

In areas where proposed project activity would occur on other undeveloped lands, the impacts to soil, water quality, air quality; plant and animal communities; habitat for threatened, endangered, and sensitive species; recreation; noxious weeds; and cultural resources, etc. are the same as disclosed for areas of proposed project activity in previous resource sections of this chapter and are not reiterated here. Environmental effects to resources in other undeveloped lands due to the implementation of proposed project activities would be consistent with applicable laws, regulations, and Forest Plan management area standards and guidelines.

Other undeveloped lands with no proposed activities would remain the same as described in the affected environment. They would still remain free of developments such as forest roads or timber harvest units. They would still not be considered inventoried roadless areas, or a designated wilderness area.

Cumulative Effects of the Action Alternatives Past harvest and road building have reduced the acreage of other undeveloped areas across the watershed. No future projects have been identified that would further reduce other undeveloped areas within the project area.

Crow, when combined with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions for other undeveloped lands, where project activities would occur, would reduce the acres of other undeveloped lands. These areas would have the same cumulative effects to soil, water quality, air quality; plant and animal communities; habitat for threatened, endangered, and sensitive species;

Chapter 3 Page|3-107 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment recreation; noxious weeds; and cultural resources which are disclosed in previous sections of this chapter and are not reiterated here.

Figure 18 - Proposed Action with Undeveloped Areas Greater than 1,000 acres

Page | 3-108 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Global Climate Change Prevention Act (7 USC 6701) The action alternatives would affect about 27,900 acres of forest vegetation by thinning trees from the stand and about 31,000 acres of forest vegetation by reducing surface fuels through prescribed fire, retaining a residual stand at the lower limit of the management zone for the associated plant associations. This scope and degree of change would be minor, affecting roughly less than 2% of the 1.7 million-acre Malheur National Forest, and 0.2% of forest land in the U.S. In addition, the effect of the action alternatives focuses on aboveground carbon stocks, which typically comprise a fraction of the total ecosystem carbon stocks in the proposed managed area; 50 percent or more of the ecosystem carbon is in the soils, a very stable and long-lived carbon pool (McKinley et al. 2011, Domke et al. 2017).

Climate change is a global phenomenon, because major greenhouse gasses (GHGs) 9 mix well throughout the planet’s lower atmosphere (IPCC 2013). Considering emissions of GHGs in 2010 10 11 were estimated at 49 ± 4.5 gigatonnes carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalent globally (IPCC 2014) and 6.9 gigatonnes CO2 equivalent nationally (US EPA 2015), a project of this size makes an extremely small contribution to overall emissions. Because local GHGs emissions mix readily into the global pool of GHGs, it is difficult and highly uncertain to ascertain the indirect effects of emissions from single or multiple projects of this size on global climate. Therefore, at the global and national scales, the action alternatives direct and indirect contribution to GHGs and climate change would be negligible. In addition, because the direct and indirect effects would be negligible, the action alternatives contribution to cumulative effects on global GHGs and climate change would also be negligible. Lastly, carbon emissions during the implementation of the action alternatives would have only a momentary influence on atmospheric carbon concentrations, because carbon would be removed from the atmosphere with time as the forest regrows, further minimizing or mitigating any potential cumulative effects.

The Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) summarized the contributions of global human activity sectors to climate change (IPCC 2014). From 2000 to 2009, forestry and other land uses contributed just 12 percent of the human-caused 12 global CO2 emissions . The forestry sector’s contribution to GHG emissions has declined over the last decade (IPCC 2014, Smith et al. 2014, FAOSTAT 2013). The largest source of GHG emissions in the forestry sector globally is deforestation (Pan et al. 2011, Houghton et al. 2012, IPCC 2014), which is defined as the removal of all trees to convert forested land to other land uses that do not support trees or allow trees to regrow for an indefinite period of time (IPCC 2000) (e.g., conversion of forest land to agricultural or developed landscapes). However, forest land in the United States has had a net increase since the year 2000, and this trend is expected to

9 Major greenhouse gases released as a result of human activity include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, and perfluorocarbons. 10 Gigatonne is one billion metric tons; equal to about 2.2 trillion pounds.

11 Equivalent CO2 (CO2e) is the concentration of CO2 that would cause the same level of radiative forcing as a given type and concentration of greenhouse gas. Examples of such greenhouse gases are methane, perfluorocarbons, and nitrous oxide. 12 Fluxes from forestry and other land use (FOLU) activities are dominated by CO2 emissions. Non-CO2 greenhouse gas emissions from FOLU are small and mostly due to peat degradation releasing methane and were not included in this estimate.

Chapter 3 Page|3-109 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

continue for at least another decade (Wear et al. 2013, USDA Forest Service 2016). Estimates of forested area on the Malheur National Forest have also slightly increased since the year 2000.

This hazardous fuel reduction project is not considered a major source of GHG emissions. Forested land will not be converted into a developed or agricultural condition or otherwise result in the loss of forested area. In fact, forest stands are being retained and thinned, harvested, and prescribed burned to mimic natural fire effects to maintain a vigorous condition that supports enhanced tree growth and productivity, thus contributing to long-term carbon uptake and storage. 13 In 2010, forests in the United States removed about 757 megatonnes of CO2 from the atmosphere after accounting for natural emissions (e.g., wildfire and decomposition) (US EPA 2015).

Some assessments suggest that the effects of climate change in some United States forests may cause shifts in forest composition and productivity or prevent forests from fully recovering after severe disturbance (Anderson-Teixeira et al. 2013), thus impeding their ability to take up and store carbon14 and retain other ecosystem functions and services. Climate change is likely already increasing the frequency and extent of droughts, fires, and insect outbreaks, which can influence forest carbon cycling (Kurz et al. 2009, Allen et al. 2010, Joyce et al. 2014). In fact, reducing stand density, one of the benefits of this proposed action, is consistent with adaptation practices to increase resilience of forests to climate-related environmental changes (Joyce et al. 2014). This project is consistent with options proposed by the IPCC for minimizing the impacts of climate change on forests, thus meeting objectives for both adapting to climate change and mitigating GHG emissions (McKinley et al. 2011).

Forests have a “boom and bust” cycle with respect to carbon, as forests establish and grow, experience mortality with age or disturbances, and regrow over time. Forest management activities such as harvests and hazardous fuels reduction have characteristics similar to disturbances that reduce stand density and promote regrowth through thinning and removal, making stands and carbon stores more resilient to environmental change (McKinley et al. 2011). The relatively small quantity of carbon released to the atmosphere and the short-term nature of the effect of the proposed action on the forest ecosystem are justified, given the overall change in condition increases the resistance to wildfire, drought, insects and disease, or a combination of disturbance types that can reduce carbon storage and alter ecosystem functions (Millar et al. 2007, Amato et al. 2011). Furthermore, any initial carbon emissions from this project will be balanced and possibly eliminated as the stand recovers and regenerates, because the remaining trees and newly established trees typically have higher rates of growth and carbon storage (Hurteau and North 2009, Dwyer et al. 2010, McKinley et al. 2011).

