United States Forest Bend/Fort Rock 63095 Deschutes Market Road Department of Service Ranger District Bend, Oregon 97701 Agriculture

Date: 12 February 2015 To: The Record Re: Survey and Manage Plant Species within Ursus Project From: Charmane Powers

Summary of Findings There are no expected direct, indirect, or cumulative effects from implementation of any alternative, because: • There are no known Survey and Manage sites located within the project treatment areas. • There is no old-growth habitat present within project treatment areas, which would trigger survey for some species.

This report documents the survey findings, project effects, and project recommendations regarding the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) “Survey and Manage” plant species as they relate to the Ursus Project; the entirety of Ursus falls within the NWFP area.

The Survey and Manage guidelines have changed many times since its inception. The following represents the direction at the time of this document and project, taken from a May 13, 2014 letter of direction: “… in order to allow projectsDRAFT that are already initiated (meaning scoping initiated or the project is entered into the Schedule of Proposed Actions) to proceed with minimal disruption, there is a grace period for implementing this direction. Field units can choose which direction to follow until April 30, 2015; projects initiated in this next year can follow the direction in (a) or (b) below. For projects initiated after April 30, 2015, your project must follow direction in (b).

(a) The January 2001 ROD standards and guidelines and the associated January 2001 species list, and/or the four categories of projects exempt from the Survey and Manage standards and guidelines as stipulated by Judge Pechman (October 11, 2006 Pechman exemptions). (Same as previous June 12, 2013 Interim Direction.)

(b) The January 2001 ROD standards and guidelines and the December 2003 species list, except for the red tree vole which remains as Category C across its range, and/or the

Ursus Project—Survey and Manage Report (Plants) Page 1 of 10 four categories of projects exempt from the Survey and Manage standards and guidelines as stipulated by Judge Pechman (October 11, 2006, “Pechman exemptions”.)

This document follows the direction outline in (b) above.

Project Consistency The Ursus project applies the Survey and Manage species list in the 2001 ROD using the December 2003 species list (Table 1-1, Standards and Guidelines, pages 41-51) and thus meets the provisions of the May 2014 guidance letter (referenced above) and the 2001 Record of Decision and Standards and Guidelines for Amendments to the Survey and Manage, Protection Buffer, and other Mitigation Measures Standards and Guidelines. See Appendix A for the Survey and Manage categories into which species are grouped; see Appendix B for a list and brief habitat description of the potential Deschutes National Forest species for which pre-disturbance surveys are required and for which any known sites are required to be managed; see Appendix C for Definitions of “Equivalent Effort Surveys in Old Growth” and “Habitat Disturbing”.

One way the NWFP requires the Forest Service to address late-successional forest ecosystem function is through consideration of “Survey and Manage” species associated with this ecosystem. These are selected species of fungi, lichens, bryophytes, vascular plants, and invertebrate animals whose viability are of concern within this broad ecosystem type. The November 2000 FEIS identifies six categories into which species are grouped. In order to fall into one of these categories, the species must meet three basic criteria: 1. The species must occur within the Northwest Forest Plan area, or occur close to the NWFP area and have potentially suitable habitat within the NFP area. 2. The species must be closely associated with late-successional or old-growth forest. 3. The reserve system and other Standards and Guidelines of the NFP do not appear to provide for a reasonable assurance of species persistence. All six categories contain a requirement to conduct “strategic surveys”, which is something separate from project-level surveys andDRAFT is not required to be addressed in this document. Specific habitat information on Survey and Manage species is becoming better understood as species-specific surveys are conducted and data is compiled and compared. However, many habitat descriptions are based on relatively few records and will continue to be scrutinized and refined as new sites are discovered. The following discussion is an effort to assess and apply existing information as it relates to the Ursus project.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION Alternative 1 (NO ACTION) Alternative 1 is the No Action alternative. This alternative is required by law and serves as a baseline for comparison of the effects of all of the alternatives. Under Alternative 1, current management plans would continue to guide management. There would be no change in the level of ongoing management activities

Ursus Project—Survey and Manage Report (Plants) Page 2 of 10 within the project area. All custodial activities such as road maintenance, law enforcement, and response to emergencies, including wildfire, would continue. No treatment would be implemented to reduce stand density and fire risk and meet the Purpose and Need of this proposed project.

Alternative 2 (PROPOSED ACTION) Alternative 2, the proposed action, would respond to the Purpose and Need by harvesting 4,208 of 6,066 acres of stands in the project area. Thirty-one percent of the planning area or 1,858 acres would remain untreated. Fuel treatment would occur on 4,158 acres. This alternative is consistent with management direction set forth in the Deschutes National Forest Plan.

