DOCSLIB.ORG

Bald Angel Vegetation Management Project Environmental Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Bald Angel Vegetation Management Project Environmental Assessment BALD ANGEL VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT La Grande Ranger District Wallowa-Whitman National Forest December 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NUMBER I. PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION ...............................................................................1 A. Introduction.......................................................................................................................1 B. Background ......................................................................................................................1 C. Purpose and Need ..........................................................................................................1 D. Proposed Action..............................................................................................................3 E. Decisions to be Made .....................................................................................................7 F. Desired Condition............................................................................................................7 G. Project Area Description ................................................................................................8 H. Key Issues ........................................................................................................................9 I. Other Issues...................................................................................................................18 J. Summary of Scoping Process.....................................................................................24 II. ALTERNATIVES, INCLUDING THE PROPOSED ACTION................................................26 A. Introduction.....................................................................................................................26 B. Alternative Development Process ..............................................................................26 C. Alternatives Considered, but Eliminated from Detailed Study...............................26 D. Alternatives Considered in Detail................................................................................27 Elements Common to the Action Alternatives ..........................................................27 Alternative Descriptions................................................................................................36 A. Alternative 1 – No Action..................................................................................36 B. Alternative 2 – Proposed Action......................................................................36 C. Alternative 3 – Preferred Alternative ..............................................................39 D. Alternative 4 – No Roads .......................................………………………… 42 Management Requirements, Constraints, and Mitigation Measures....................46 Alternative Comparison at a Glance ..........................................................................58 Comparison of How the Alternatives Respond to the Key Issues.........................59 Monitoring Plan..............................................................................................................60 III. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ...............................................................................63 A. Introduction.....................................................................................................................63 B. Alternative Evaluation as They Respond to the Key Issues...................................63 Silviculture/Vegetation Management....................................................................64 Wildlife Resource – Old Growth/Big Game.........................................................68 Fire and Fuels Management..................................................................................80 C. Alternative Evaluation as They Respond to the Other Issues................................93 Economic Effects.....................................................................................................93 Fisheries and Watershed Resources...................................................................97 Soil Quality and Productivity............................................................................... 105 Proposed, Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive Species (PETS)......... 115 Sensitive Plant Species....................................................................................... 115 Access and Travel Management....................................................................... 123 Management Indicator Species (MIS)............................................................... 125 Primary Cavity Excavators (Snags and Log Habitat)..................................... 128 Neotropical Migratory Birds ................................................................................ 132 Unique and Sensitive Habitats ........................................................................... 135 Rangeland Resources & Noxious Weeds ........................................................ 138 Recreation/Visuals ............................................................................................... 143 Forest Plan Amendment for LOS....................................................................... 148 D. Required and Additional Disclosures ...................................................................... 150 IV. CONSULTATION WITH OTHERS ................................................................................ 153 V. INTERDISCIPLINARY PARTICIPATION ..................................................................... 