In the absence of thinning and harvesting, the forest where this project would take place will thin naturally from mortality-inducing natural disturbances and other processes resulting in dead trees that will decay over time, emitting carbon to the atmosphere. Conversely, the wood and fiber removed from the forest in this project will be transferred to the wood products sector for a variety of uses, each of which has different effects on carbon (Skog et al. 2014). Carbon can be stored in wood products for a variable length of time, depending on the commodity produced. It can also be burned to produce heat or electrical energy or converted to liquid transportation fuels and chemicals that would otherwise come from fossil fuels. In addition, a substitution effect

13 A megatonne is one million metric tons; equal to about 2.2 billion pounds. 14 The term “carbon” is used in this context to refer to carbon dioxide.

Page | 3-110 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

occurs when wood products are used in place of other products that emit more GHGs in manufacturing, such as concrete and steel (Gustavasson et al. 2006, Lippke et al. 2011, McKinley et al. 2011). In fact, removing carbon from forests for human use can result in a lower net contribution of GHGs to the atmosphere than if the forest were not managed (McKinley et al. 2011, Bergman et al. 2014, Skog et al. 2014). The IPCC recognizes wood and fiber as a renewable resource that can provide lasting climate-related mitigation benefits that can increase over time with active management (IPCC 2000). Furthermore, by reducing stand density, the action alternatives may also reduce the risk of more severe disturbances, such as insect and disease outbreak and severe wildfires, which may result in lower forest carbon stocks and greater GHG emissions. Crow would move tree species composition towards more ponderosa pine, a fire adapted species.

In the absence of prescribed fire to reduce stand density and fuel loads, the fire-adapted forest where this project would take place may be more at risk to a high-severity wildfire, resulting in decreased ecosystem services and potentially increased carbon emissions. Prescribed fires typically target surface and ladder fuels and are typically less severe than wildfires (Agee and Skinner 2005), because they are conducted only when weather conditions are optimal and fuel moisture is high enough to keep combustion and spread within predetermined limits. Thus, prescribed fires result in minimal overstory tree mortality and typically combust less than 50 percent of the available fuel (Carter and Foster 2004, Hurteau and North 2009), producing lower GHG emissions than might be emitted if the same area were to burn in a high-severity wildfire (Wiedinmyer and Hurteau 2010). Also, a large portion of the emissions associated with prescribed fires is from duff, litter, and dead wood which comprise carbon pools that would otherwise decay quickly over time, releasing carbon to the atmosphere. Hazardous fuels reduction can help reduce the severity of wildfires in forests where fire exclusion has resulted in high fuel loadings and high tree densities (Agee and Skinner 2005, Stephens et al. 2013). High-severity fires, especially when they occur repeatedly, can affect human health and safety, infrastructure, and ecosystem services, and can cause a transition of forests to non-forest ecosystems in some areas (Roccaforte et al. 2012, Anderson-Teixeira et al. 2013). By reducing the threat of high-severity wildfire, the proposed action would create conditions more advantageous for supporting forest health in a changing climate and reducing GHG emissions over the long term.

In summary, this project affects a relatively small amount of forest land and carbon on the Malheur National Forest and, in the near term, might contribute an extremely small quantity of GHG emissions relative to national and global emissions. This project would not convert forest land to other non-forest uses, thus allowing any carbon initially emitted from the proposed action to have a temporary influence on atmospheric GHG concentrations, because carbon would be removed from the atmosphere over time as the forest regrows or would transfer carbon to the product sector where it may be stored for decades and substitute for more emission intensive materials or fuels. The action alternatives are consistent with internationally recognized climate change adaptation and mitigation practices. Evaluation of Proposed Forest Plan Amendments As discussed in chapter 1, the Forest Service has identified a need to amend the Ochoco Forest Plan to better reflect current conditions and scientific understanding regarding necessary hazardous fuel reduction in Crow. Based on the direction provided in 36 CFR 219, the Responsible Official must determine the appropriate scope and scale of forest plan amendments and apply those provisions of 36 CFR 219.8 through 219.11 that directly apply to the proposed

Chapter 3 Page|3-111 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment amendment. In the following section, the provisions of 36 CFR 219.8 through 219.11 that directly apply to the proposed amendments are briefly identified and discussed.

Provisions of 36 CFR 219.8 through 219.11 that are not directly applicable to the proposed amendments can be found in the EA Appendix B, along with the rationale for why those provisions are not directly applicable to the proposed amendments.

Proposed Forest Plan Amendments Selection of the proposed action alternative would require forest plan amendments (36 CFR 219.10(c)) to remove live ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir trees greater than or equal to 21 inches DBH but less than 30 inches DBH within 2,946 acres of upland stands. Analysis on the effects of this amendment were revised to include the recent decision on January 15, 2021.

Removal of Young, Large Trees Based on the need for change, site-specific conditions in the project area, and relevant forest- specific information and data, the following substantive requirements of 36 CFR 219.8 through 219.11 apply to the proposed amendments to allow removal of young trees up to 30 inches DBH in selected commercial thinning units outside of late and old structure stands in Crow. See Appendix B – 36 Code of Federal Regulations 219.8 to 11 Applicability to Amendments to the 1990 Malheur Forest Plan, as Amended for a rationale for why other provisions of 36 Code of Federal Regulations 219.8 through 219.11 do not apply.

As discussed in chapter 1, there is a need to change the Ochoco Forest Plan, as amended, to better reflect desired conditions regarding hazardous crown fuels and fuel levels within Crow.

Within Crow there has been an increasing trend of younger more shade-tolerant grand fir and Douglas-fir trees growing in the understory. The combination of timber harvest and fire suppression has gradually converted these dry forests from primarily long-lived, early-seral species (ponderosa pine) to a higher proportion of late-seral species (grand fir and Douglas-fir). Grand fir and Douglas-fir were historically not a major component within these dry forest types, but were present on the landscape, primarily on northern slopes and topographic depressions with higher availability of moisture. Some of these younger late-seral species are now greater quite large. The ingrowth of large younger fir trees has increased the risk of tree mortality to old ponderosa pine due to competition induced stress, insect attacks, and uncharacteristic wildfire.