Alternative 3 Alternative 3 would respond to the Purpose and Need by harvesting 4,148 of 6,066 acres of stands in the project area. Thirty-two percent of the planning area or 1,919 acres would remain untreated. Fuel treatment would occur on 4,075 acres. This alternative is consistent with management direction set forth in the Deschutes National Forest Plan.

PREFIELD REVIEW

The plant associations in Ursus include lodgepole pine and mixed conifer. Soils are most commonly characterized by sandy volcanic ash and pumice on a buried soil over glacial till, while on the buttes, it becomes sandy pumiceous volcanic ash & pumice lapilli over sandy buried soils. The elevation lies between 5400’ – 6400’. The average annual precipitation measures about 20 – 30”.

The area is characterized generally by a depauperate understory. (Common understory herbaceous plants include upland sedges, western needlegrass, Idaho fescue, bottlebrush squirreltail, silvery lupine, and strawberry). There are no known sites within Ursus treatment areas of any Survey and Manage species listed on the Deschutes National Forest S&M list (Appendix B). If sites were present, that would trigger protection from project disturbance. There is no old growth (see definition in Appendix C) present within Ursus that is proposed for treatment, which eliminates considerationDRAFT of all Category B species (most prominently featuring many fungi species).

VASCULAR PLANTS There is no habitat present within the project area for Cypripedium montanum; this species would require pre-disturbance surveys if habitat is present. This species has never been found on the Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger District.

BRYOPHYTES The only Deschutes bryophyte requiring pre-disturbance survey if habitat is present, Schistostega

Ursus Project—Survey and Manage Report (Plants) Page 3 of 10 pennata, does not have habitat within Ursus.

LICHENS There are no S&M lichens that are in a category that requires surveys nor are there any known sites to protect within Ursus.

FUNGI Category B fungi are required to have “equivalent effort” surveys conducted if the project proposes to enter old-growth habitat (see Appendix C) and if the activity is deemed habitat-disturbing (see Appendix C), and if the project does not meet the Judge Pechman exemptions (see Appendix D). Surveys for Category B fungi are not warranted in the Ursus project, because there is no old growth habitat present within proposed treatment areas. This determination was made using the 1993 Region 6 Interim Old Growth definitions referenced in Appendix C, as reflected in the old growth lidar dataset in the GIS layerfiles of the Deschutes National Forest.

PROJECT EFFECTS Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects: There are no expected direct, indirect, or cumulative effects to Survey and Manage species in the proposed project because there are no known S&M sites present, nor is there old-growth habitat present within disturbance areas, which would trigger a survey for certain species. See page one for a summary of Findings.

REFERENCES AND COMMUNICATIONS Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger DistrictDRAFT Survey and Manage species GIS layer. Deschutes National Forest old growth lidar GIS layerfile. USDA Forest Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management. 2000. Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement: For Amendment to the Survey & Manage, Protection Buffer, and other Mitigation Measures, Standards and Guidelines, Volumes I and II. USDA Forest Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management. January 2001. Record of Decision and Standards and Guidelines: For Amendment to the Survey and Manage, Protection Buffer, and other Mitigation Measures, Standards and Guidelines USDA Forest Service, May 13, 2014. Letter of direction titled “Direction Regarding the Survey and Manage Standards and Guidelines”.

Ursus Project—Survey and Manage Report (Plants) Page 4 of 10

APPENDIX A SURVEY AND MANAGE CATEGORIES

Category A – Rare species. Pre-disturbance surveys are practical. The objective of this category is to manage all known sites and minimize inadvertent loss of undiscovered sites. Management direction includes manage all known sites, survey prior to habitat-disturbing activities, and conduct strategic surveys. Category B – Rare species. Pre-disturbance surveys are not practical. The objective of this category is to manage all known sites and minimize inadvertent loss of undiscovered sites. Management direction includes manage all known sites and conduct strategic surveys. Category C – Uncommon species. Pre-disturbance surveys are practical. The objective of this category is to identify and manage high-priority sites. Until high- priority sites can be determined, all known sites are managed. Management direction includes manage high-priority sites, survey prior to habitat-disturbing activities, and conduct strategic surveys. Category D – Uncommon species. Pre-disturbance surveys are not practical or not necessary. The objective of this category is to identify and manage high-priority sites. Until high-priority sites can be determined, all known sites are managed. Management direction includes manage high-priority sites and conduct strategic surveys. Category E – Rare species for which status is undetermined. The objective is to manage all known sites while determining if the species meets the basic criteria for Survey and Manage. Management direction includes manage all known sites and conduct strategic surveys.DRAFT Category F – Uncommon species for which status is undetermined. The objective is to determine if the species meets the basic criteria for Survey and Manage. Management direction includes conduct strategic surveys.