154 APPENDICES: A. Alternative 2 – Data Table and Map B. Alternative 3 – Data Table and Map C. Alternative 4 – Data Table and Map D. Cumulative Effect Process and Area Activities E. Public Comments to Environmental Assessment Changes Post Comment Period: An earlier addition of Chapter 2 was inadvertently mailed out to the public during the comment period. The primary change from the version of Chapter 2 mailed out to this updated version is the treatment of snags within the project area. The previous version called for use of the District Snag Policy which had been changed to “No snag removal” and is accurately reflected in this version. Refer to the pages listed below for specifics. Chapters One and Three were correct in the mailing and already reflected the effects of this change in snag direction for the project. Page 28 – Connective Corridor Units: Changed from 4-6 snags per acre retained to All snags would be retained. Page 35 – Common Elements - Added 7. Snags section directing the retention of all snags > 12 inches dbh in all action alternatives. Page 51 – General Soil and Water Mitigations – Added Temporary road direction for location, design, and management. Page 63 – “Stocking levels exceeding recommendations on approximately 25%” was corrected to 52% as the numbers were accidentally transposed. Page 123 – Changed typo INFS to INFISH. BALD ANGEL VEGETATION MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT La Grande Ranger District Wallowa-Whitman National Forest Chapter I: Purpose of and Need for Action A. Introduction The purpose of this Environmental Assessment (EA) is to evaluate the environmental impacts of proposed activities designed to restore and enhance ecosystems, and reduce fire danger within the Bald Angel project area. B. Background The 36,700 acre Bald Angel analysis area (subwatersheds 13D-F and 29D-F, and H) consists primarily of the National Forest system lands beginning at Bald Hill south of the 77 Road, east to the 7740 Road above Velvet Creek, follows the private land boundary along the south end of the project area, and is bordered on the eastern edges by the 7035 road, Goose Creek and the East Fork of Goose Creek. The project area is due east of Medical Springs and approximately 12 miles southeast of Union, Oregon. The project area does not affect any roadless areas as described in the Roadless Area Conservation FEIS and has been allocated to timber production, big game winter range, and old growth in the Wallowa-Whitman National Forest Plan. Past management activities, aggressive fire suppression, drought, and insect and disease activity in the past contributed to the decline of forest and watershed conditions in this area over the last 20 years. Mountain Pine beetle and Western Pine Beetle are generally at endemic levels within the project area at the present time, however, they have shown an increase in recent years. The area around Langrell Gulch had beetle populations at epidemic levels with tree mortality spreading throughout the area. In response to this epidemic the Bald Angel Project Decision Memo was signed in 2004, and the insect mortality and overstocked stands immediately adjacent to the infestation were harvested the same year. Overstocked stand conditions increase the risk of further loss of tree species. The landscape in the Bald Angel project area (Powder River/Pondosa- watershed 13 and Powder River/Keating- watershed 29) is currently outside of the desired range of variability for late and old forest structure, as well as desired levels for snags, down woody material, and big game cover. Further analysis indicates that long-term restoration needs still exist within the area. Analysis of the existing condition for the Draft Powder River/Pondosa and Keeting Watershed Analysis (slated for completion in 2006) and field reconnaissance completed for this project during the summers of 2000 - 2003 indicated that the project area has a considerable number
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Protecting the Crown: a Century of Resource Management in Glacier National Park
    Protecting the Crown A Century of Resource Management in Glacier National Park Rocky Mountains Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit (RM-CESU) RM-CESU Cooperative Agreement H2380040001 (WASO) RM-CESU Task Agreement J1434080053 Theodore Catton, Principal Investigator University of Montana Department of History Missoula, Montana 59812 Diane Krahe, Researcher University of Montana Department of History Missoula, Montana 59812 Deirdre K. Shaw NPS Key Official and Curator Glacier National Park West Glacier, Montana 59936 June 2011 Table of Contents List of Maps and Photographs v Introduction: Protecting the Crown 1 Chapter 1: A Homeland and a Frontier 5 Chapter 2: A Reservoir of Nature 23 Chapter 3: A Complete Sanctuary 57 Chapter 4: A Vignette of Primitive America 103 Chapter 5: A Sustainable Ecosystem 179 Conclusion: Preserving Different Natures 245 Bibliography 249 Index 261 List of Maps and Photographs MAPS Glacier National Park 22 Threats to Glacier National Park 168 PHOTOGRAPHS Cover - hikers going to Grinnell Glacier, 1930s, HPC 001581 Introduction – Three buses on Going-to-the-Sun Road, 1937, GNPA 11829 1 1.1 Two Cultural Legacies – McDonald family, GNPA 64 5 1.2 Indian Use and Occupancy – unidentified couple by lake, GNPA 24 7 1.3 Scientific Exploration – George B. Grinnell, Web 12 1.4 New Forms of Resource Use – group with stringer of fish, GNPA 551 14 2.1 A Foundation in Law – ranger at check station, GNPA 2874 23 2.2 An Emphasis on Law Enforcement – two park employees on hotel porch, 1915 HPC 001037 25 2.3 Stocking the Park – men with dead mountain lions, GNPA 9199 31 2.4 Balancing Preservation and Use – road-building contractors, 1924, GNPA 304 40 2.5 Forest Protection – Half Moon Fire, 1929, GNPA 11818 45 2.6 Properties on Lake McDonald – cabin in Apgar, Web 54 3.1 A Background of Construction – gas shovel, GTSR, 1937, GNPA 11647 57 3.2 Wildlife Studies in the 1930s – George M.