Stand densities and multi-layered canopies have also increased across the project area. Roughly 72 percent (24,567 acres) of forested ground in the project area has a basal area greater than 90 square ft. per acre, which is above the desired range. Stand structures in the project area currently does not reflect the desired condition based on historical references. Over stocking, drought stress, and slow growth, accompanied by stagnated stand conditions are contributing to insect activity. Currently Crow is outside the historic range of variability. (HRV) Modeled results of current conditions in the project area indicate a HRV departure of 29,313 acres in the dry forest PVG. Departures are most evident in the old forest single stratum. See chapter 3, Forest Vegetation section for more information. Crow has a high fire risk based on past starts. Existing fuel conditions are a result of effective fire suppression for the past 75 to 100 years, timber harvest, and livestock grazing. There has been an increase in understory vegetation and an increase in surface fuels, a change in species composition, and an increase in the continuity of vertical and horizontal stand structure. As a result, the potential for crown fire has increased.

Page | 3-112 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

The fire return interval for Dry Upland Forest is commonly accepted to be between 12 and 20 years (Heyerdahl and Agee 1996, Johnston et al. 2017). Forested stands in Crow have missed several fire cycles based on the known fire return intervals and many of these stands would not burn as a low severity surface fire. Tree densities are also much higher and species composition has shifted to have a higher proportion of shade tolerant, fire susceptible fir. Insects and disease are also contributing to tree mortality in the area which contributes to surface fuel loading as trees fall to the ground. Future fires would be mixed severity to stand replacing with detrimental effects to other resources that did not historically occur.

As a stand becomes dense, active crowning occurs at lower wind speeds and the stand is more vulnerable to crown fire (Reinhardt et al. 2003).Through past harvest activities and the effects of fire exclusion, stand structure over much of the project area has shifted from primarily single storied stands with large trees to densely stocked stands with multi layered canopy of mid-size and small trees. These multi layered canopies favor mixed severity and stand replacement fire effects. Higher proportions of less fire dependent tree species such as grand fir have been recruited into the understory. This species exhibits very dense crowns and grow in tighter spacing than the more fire dependent ponderosa pine and western larch. Much of the stands in the project area have smaller grand fir growing as ladder fuels underneath the mature over story.

The proposed forest plan amendment is needed to address the need for change and the site- specific conditions in the project area described above. Specifically the proposed treatments would restore historically present tree species composition and restore the drier forest landscapes to a more historically fire resistant condition, and reduce stand densities and stress due to competition (§219.8(a)(1)(v) and §219.8(a)(1)(vi)). The ecosystem structure and function within the landscape would be restored by moving the tree species composition toward the ecologically desired mix of fire-resistant species (§219.8(a)(1)(ii)). Studies completed on the Malheur National Forest show that the dry forest landscapes were historically dominated by ponderosa pine (Johnston et al. 2017). Historically, frequent low-severity and mixed severity fire regimes maintained ponderosa pine as the dominant species (Munger 1917) (§219.8(a)(1)(iv) and §219.10(a)(8)). This directly applies to restoring upland stands towards historical condition as a fire adapted ecosystem.

Within the project area there are foreseeable risks to ecological sustainability because of the current imbalance of tree species composition and stand structures (§219.10(a)(7)). Proposed treatments would begin to restore the landscape condition (integrity) (§219.9(a)(1)), including stand structures and densities, species composition, and function (ability to withstand insects, diseases, and fire) while also restoring habitats for historically present plant communities and wildlife habitat (§219.8(a)(1)(iii) and §219.10(a)(1)). Treatments would develop an ecological balance and diversity of structural stages and tree species composition across the landscape that better reflect the historical range of variability for the dry upland forest potential vegetation groups (§219.9(a)(2)).

Maintaining or enhancing ecologically appropriate old forest conditions provides ecosystem types and habitat for forest plan management indicator species for old growth (§219.9(a)(2)(i)).

Management indicator species are commonly enjoyed and used by the public for observing (Lewis’s and white-headed woodpecker and bald eagle) (§219.10(a)(5)). See chapter 3, Terrestrial Wildlife – Management Indicator Species, Forest Vegetation, and Fire and Fuels, sections for more information.

Chapter 3 Page|3-113 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Consequences of Taking No Action (Alternative 1) Under the no action alternative there would be no removal of young large trees, therefore there is no proposed amendment. There would be no direct effect to the abundance of large trees in the project area. Upland stands would continue to deviate from the HRV throughout the modeling period. Surface fuels, ladder fuels, and crown fuels would continue to increase leading to an increased potential for crown fire. See chapter 3, Forest Vegetation and Fire and Fuels, sections for more information.

Direct and Indirect Effects of the Proposed Action Alternative Under the proposed action alternative, relatively large (greater than or equal to 21 inches diameter at breast height but less than 30 inches diameter at breast height) young Douglas-fir and ponderosa pine trees in the dry upland forest types would require a forest plan amendment to be removed on approximately 2,946 acres. The proposed action alternative would restore the ecosystem structure and function of dry upland forest stands by shifting the tree species composition toward the ecologically desired mix (consistent with 219.8(a)(1)(ii), 219.8(a)(1)(iii) and 219.8(a)(1)(vi)). Encroaching conifers greater than or equal to 21 inches DBH would be removed, reducing the risk of future insect outbreaks and uncharacteristic wildfire, while also restoring habitats for historically present plant communities and wildlife habitat (consistent with 219.8(a)(1)(iv), 219.9(a)(2)(i), 219.10(a)(5)), and 219.10(a)(8)). The proposed action alternative would develop stands more resilient to natural disturbances such as insects, disease, and wildfire (consistent with §219.9(a)(1), §219.8(a)(1)(iii), and §219.10(a)(1)). The proposed action alternative would directly allow for terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems to adapt to change by reducing surface, ladder and crown fuels, reducing conifer tree density, and reducing species composition of grand fir and Douglas fir where historically it was not a major component within these dry forest types, increasing water availability, and shifting species composition toward higher percentages of fire-resistant trees (219.10(a)(8)). The proposed amendment would transition upland stands in Crow to a more historically fire resilient landscape characterized by frequent, low severity fires (consistent with 219.8(a)(1)(v)). The proposed action alternative would directly allow for terrestrial ecosystems to adapt to change by reducing ladder fuels, reducing tree density, increasing water availability, and shifting species composition toward higher percentages of fire-resistant trees (consistent with §219.10(a)(8)). Without the removal of trees greater than or equal to 21 inches diameter at breast height, the percentage of ponderosa pine would be lower. The proposed action alternative is consistent with the intent of the updated Eastside Screens, as amended by the Old and Large Tree Guideline on a project- level scale. The project area is an appropriate size to conduct a historical range of variability analysis (Powell 2012) and project wide, late and old structure stand components would be maintained and/or enhanced in stands subject to timber harvest as much as possible by adhering to the following plan components: • old trees are prioritized for retention and recruitment, • large, fire tolerant species would be favored where appropriate, • appropriate species composition for biophysical environment, topographical position, stand density, historical diameter distributions, and spatial arrangements within stands and across the landscape are considered in order to develop stands that are resistant and resilient to disturbance • vegetative structure is manipulated in a manner that moves it towards late and old structural conditions as appropriate to meet historic range of variability

Page | 3-114 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

• open, park-like stand conditions are maintained where they occurred historically.

Cumulative Effects of the Proposed Action Alternative In the 25 years during which the amended Regional Forester’s Eastside Forest Plan Amendment 2 has been in place, the Ochoco National Forest has authorized 1 forest plan amendments for 384 acres to Standard #6(d) Scenario A (2)(a) to allow removal of live trees greater than 21 inches DBH. The effects to large tree abundance are analyzed at two scales: Watershed because that scale is large enough to encompass disturbance regimes and vegetative patterns and distributions that would have occurred historically; and Forest because of public comments about Forest-wide cumulative effects and to assess the Forest Plan amendments at the Forest planning level. At the watershed scale, there have been no projects in the Emigrant Creek watershed that amended the Eastside Screens to allow harvest of young large trees, and there are no foreseeable future projects that would amend the eastside screens for that purpose. Therefore, the effects of removing large trees in the Crow project would not create a cumulative effect with any other projects at the watershed scale. At the scale of the Ochoco National Forest there has been 1 previous amendment, the Wolf project which allowed for harvest of young large fir trees causing competitive stress to old ponderosa pine on 384 acres. The project removed approximately 1 to 2 large trees per acre (between 384 and 768 trees). The analysis for the Wolf project showed that over time, ponderosa pine large tree structure would be better maintained by the treatments (USFS 2014c). Foreseeable future projects on the Ochoco National Forest include the Walton Lake project, alternative 2. This project would remove about 571 large trees on 78 acres. The analysis for the Walton Lake project showed that over time, ponderosa pine large tree structure would be better maintained by the treatments (USFS 2020). Under a more recent analysis, the Forest Service evaluated alternatives to the Wildlife Standard of the Eastside Screens that limits harvest of trees greater than 21 inches for the Umatilla, Wallowa- Whitman, Malheur, Ochoco, Deschutes, and the Fremont-Winema National Forests. This project analysis, called Forest Management Direction for Large Diameter Trees in Eastern Oregon (https://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=58050), and accompanying Decision Notice and FONSI was signed January 15th, 2021. This amended the Eastside Screens by replacing the 21- inch standard with a guideline that emphasizes recruitment of old trees and large trees. Old trees (≥ 150 years of age) are prioritized for protection, and if there are not enough old trees to develop late and old structure conditions, large trees are protected, favoring fire tolerant species where appropriate. Large trees are defined as grand fir and white fir ≥ 30" dbh or trees of any other species ≥ 21-inch dbh.

Based on LiDAR data, there are an estimated 3.3 million trees >20” DBH on the Ochoco National Forest prior to implementation of the Wolf project that allowed removal of trees ≥21” DBH. When combined with the proposed action alternative, the amendments for the three projects would allow for harvest of trees ≥ 21” DBH within a range of about 16,402 to 16,786 trees (about 0.49% to 0.51% of estimated number of large trees on the Forest). Additionally, treatments would reduce hazardous crown fuels and contribute toward the restoration of, the structure and composition of old growth stands according to the pre-fire suppression old growth condition characteristic of the forest type.

Chapter 3 Page|3-115 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects of the Alternative 3 Under alternative 3 there would be no removal of young large trees, therefore there is no proposed amendment. There would be no direct effect to the abundance of large trees in the project area. Indirectly, upland stands would continue to deviate from the HRV throughout the modeling period although not as much as the no action alternative. There would be no cumulative effect of Alternative 3 on the abundance of large trees at the watershed or Forest scale. Overall, large trees would be maintained at the watershed and Forest scale. See chapter 3, Forest Vegetation and Fire and Fuels, sections for more information. Other Disclosures NEPA at 40 CFR 1502.25(a) directs “to the fullest extent possible, agencies shall prepare environmental assessments concurrently with and integrated with other environmental review laws and executive orders.” The following sections disclose those laws and executive orders.

Clean Water Act of 1982 All action alternatives would meet and conform to the Clean Water Act as amended in 1982. This act establishes a non-degradation policy for all federally proposed projects. All action alternatives meet anti-degradation standards agreed to by the state of Oregon and the Forest Service, Region 6, in a Memorandum of Understanding (Forest Service Manual 1561.5). This would be accomplished through planning, application, and monitoring of Best Management Practices (BMPs). Site-specific BMPs have been designed to protect beneficial uses. See Aquatics and Water Quality sections for detailed analysis.

Conflicts with Plans and Policies of Other Jurisdictions In Oregon, city and county comprehensive management plans are designed to carry out statewide planning goals. County plans recognize the National Forest as “primary forest,” “timber/grazing,” or similar designation. Although counties do not have responsibility for regulating use on Federal lands, the Forest Service and county governments attempt to coordinate planning efforts to avoid conflicts.

The alternatives discussed in this environmental assessment are generally compatible with the Harney County Comprehensive Plan (2009). The county comprehensive plan was reviewed to determine consistency with the alternatives and were determined to be in conformance with NFMA which requires the responsible official to "provide opportunities for the coordination of Forest Service planning efforts…with those of other resource management agencies."

Therefore, there are no known conflicts with plans or policies of other jurisdictions associated with implementing the alternatives. The FEIS for the Forest Plan (chapter 4, pages IV 85-89) discusses this in further detail. There are no known RS2477 claims for any roads proposed for access changes in the project area.

Ecologically Critical Areas There are no ecologically critical areas in the project area.

Page | 3-116 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

The Endangered Species Act of 1973, as Amended and Magnuson- Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA) of 2000 The Endangered Species Act requires protection of all species listed as “Threatened” or “Endangered” by Federal regulating agencies (Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service). The Forest Service also maintains, through the Federal Register, a list of species which are proposed for classification and official listing under the Endangered Species Act, species which occur on an official State list, or that are recognized by the Regional Forest as needing special management to prevent their being placed on Federal or State lists. Biological Evaluations and Assessments have been completed for all TES plant, aquatic and terrestrial wildlife. All alternatives are consistent with the Endangered Species Act, the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, and the requirements of the Regional Forester's Sensitive Species list. Consultation with U.S. Department of the Interior (USDI), Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S. Department of Commerce (USDC), National Marine Fisheries Service is not required for this project. See detailed analysis in Fisheries section, Wildlife section and Sensitive Plants section.

Energy Requirements and Conservation Potential of Alternatives The potential energy consumption associated with the proposed action and alternatives as well as the differences between the alternatives is not measurable.