    [Show full text]
  • Protection of Predator/Prey Diversity in the North Fork Valley of the Flathead River : a Case for Land Use Planning
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 1993 Protection of predator/prey diversity in the North Fork valley of the Flathead River : a case for land use planning Allen C. May The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation May, Allen C., "Protection of predator/prey diversity in the North Fork valley of the Flathead River : a case for land use planning" (1993). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 8397. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/8397 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ALLFA^ C MAi Maureen and Mike MANSFIELD LIBRARY TheMontana University of Permission is granted by the author to reproduce this material in its entirety, provided that this material is used for scholarly purposes and is properly cited in published works and reports. * * Please check “Yes ” or “No ” and provide signature Yes, I grant permission No, I do not grant permission Author’s Signature L / Date; ; Any copying for commercial purposes or financial gain may be undertaken only with the author’s explicit consent. MALirOPY P\t4 PROTECTION OF PREDATOR/ PREY DIVERSITY IN THE NORTH FORK VALLEY OF THE FLATHEAD RIVER: A CASE FOR LAND USE PLANNING By Allen C.
    [Show full text]
  • Wild and Scenic River Study Report for the Flathead River
    ----- ' ---- 1 !3o !( F1 LE , ,. I i STUDY REPORT FlATHEAD NATIONAl F ...- Wild& Scenic . River STUDY REPORT , .•~·· ~ . ~ \. FLATHEAD RIVER WILD AND SCENIC RIVER STUDY REPORT U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FLATHEAD NATIONAL FOREST 1975 Prepared in Accordance with Section 4(a) of Public Law 90-542 Preface This report was originally published in July of 1973. It was sent to Federal agencies, State agencies, and made available for public review in August of 1973. Consideration of review comments was the basis for changes made in this revision. Recommendations within the report have not changed, but numerous additions and corrections have been made in the support data. The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act was passed prior to the passage of the National Environmental Policy Act. As a result of this sequence of legislative action two reports are required in the Flathead Wild and Scenic River Study: (1) a study report and (2) an environmental statement. The draft environmental statement was used more extensively than the study report for public review since it contained the items of essential interest in a more concise form. The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act requires that responses from Federal agencies be sent with the study report to the President and Congress; therefore, they have been included in Appendix 11. A summary of public comment to the draft environmental statement is also included as a part of Appendix 11 of this report. Public documents on the draft environmental statement which were also pertinent to the study report were considered in the revision of the study report. Public, Federal, and State letters are all included in the final environmental statement with the responses by the Forest Service explaining how comments were considered in the revision of the report.
    [Show full text]
  • Fire History of a Western Larch/Douglas-Fir Forest Type In
    Fire History of a Western LarchlDouglasFir ForestType in Northwestern Montana1 Kathleen M.Davis2 Abstract.--Mean frequencies were about 120 years for valleys and montane slopes and 150 years for subalpine slopes in this western larch/Douglas-fir forest from 1735 to 1976. Fires were small and moderately intense with occasional high intensity runs. Single burns thinned the overstory favoring mixed conifer regeneration.Multiple burns created homogeneous stands or shrubfields. INTRODUCTION Forest.3Coram provided a contiguous study unit with documented history of logging operations and fires In coniferous forests of North America fire is since the 1920's. A fire history investigation recognized as an ecological agent of change that, would be a continuation of research in this Bio- in some cases, is essential for continuation of shpere Reserve. Specific objectives of the study certain biotic communities (Muir 1901, Intermountain were: Fire Research Council 1970, Kilgore 1973, Wright l.--Field test the fire methodology that was and Heinselmam 1973). Acknowledging this as an being prepared by Arno and Sneck and develop tech- forest integral factor of some environments, Mutch (1970) niques for sampling logged areas and inesic hypothesized that floral species in a f ire- types. dependent community have flammable characteristics 2.--Determine and describe fire history through that promote fire. Features such as volatile oils, scar analysis and stand age class structure. high resin content, serotinous cones, and fibrous 3.--Interpret the role of fire using the study bark perpetuate fire as a major ecological influence. results and historical information from surrounding However, in a community-that is not fire dependent, areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Copyright by Neel Gregory Baumgardner 2013