Facilitation of Hunting Heritage and Wildlife Conservation: (Executive Order 13443) The purpose of this order is to direct Federal Agencies that have activities that have a measurable effect on public land management to facilitate the expansion and enhancement of hunting opportunities for the public. With implementation of any of these alternatives, there will be no significant effects to hunters or hunting seasons.

Floodplains (Executive Order 11988) and Wetlands (Executive Order 11990) Floodplains are defined in Executive Order 11988 Section 6 as: (c) The term "floodplain" shall mean the lowland and relatively flat areas adjoining inland and coastal waters including flood prone areas of offshore islands, including at a minimum, that area subject to a one percent or greater chance of flooding in any given year. Wetlands are defined in Executive Order 11990 Section 6 as: c) The term "wetlands" means those areas that are inundated by surface or ground water with a frequency sufficient to support and under normal circumstances does or would support a prevalence of vegetative or aquatic life that requires saturated or seasonally saturated soil conditions for growth and reproduction. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs and similar areas such as sloughs, potholes, wet meadows, river overflows, mud flats, and natural ponds. There are no jurisdictional floodplains or wetlands in the project area. Furthermore, the action alternatives comply with laws, regulations, and policies concerning floodplains and wetlands as no adverse effects on wetlands and floodplains would be expected to result from implementation of any alternative. Any wetlands associated with streams and springs would be protected using design features identified in chapter 2.

Chapter 3 Page|3-117 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Municipal Watersheds There are no municipal watersheds affected by the project; therefore, there would be no impacts on any municipal watersheds.

Multiple Use-Sustained Yield Act of 1960 The Multiple Use-Sustained Yield Act (MUSYA) 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 alternatives meet the intent of the MUSYA by providing timber products and service (renewable resources) from the National Forest without impairment of the productivity of the land. Proposed management of the lands in the project area are consistent with the goals and objectives of the Forest Plan as amended and would continue to provide for the needs of the American people to enjoy multiple uses associated with water resources, recreation, and wildlife.

National Forest Management Act (NFMA) Requirements of 36 CFR 219.28, which are part of the NFMA regulations, would be met. Specifically: 1) Harvest would occur only on suitable timberlands; 2) Following commercial thinning activities, none of the action alternatives would require reforestation activities since the stands would remain fully stocked or overstocked. The National Forest Management Act of 1976 requires the disclosure of any silvicultural prescription that creates an opening larger than 40 acres, using even-aged vegetation management. The project proposed action and alternatives would not create openings greater than 40 acres. The project proposed action and alternatives would not contribute to a negative trend in viability for any Management Indicator species.

National Historic Preservation Act In accordance with federal laws, regulations, and policies, a background (or prefield) investigation of the project area was conducted. The prefield research provides information on previous archaeological surveys performed in the project area, previous sites recorded in the area, the history of the area, and the probability of locating cultural resources on the geological and topographical landscape of the project area. Resources referenced for the prefield investigations include the Emigrant Creek Ranger District Heritage Program site and survey files and Geographic Information System (GIS) database. Also consulted were cultural overviews and ethnohistoric and academic reports relating to the cultural prehistory and history of both the Malheur National Forest and surrounding geographic areas.

On the ground implementation will not occur until the State Historic Preservation Office consultation has been conducted under the Programmatic Agreement among the United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region (Region 6), the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and the Oregon State Historical Preservation Officer regarding Cultural Resources Management in the State of Oregon by the USDA Forest Service dated June 2004.

Most identified sites and any newly recorded sites would be protected from activities associated with this project through avoidance. Impacts to sites that cannot be avoided (for instance by prescribed burning) would be reduced or eliminated through design criteria listed in chapter 2. See also the Cultural Resources section in chapter 3.

Page | 3-118 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

National Landmarks There are no National Landmarks in the project area. Therefore, no impacts would occur for any National Landmark.

Parklands There are no lands within the project area that would be characterized as parklands; therefore, there would be no impacts to parklands.

Prime Farmlands, Rangelands, and Forestlands Prime Farmland: The project area is not located in or adjacent to prime farmlands; therefore, there would be no impacts to Prime Farmlands. Prime Rangeland: The project does not contain prime rangeland because of soils and climate, and none of the proposed activities in the project would convert rangelands to other uses. Therefore, there would be no 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 Forestland.

Public Health and Safety Public health and safety would not be affected with this project.

Chapter 3 Page|3-119 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

References Agee, J.K. 1993. Fire ecology of Pacific Northwest Forests, Island Press, Washington D.C.

Agee, J.K., B. Bahro, and M.A Finney, M.A. [et al.]. 2000. The use of shaded fuelbreaks in landscape fire management. Forest Ecology and Management. 127: 55-66.

Agee, J.K. 2002. The fallacy of passive management managing for firesafe forest reserves. Conservation in Practice 3(1): 18-26. Agee, James K. 2002. Fire as a Coarse Filter for Snags and Logs. USDA Forest Service. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW- GTR- 181. Pp 359-368. Agee, J.K. and C.N. Skinner. 2005. Basic principles of forest fuel reduction treatments. Forest Ecology and Management. 211: 83-96.

Altman, Bob. 2000. Conservation Strategy for Landbirds in the Northern Rocky Mountains of Eastern Oregon and Washington. American Bird Conservancy, Corvallis, OR. 126pp. Arkle, R. S., and Pilliod D. S. 2009. Prescribed fires as ecological surrogates for wildfires: A stream and riparian perspective. Forest ecology and management. Baldwin, Ewart M.1964 Geology of Oregon. Kendall/Hunt Publishing, Dubuque, Iowa.

Barrett, H., 2007. Western juniper management: A field guide. Prepared by CSR Natural Resources Consulting, Inc. for The Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board.

Bastian, H.V. 2001. Effects of low intensity prescribed fires on ponderosa pine forests in wilderness areas of Zion National Park, Utah. Ponderosa pine ecosystems restoration and conservation: steps towards stewardship, conference proceedings. RMRS-P22. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, Colorado.

Bate, Lisa J., Garton, Edward O., Wisdom, Michael J. 1999. Estimating snag and large tree densities and distributions on a landscape for woodpecker management. Gen. Tech. Rep. USDA Portand. OR. Pac, NW Res. Stat. Bate, L. J., M. J. Wisdom, and B. C. Wales. 2007. Snag densities in relation to human access and associated management factors in forests of northeastern Oregon, USA. Landscape and Urban Planning 80:278–291. 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.

Brown, J.K., E.D. Reinhardt, and K.A. Kramer. 2003. Course woody debris: managing benefits and fire hazards in recovering forest. RMRS-GTR-105. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, Colorado.

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, Evelyn L., Catherine G. Parks, and Torolf R. Torgersen. 1997. Trees and Logs Important to Wildlife in the Interior Columbia River Basin. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-391. USDA Pac. NW Res. Sta. Pp55.

Page | 3-120 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Bull, E.L., N. Nielsen-Pincus, B.C. Wales, and J.L. Hayes. 2007. The influence of disturbance events on pileated woodpeckers in Northeastern Oregon, Forest Ecology and Management 243:320-329. Bull, E.L. 2003. Pileated Woodpecker. Pp. 372-374 in Birds of Oregon: A general reference. D.B. Marshall, M.G. Hunter, and A.L. Contreras, Eds. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. Burchsted, M.D., R. Thorson, and J. Vokoun. 2010. The river discontinuum: applying beaver modifications to baseline conditions for restoration of forested headwaters. Bioscience. 60: 908-922.

Butchard, Greg C. 1998. Environment, Prehistory, and Archaeology of the John Day Fossil Beds National Monument Blue Mountain Region, North-Central, Oregon. Report prepared for the National Park Service, Columbia Cascades System Support Office and John Day Fossil Beds National Monument by the International Archaeological Research Institute, Inc., Honolulu, Hawai’i. Report 583. Clark, R.N. and G.H. Stankey. 1979. The Recreation Opportunity Spectrum: A Framework for Planning, Management, and Research. General Technical Report PNW-98. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, Seattle, Washington.

Clinton, W.J. 1994. Executive order 12898: Federal actions to address environmental justice in minority populations and low-income populations. Federal Register. 59(32):7629–7635. http://www.archives.gov/federalregister/executive-orders/pdf/12898.pdf. (Accessed January 21, 2014).

Cluer, B. and C. Thorne. 2014. A stream evolution model integrating habitat and ecosystem benefits. River Research and Applications. 30(2): 135-154.

Collins, B. M. and S. L. Stephens. 2010. Stand replacing patches within a 'mixed severity' fire regime: quantitative characterization using recent fire in a long established natural fire area. Landscape Ecology. 25: 927-939.

Countryman, B., & Justice, D. (2010, June). Analysis of Existing versus Historic Condition for Structural Stages and Potential Vegetation Groups within the Malheur, Umatilla, and Wallowa-Whitman National Forests. Portland, OR: USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region (13 p.).

Covington, W.W., and M.M. Moore. 1994. Post-settlement Changes in Natural Fire Regimes and Forest Structure: Ecological Restoration of Old growth Ponderosa Pine Forests. Journal of Sustainable Forests 2:153-181.

Cram, D., T. Baker, and J. Boren. 2006. Wildland fire effects in silviculturally treated vs. untreated stands of New Mexico and Arizona. RMRS-RP-55. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, Colorado.

Crookston, N. L., Moeur, M., & Renner, D. (2002). Users guide to the most similar neighbor imputation program version 2.

Couture, Marilyn, 1996. Ethnographic Survey of the Burns Paiute Indians. USDA Forest Service, Wallowa-Whitman National Forest: Heritage program document.

Chapter 3 Page|3-121 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Cullen, S.J., C. Montagne, and H. Ferguson. 1991. Timber harvest trafficking and soil compaction in Western Montana. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 55: 1416 – 1421. DeBano, Leonard F., Daniel G. Neary, and Peter F. Folliott. 1998. Fire’s Effects on Ecosystems. John Wiley & Sons, New York. 333 pp. Dewey, R. 2011. Conservation Strategy for Calochortus longebarbatus var. peckii for Ochocoand Malheur National Forests and Prineville District BLM. USDA Forest Service Region6 and USDI Bureau of Land Management, Oregon and Washington.

Everett, R. L., Schellhaas, R., Keenum, D., Spurbeck, D., & Ohlson, P. (2000). Fire history in the ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir forests on the east slope of the Washington Cascades. Forest Ecology and Management, 129(1), 207-225.

Franklin, J. F., Johnson, K. N., Churchill, D. J., Hagmann, K., Johnson, D., & Johnston, J. (2013). Restoration of dry forests in eastern Oregon: a field guide. The Nature Conservancy, Portland, OR.

Frenzel, R.W., and K. J. Popper, 1998. Densities of white-headed woodpeckers and other woodpeckers in study areas on Deschutes National Forests, Oregon in 1997. In Marshall, 2003. Birds of Oregon Unpublished Report, Oregon Nat. Heritage Program, The Nature Conservancy, Portland, Oregon. Goodell, J. M. and Seager, S.T. 2015. The Northern Goshawk on the Southern Blue Mountains and Malheur National Forest: A Technical Review of its Status, Ecology and Management. The Nature Conservancy, Portland, OR. 93 p. Graham, R.T.; McCaffrey, S.; Jain, T.B. tech. eds. 2004. Science basis for changing forest structure to modify wildfire behavior and severity. RMRS-GTR-120. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, Colorado.

Graham, R.T., A.E. Harvey, and T.B. Jain. [et al.].1999. The effects of thinning and similar stand treatments on fire behavior in western forests. PNW-GTR-463. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, Oregon.

Graham, R.T.; McCaffrey, S.; Jain, T.B. tech. eds. 2004. Science basis for changing forest structure to modify wildfire behavior and severity. RMRS-GTR-120. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, Colorado.

Grant County Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2013. Prepared by Jerome Natural Resource Consultants, Inc., http://www.grantcountycwpp.com/

Hagmann, R. K., Franklin, J. F., & Johnson, K. N. (2013). Historical structure and composition of ponderosa pine and mixed-conifer forests in south-central Oregon. Forest Ecology and Management, 304, 492-504.

Hall, F. C., Bryant, L., Clausnitzer, R., Geier-Hayes, K., Keane, R., Kertis, J., & Steele, R. (1995). Definitions and codes for seral status and structure of vegetation. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report PNW.

Hall, F. C., 2007. Variation in Shrub and Herb Cover and Production on Ungrazed Pine and Sagebrush Sites in Eastern Oregon: A 27 Year Photomonitoring Study.

Page | 3-122 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Hann, W., D. Havlina, and A. Shlisky. [et al.]. 2003. Interagency and The Nature Conservancy fire regime condition class website. USDA Forest Service, US Department of the Interior, The Nature Conservancy, and Systems for Environmental Management. Available online at: http://www.frcc.gov

Harney County Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2013. Prepared by Walsh Environmental Scientists and Engineers, LLC. 84 pp

Harrod, Richy J., David W. Peterson, Nicholas A. Povak, Erich K. Dodson. 2009. Thinning prescribed fire effects on overstory tree and snag structure in dry coniferous forests of the interior Pacific Northwest. Forest Ecology and Management Vol. 258 issue 5 pp 712-721. Hessburg, P. F., Mitchell, R. G., & Filip, G. M. (1994). Historical and current roles of insects and pathogens in eastern Oregon and Washington forested landscapes.