    Copyright by Neel Gregory Baumgardner 2013 The Dissertation Committee for Neel Gregory Baumgardner Certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Bordering North America: Constructing Wilderness Along the Periphery of Canada, Mexico, and the United States Committee: Erika Bsumek, Supervisor H.W. Brands John McKiernan-Gonzalez Steven Hoelscher Benjamin Johnson Bordering North America: Constructing Wilderness Along the Periphery of Canada, Mexico, and the United States by Neel Gregory Baumgardner, B.B.A, M.B.A. Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Texas at Austin May 2013 Bordering North America: Constructing Wilderness Along the Periphery of Canada, Mexico, and the United States Neel Gregory Baumgardner, Ph.D. The University of Texas at Austin, 2013 Supervisor: Erika Bsumek This dissertation considers the exchanges between national parks along the North American borderlands that defined the contours of development and wilderness and created a brand new category of protected space – the transboundary park. The National Park Systems of Canada, Mexico, and the United States did not develop and grow in isolation. “Bordering North America” examines four different parks in two regions: Waterton Lakes and Glacier in the northern Rocky Mountains of Alberta and Montana and Big Bend and the Maderas del Carmen in the Chihuahuan Desert of Texas and Coahuila. In 1932, Glacier and Waterton Lakes were combined to form the first transboundary park. In the 1930s and 1940s, using the Waterton-Glacier model as precedent, the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX T REFERENCES *Document Contains Confidential Information
    APPENDIX T REFERENCES *Document contains confidential information. Not for release under FOIA. *ALL Consulting. 2004. Old North Trail and Ethnographic Investigation for the Blackleaf Gas Field. Prepared for Bureau of Land Management Montana State Office (contract). Tulsa, Oklahoma. 117 p. (plus appendices) Andryk, T.A. 1983. Ecology of bighorn sheep in relation to oil and gas development along the east slope of the Rocky Mountains, Northcentral Montana. Unpublished Master’s Thesis. Montana State University, Bozeman, MT. 100 pp. Archer, V. 2003. USDA Forest Service, Lewis and Clark National Forest. P.O. Box 869, Great Falls, MT. Unpublished Soil Resource Field Report. 12 p. Banci, V. 1994. Chapter 5 – Wolverine. pp. 99-127 in Ruggiero, L.F., K.B. Aubry, S.W. Buskirk, L.J. Lyon, and W. J. Zielinski, eds. The Scientific Basis for Conserving Forest Carnivores – American Marten, Fisher, Lynx, and Wolverine in the Western United States. General Technical Report RM-254. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO. 184 pp. Beidl, Jacqueline. 1992. The Blackfeet and the Badger-Two Medicine: An Evaluation of Potential Traditional Cultural Significance Drawn From Archival Sources. Lewis and Clark National Forest. Great Falls, Montana. 62 p. Belsky, A.J., A. Matzke, and S. Uselman. 1999. Survey of Livestock Influences on Stream and Riparian Ecosystems in the Western United States. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 54(1):419-431. Betz, Carter, D. English, and H.K. Cordell. 1999 “Outdoor Recreation Resources”, Multiple- Use Agencies, pgs 44-49, IN: Outdoor Recreation in American Life: A National Assessment of Demand and Supply Trends, H.
    [Show full text]
  • Cartographic Records of the Forest Service
    PRELIMINARY INVENTORY OF THE CARTOGRAPHIC RECORDS OF THE FOREST SERVICE (Record Group 95) Compiled by Charlotte M. Ashby The National Archives National Archives .and Records Service General Services Administration Washington: 1967 National Archives Publication No. 67-5 Library of Congress Catalog Card No. A67-7213 FOREWORD GSA through the National Archives and Records Service is responsible for administering the permanent noncurrent records of the Federal Government. These archival hold­ ings, now amounting to about 900,000 cubic feet, date from the days of the Continental Congresses; they include the basic records of the three branches of our Government-­ Congress, the courts, and the executive departments and independent agencies. The Presidential Libraries.. - Hoover, Roosevelt, Truman, and Eisenhower--contain the papers of those Presidents and many of their associates in office. Among our holdings are many hallowed documents relating to great events of our Nation's history, preserved and ven­ erated as symbols to stimulate a worthy patriotism in all of us. But most of the records are l~ss dramatic, kept because of their continuing practical utility for the ordinary proc­ esses of government, for the protection of private rights, and for the research use of students and scholars. To facilitatethe use of the records and to describetheir nature and content, our archivists prepare various kinds of finding aids. The present work is one suchpublication. We believe that it will prove valuable to anyone who wishes to use the records it describes. LAWSON B. KNOTT, JR. Administrator of General Services iii PREFACE The first step in the records-description program of the National Archives is the compilation of preliminary invento­ ries of the material in some 380 record groups to which the holdings of the National Archives are allocated.