Hessburg, P. F., Agee, J. K., & Franklin, J. F. (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(1), 117-139.

Hessburg, Paul F., Povak, Nicholas A., Salter R. Brion. 2010. Thinning and Prescribed Fire Effects on Snag Abundance and Spatial Pattern in an Eastern Cascade Range Dry Forest., Washington, USA. Forest Science. Vol. 56, number 1. Pp 74-87(14). Hessburg, P. F., Spies, T. A., Perry, D. A., Skinner, C. N., Taylor, A. H., Brown, P. M., ... & Singleton, P. H. (2016). Tamm Review: Management of mixed-severity fire regime forests in Oregon, Washington, and Northern California. Forest Ecology and Management, 366, 221-250.

Heyerdahl, E.K.; Agee, J.K. 1996. Historical fire regimes of four sites in the Blue Mountains, Oregon and Washington. University of Washington, College of Forest Resources.

Hillis, J., M.Thompson, J. Canfield, L. Lyon, C. Marcum, P.Dolan, and D. McCleerey . 1991 Defining elk security: the Hillis paradigm. Pages 38-43 in A. Christensen, L. Lyon, and T. Lonner, editors. Proceedings of a Symposium on Elk Vulnerability. Montana State University, Bozeman, USA. Hollenbeck, J.P., V.A. Saab, and R.W. Frenzel. 2011. Habitat Suitability and Nest Survivability of White-headed woodpeckers in unburned forests of Oregon. Journal of Wildlife Management. Vol. 75 Issue 5. 10 pp. Horton, Scott P.; Mannan, R. William. 1988. Effects of prescribed fire on snags and cavity- nesting birds in southeastern Arizona pine forests. Wildlife Society Bulletin. 16(1): 37- 44. Johnston, James D. et al. 2017. Historical Fire-Climate Relationships in Contrasting Interior Pacific Northwest Forest Types. Fire Ecology Volume 13, Issue 2, 2017

Johnston, J.D., C.J. Dunn, M.J. Vernon, J.D. Bailey, B.A. Morrissette, and K.E. Morici. 2018.Restoring historical forest conditions in a diverse inland Pacific Northwest landscape.Ecosphere, 9(8): e02400. 10.1002/ecs2.2400

Kagan, J. 1996. Species Management Guide for Calochortus longebarbatus var. peckii. Oregon Natural Heritage Program.

Chapter 3 Page|3-123 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Kaufmann, M.R., Huckaby, L.S., Regan, C.M., and Popp, J. 1998. Forest Reference Conditions for Ecosystem Management in the Sacramento Mountains, New Mexico. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-19, Rocky Mountain Research Station, USDA Forest Service, Fort Collins, Colorado

Keane, R. E., Ryan, K. C., Veblen, T. T., Allen, C. D., Logan, J., & Hawkes, B. (2002). Cascading effects of fire exclusion in Rocky Mountain ecosystems: a literature review. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mt. Res. Stn. Gen. Tech. Rep. GTR-91.

Korol, Jerome J., Miles A. Hemstrom, Wendel J. Hann, and Rebecca Gravenmier. 2002. Snags and down wood in the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project. In: Laudenslayer, William F., Jr.; Valentine, Brad; Weatherspoon, C. Philip; Lisle, Thomas E., technical coordinators. Proceedings of the symposium on the ecology and management of dead wood in western forests. 1999 November 2-4; Reno, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-181. Albany, CA: Pacific Southwest Research Station, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. 649-66. Korol, unpublished cited in DecAid http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/wildlife/decaid/index.shtml Krannitz, P. G. (2007). Abundance and diversity of shrub-steppe birds in relation to encroachment of ponderosa pine. Wilson Journal of Ornithology, 119(4), 655-664.

Krieger, Douglas J. Ph.D. 2001. The Economic Value of Forest Ecosystem Services: A Review. Prepared for the Wilderness Society. p 40.

McNeil, R.1999. Overland transport distances of sediment from roads swamp planning area. White Paper. USDA Forest Service, Malheur National Forest, Supervisor’s Office, John Day, Oregon.

Mellen-McLean, Kim, Bruce G. Marcot, Janet L. Ohmann, Karen Waddell, Susan A. Livingston, Elizabeth A. Willhite, Bruce B. Hostetler, Catherine Ogden, and Tina Dreisbach. 2014. DecAID, 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 Miller, R. F., & Eddleman, L. (2000). Spatial and temporal changes of sage grouse habitat in the sagebrush biome. Corvallis, Or.: Oregon State University, Agricultural Experiment Station.

Miller, R. F. (2005). Biology, ecology, and management of western juniper (Juniperus occidentalis). Corvallis, Or.: Agricultural Experiment Station, Oregon State University.

Miller, R. F., & Heyerdahl, E. K. (2008). Fine-scale variation of historical fire regimes in sagebrush-steppe and juniper woodland: an example from California, USA. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 17(2), 245-254.

Miller, R. F., Ratchford, J., Roundy, B. A., Tausch, R. J., Hulet, A., & Chambers, J. (2014). Response of conifer-encroached shrublands in the Great Basin to prescribed fire and mechanical treatments. Rangeland Ecology & Management, 67(5), 468-481.

Page | 3-124 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

Minnich, R.A., M.G. Barbour, J.H. Burk, and R.F. Fernau. 1995. Sixty years of change in Californian conifer forests of the San Bernardino Mountains. Conservation Biology 9:902-914.

Mosgrove, Jerry L. 1980 The Malheur National Forest: An Ethnographic History. John Day, Oregon: USDA Forest Service, Malheur National Forest.

Munger, T.T. 1917. Western yellow pine in Oregon. Technical Bulletin 418, USDA-Forest Service, Washington, D.C. 47 p.

North, M., P. Stine, K. O’Hara, W. Zielinski, and M. Stephens. 2009. An ecosystem management strategy for Sierran Mixed-Conifer forests. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station, PSW-GTR- 220.

Olson, Diana 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. Seattle: University of Washington. M.S. Thesis. 274 p.

Omi, P.N.; Martinson, E.J. 2002. Final report: effect of fuel treatment on wildfire severity. Western Forest Fire Research Center, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado.

Osei, N.A., A.M. Gurnell, and G.L. Harvey. 2015. The role of large wood in retaining fine sediment, organic matter and plant propagules in a small, single-thread forest river. Geomorphology, 235, 77-87.

Peterson, D.L. 2004. Role of silviculture in fuel treatments. Fuels planning: science synthesis and integration, fact sheet 43. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, Colorado.