    [Show full text]
  • Swan River State Forest
    Swan River State Forest: Department of Natural Resources and Conservation LOST NAPA VICINITY MAP Approximate Lost Napa Project Area March 8, 2021 LOST NAPA MULTIPLE TIMBER SALE PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Enclosed is a copy the Lost Napa Multiple Timber Sale Project Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). The proposed project is located approximately 7 miles south of Swan Lake, Montana in the Swan River State Forest. The Department does not present a preferred alternative of the two action alternatives analyzed in the FEIS. The proposed harvest volumes range from 0 with No-Action Alternative A, 19.8 MMbf with Action Alternative B, and 18.5 MMbf with Action Alternative C. My proposed decision in the FEIS is Action Alternative C. The rational for my proposed decision is at the end of Chapter II in the FEIS. I anticipate making my final decision on March 22, 2021. The Land Board has the ultimate decision responsibility. The FEIS was designed to address Swan River State Forest’s primary commitment to Montana’s mandated timber harvest levels over a three-year period. This approach does a better job of analyzing cumulative effects to valuable resources and improves coordination for project planning within active subzones scheduled by the Habitat Conservation Plan. Sincerely, Nick Aschenwald Unit Manager Swan River State Forest 34925 MT Highway 83, Swan Lake, Mt 59911 (406) 754 - 2301 LOST NAPA MULTIPLE TIMBER SALE PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PREFACE This document has been designed and developed to provide the decisionmaker with sufficient information to make an informed, reasoned decision concerning the proposed Lost Napa Multiple Timber Sales Project (proposed action) and to inform the interested public about this project so they may express their concerns to the project leader and decisionmaker.
    [Show full text]
  • Names, Boundaries, and Maps: a Resource for the Historical Geography of the National Forest System of the United States The
    NAMES, BOUNDARIES, AND MAPS: A RESOURCE FOR THE HISTORICAL GEOGRAPHY OF THE NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM OF THE UNITED STATES THE NORTHERN REGION (Region One) By Peter L. Stark Brief excerpts of copyright material found herein may, under certain circumstances, be quoted verbatim for purposes such as criticism, news reporting, education, and research, without the need for permission from or payment to the copyright holder under 17 U.S.C § 107 of the United States copyright law. Copyright holder does ask that you reference the title of the essay and my name as the author in the event others may need to reach me for clarification, with questions, or to use more extensive portions of my reference work. Also, please contact me if you find any errors or have a map that has not been included in the cartobibliography TABLE OF CONTENTS I. The Northern Region as an Administrative Area of the U.S. Forest Service in Maps……………………………4 II. Administrative History of the Northern Region………………………………………………………………… 8 A. Initial Establishment of the Forest Reserves, 1891 to 1907, the Northern Region……………………... 9 B. The Remarkable Reorganization of 1907/1909…………………………………………………………10 C. Forest Consolidations, “…for the Economy of Administration…”………………………………….… 11 D. Wilderness Areas in the Northern Region……………………………………………………………….12 E. National Grasslands in the Northern Region…………………………………………………………… 13 F. Purchase Units and the Land and Water Conservation Fund Acquisitions under the National Forest Reservation Commission in the Northern Region……………………………………………………… 13 G. Emergency Relief Purchases………………………………………………………………………….… 15 H. Modern Administrative Combinations………………………………………………………………….. 15 III. Chronological Listing of Laws and Regulations Affecting the Administrative History of the National Forest System………………………………………………………………………………………17 IV.