Peterson, D.L., Johnson, M.C.; Agee, J.K.[et al.]. 2005. Forest structure and fire hazard in dry forests of the Western United States. PNW-GTR-628. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, Oregon.

Pilliod, David S; Bull, Evelyn L.; Hayes, Jane L; Wales, Barbara C. 2006. Wildlife and invertebrate response to fuel reduction treatments in dry forest of the western United State: a synthesis. Gen. Tech. Rep. Rocky Mnt. Res. Stat. RMRS-GTR-173. USDA Fort Collins, CO. 34pp. Pollet, J., & Omi, P. N. (2002). Effect of thinning and prescribed burning on crown fire severity in ponderosa pine forests. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 11(1), 1-10.

Polvi, L.E. and E. Wohl. 2013. Biotic drivers of stream planform implications for understanding the past and restoring the future. BioScience, 63(6), 439-452.

Powell, D. C.; et al (2007). Potential vegetation hierarchy for the Blue Mountains section of northeastern Oregon, southeastern Washington, and west central Idaho. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-709. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 87 p. Powell, D. C. (2010). Range of variation recommendations for dry, moist, and cold forests. White Pap. F14-SO-WP-Silv-03. Pendleton, OR: USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region, Umatilla National Forest.

Chapter 3 Page|3-125 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Reid, Kenneth C., John A. Draper, and Peter E. Wigand, 1989. Prehistory and Paleoenvironments of the Silvies Plateau, Harney Basin, Southwest Oregon. Center for Northwestern Anthropology, Washington State University, Pullman. Reinhardt, E.D.; Crookston, N.L., tech. eds. 2003. The fire and fuels extension to the Forest Vegetation Simulator. RMRS-GTR-116. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Ogden, Utah.

Rose, J., et al. (2001), Identifying Conservation-Priority Areas in the Tropics: a Land-Use Change Modeling Approach. Conservation Biology, 15: 501-512. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523- 1739.2001.015002501.x

Rothermel, R.C. 1983. How to predict the spread and intensity of forest and range fires. INT-143. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Ogden, Utah.

Rowland, Mary M.; Wisdom, Michael J.; Johnson, Bruce K.; Penninger, Mark A. 2004. Effects of roads on elk: implications for management in forested ecosystems. In: Transactions of the 69th North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference: 491-508. Saab, V. and Dudley, J.; 2003. A field protocol to monitor cavity-nesting birds. Res. Pap. RMRS-RP-44. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 16 pp. Smith, J. and W. Fischer. 1997. Fire Ecology of the Forest Habitat Types of Northern Idaho. Intermountain Research Station General Technical Report INT-GTR-363. September 1997. 142 pp.

Soil Resource Inventory (SRI). 1974. Malheur National Forest. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. Thomas J. W, Technical Editor. 1979 Wildlife Habitats in Managed Forests, The Blue Mountains of Oregon and Washington. Agricultural Handbook No. 553. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Thomas, J.W., D A. Leckenby; M. Henjum; R. J. Pedersen; L.D. Bryant 1988. Habitat effectiveness index for elk on Blue Mountain Winter Ranges. Gen. Tech. Rep PNW- GTR-218. Portland, OR U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Servcive Pacific Northwest Research Station. 28 p. Turner, J. S., & Krannitz, P. G. (2001). Conifer density increases in semi-desert habitats of British Columbia in the absence of fire. Northwest Science, 75(2), 176-192.

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1997. USDA departmental regulation no. 5600-002, environmental justice. http://www.ocio.usda.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2012/DR5600- 002.pdf. USDA Forest Service, 1988. General Water Quality Best Management Practices. PNW Region USDA Forest Service. 1989. Ochoco National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. USDA Forest Service. Ochoco National Forest. Available online at: https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/ochoco/landmanagement/planning/?cid=stelprd3808740

USDA Forest Service. 1990. Malheur National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. USDA Forest Service. Malheur National Forest. Available online at: http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/malheur/landmanagement/projects/?cid=fsbdev3_033813

Page | 3-126 Chapter 3 Environmental Assessment Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project

USDA Forest Service. 2004. The Malheur National Forest Roads Analysis Report. John Day, OR: Malheur National Forest.

USDA Forest Service, 2005. Pacific Northwest Region Final Environment Impact Statement for the Invasive Plant Program, 2005 USDA Forest Service, 2012. National Best Management Practices for Water Quality Management on National Forest System Lands. http://www.fs.fed.us/biology/resources/pubs/watershed/index.html USDA Forest Service. 2015c. Region 6 stream survey. Stream Inventory Handbook, Level I and II. Version 2.15. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region.

USDA Forest Service. 2015. Field Guide to Sensitive Plants of the Malheur National Forest. Unpublished book developed using publically available information and photos. USDA Forest Service. 2018. Pacific Northwest Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species List. Available online at: http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/sfpnw/issssp/agency-policy/ U.S. Department of Commerce. 2019. Census Bureau, American Community Survey Office, Washington, D.C.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2010. Action development process: interim guide on considering environmental justice during the development of an action, p. 3. http://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/resources/policy/considering-ej-in-rulemaking- guide-07-2010.pdf. (Accessed January 21, 2014). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2013. Environmental justice. http://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/. (Accessed July 10, 2013). Vale, T. R. (1981). Tree Invasion of Montane Meadows in Oregon. The American Midland Naturalist, 105, 1.

Van Pelt, R., 2008. Identifying old trees and forests of Eastern Washington. Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Olympia, Washington. pp.166.

Van Wagtendonk, J.W. 1996. Use of a deterministic fire growth model to test fuel treatments. In: Status of the Sierra Nevada: Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Final Report to Congress, Volume II, pages 1155-1165. Wildland Resources Center Report No. 37. University of California, Davis, California. Vaux, Henry J., et al. 1984. Methods for assessing the impact of fire on forest recreation. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-79. Berkeley, CA: Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture; 13 p. Wales, B. C., Gaines, W.L., Suring, L.H., Mellen-Mclean, K. 2014 (draft). Focal species assessment of current condition and the proposed action (alternative B) for the Blue Mountains forest plan revision. Baker City, OR, Unpublished paper on file at: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Wallowa-Whitman National Forest, Blue Mountain Forest Plan Revision Team.

Wisdom, M.J., R.S. Holthausen, B.C. Wales, C.D. Hargis, V.A. Saab, D.C. Lee, W.J. 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. Volume 1 – Overview. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-485.

Chapter 3 Page|3-127 Crow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/gtr485/gtr485vl.pdf

Wright, Clinton S., and James K. Agee. 2004. FIRE AND VEGETATION HISTORY IN THE EASTERN CASCADE MOUNTAINS, WASHINGTON. Ecological Applications Vol. 14, No. 2

Page | 3-128 Chapter 3