    [Show full text]
  • TRAILS of the PAST: Historical Overview of the Flathead National Forest, Montana, 1800-1960
    TRAILS OF THE PAST: Historical Overview of the Flathead National Forest, Montana, 1800-1960 By Kathryn L. McKay Historian 1994 Final report of a Historic Overview prepared under agreement with the United States, Flathead National Forest, Kalispell, Montana (Contract #43-0385-3-0363). Submitted in fulfillment of agreement by Kathryn L. McKay, Consulting Historian, 491 Eckelberry Dr., Columbia Falls, Montana, 59912. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction Acknowledgements Previous Work Methodology Physical Environment Abbreviations Used in Text Introduction The Fur Trade Introduction The Fur Trade Missionary Activity and Early Exploration Introduction Missionary Activity Railroad Surveys International Boundary Surveys Other Early Explorations Mining Introduction Oil Fields Coal Deposits Placer and Lode Mining General Prospector's Life Placer and Lode Mining in the Flathead Settlement and Agriculture Introduction Settlement Up to 1871 1871-1891 1891 to World War II World War II to Present Forest Reserves Introduction Forested Land on the Public Domain up to 1891 Creation of the Forest Reserves GLO Administration of the Forest Reserves, 1898-1905 Forest Supervisors and Rangers on the Flathead and Lewis & Clarke Forest Reserves, 1898-1905 Forest Service Administration, 1905-1960 Introduction Qualifications of Early Forest Service Workers Daily Work of Early Forest Service Employees Forest Service Food Winter Work Families Injuries Special-Use Permits Forestry Research and Education World Wars Administrative Sites Boundaries Northern Pacific Railroad
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings-Symposium on Whitebark Pine Ecosystems
    Reference Guide to Whitebark Pine Authors: Ward W. McCaughey and Tad Weaver This is a published article that originally appeared in Proceedings - Symposium on whitebark pine ecosystems: ecology and management of a high mountain resource, USDA Forest Service General Tech Report INT-270 in 1990. The final version can be found at https://doi.org/10.2737/ INT-GTR-270. W McCaughey and T Weaver 1990. Reference Guide to Whitebark Pine. p376-386, Schmidt, Wyman C.; McDonald, Kathy J., compilers. 1990. Proceedings - Symposium on whitebark pine ecosystems: Ecology and management of a high-mountain resource; 1989 March 29-31; Bozeman, MT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-270. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 386 p. Made available through Montana State University’s ScholarWorks scholarworks.montana.edu REFERENCE GUIDE TO WHITEBARK PINE Ward W. McCaughey T. Weaver The purpose of this guide is to provide an easy access Land Manage. Handb. 7. Victoria, BC: British Columbia to literature about whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis) for Ministry of Forests. 225 p. those managers and researchers who are concerned with Armstrong, J. K.; Williams, K.; Huenneke, L. F.; this species. Because of the uniqueness of the species and Mooney, H. A.1988. Topographic position effects on the lack of concentrated research programs in the past, growth depression of California Sierra Nevada pines documents about whitebark pine are found in a wide vari­ during the 1982-83 El Nino. Arctic and Alpine Re­ ety of places, including some rather obscure sources. We search. 20(3): 352-357. [85101211] assembled this guide to help those needing access to Arno, S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Northern Region 1
    NAMES, BOUNDARIES, AND MAPS: A RESOURCE FOR THE HISTORICAL GEOGRAPHY OF THE NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM OF THE UNITED STATES THE NORTHERN REGION (Region One) By Peter L. Stark This volume dedicated to a trail blazer and grand forester, Riley Stark Brief excerpts of copyright material found herein may, under certain circumstances, be quoted verbatim for purposes such as criticism, news reporting, education, and research, without the need for permission from or payment to the copyright holder under 17 U.S.C § 107 of the United States copyright law. Copyright holder does ask that you reference the title of the essay and my name as the author in the event others may need to reach me for clarification, with questions, or to use more extensive portions of my reference work. Also, please contact me if you find any errors or have a map that has not been included in the cartobibliography TABLE OF CONTENTS I. The Northern Region as an Administrative Area of the U.S. Forest Service in Maps……………………………4 II. Administrative History of the Northern Region………………………………………………………………… 8 A. Initial Establishment of the Forest Reserves, 1891 to 1907, the Northern Region……………………... 9 B. The Remarkable Reorganization of 1907/1909…………………………………………………………10 C. Forest Consolidations, “…for the Economy of Administration…”………………………………….… 11 D. Wilderness Areas in the Northern Region……………………………………………………………….12 E. National Grasslands in the Northern Region…………………………………………………………… 13 F. Purchase Units and the Land and Water Conservation Fund Acquisitions under the National Forest Reservation Commission in the Northern Region……………………………………………………… 13 G. Emergency Relief Purchases………………………………………………………………………….… 15 H. Modern Administrative Combinations………………………………………………………………….. 15 III. Chronological Listing of Laws and Regulations Affecting the Administrative History of the National Forest System………………………………………………………………………………………17 IV.
    [Show full text]