Ursus Project—Survey and Manage Report (Plants) Page 5 of 10 APPENDIX B Deschutes NF species list allowed under (b) from S&M Direction Letter dated May 13, 2014 **=Also on December 2011 TES Plant List

Category Survey Direction Group Species 2001 list w/ ASR (2003 list) A Manage All Known Bryophyte **Schistostega A Sites. pennata

Conduct Pre- Disturbance Surveys.

Conduct Strategic Surveys. B Manage All Known Bryophyte **Rhizomnium nudum B Sites. (*Strategic Surveys Conduct Strategic completed) Surveys. Bryophyte **Tritomaria B exsectiformis If Strategic Surveys Lichen Calicium abietinum B not completed by FY 2006 for bryophytes (*Strategic Surveys and lichens and FY completed) 2011 for fungi, then Lichen Chaenotheca B conduct Equivalent chrysocephala Effort Surveys in old growth habitat that (*Strategic Surveys would be disturbed. completed) Lichen Chaenotheca B ferruginea

(*Strategic Surveys completed) Lichen Cladonia norvegica Dropped but Special consideration Lichen Dermatocarpon E luridum (current name is not D. DRAFTmeiophyllizum Lichen **Tholurna dissimilis B Fungus Albatrellus B Mycorrhizal caeruleoporus Fungus Albatrellus ellisii B Mycorrhizal Fungus Albatrellus flettii Dropped Mycorrhizal Fungus **Alpova alexsmithii B Mycorrhizal Fungus Arcangeliella crassa B Mycorrhizal Fungus Arcangeliella B Mycorrhizal lactarioides Fungus Boletus pulcherrimus B Mycorrhizal

Ursus Project—Survey and Manage Report (Plants) Page 6 of 10 Category Survey Direction Group Species 2001 list w/ ASR (2003 list) Fungus Bondarzewia Dropped Wood saprobe mesenterica (= B. montana) Fungus Choiromyces B Mycorrhizal alveolatus Fungus Chroogomphus B Mycorrhizal loculatus Fungus Clavariadelphus ligula B Mycorrhizal Fungus Clavariadelphus B Mycorrhizal occidentalis (= C. pistillaris) Fungus Clavariadelphus B Mycorrhizal sachalinensis Fungus Clavariadelphus Cat. D but Mycorrhizal truncatus Special Consideration Fungus Collybia bakerensis F Litter saprobe Fungus Cortinarius B Mycorrhizal magnivelatus Fungus Cortinarius B Mycorrhizal olympianus Fungus Cortinarius B Mycorrhizal verrucisporus Fungus Cortinarius wiebeae B Mycorrhizal Fungus Cudonia monticola B Litter saprobe Fungus Elaphomyces B Mycorrhizal anthracinus Fungus Elaphomyces B Mycorrhizal subviscidus Fungus Fayodia bishpaerigera B Mycorrhizal (= F. gracilipes) Fungus Fevansia aurantiaca (= B Mycorrhizal Alpova aurantiaca) Fungus Gastroboletus ruber B Mycorrhizal Fungus Gastroboletus B DRAFTMycorrhizal subalpinus Fungus Gastroboletus B Mycorrhizal turbinatus Fungus **Gastroboletus B Mycorrhizal vividus Fungus Gautieria B Mycorrhizal magnicellaris Fungus Gomphus bonarii B Mycorrhizal Fungus Gomphus clavatus F Mycorrhizal Fungus Gymnomyces abietis B Mycorrhizal Fungus Gymnomyces B Mycorrhizal nondistincta

Ursus Project—Survey and Manage Report (Plants) Page 7 of 10 Category Survey Direction Group Species 2001 list w/ ASR (2003 list) Fungus Gyromitra californica B Wood/Litter saprobe Fungus **Helvella B Mycorrhizal crassitunicata Fungus Hydnotrya inordinata B Mycorrhizal Fungus **Hygrophorus B Mycorrhizal caeruleus Fungus Leucogaster citrinus B Mycorrhizal Fungus Mycena monticola Dropped Mycorrhizal Fungus Mycena overholtsii D Wood saprobe Fungus Nivatogastrium Dropped from Mycorrhizal nubigenum Eastern OR Cascades Fungus Polyozellus multiplex B Mycorrhizal Fungus **Ramaria amyloidea B Mycorrhizal Fungus Ramaria B Mycorrhizal aurantiisiccescens Fungus Ramaria botrytis var. B Mycorrhizal aurantiiramosa Fungus Ramaria coulterae B Mycorrhizal Fungus Ramaria largentii B Mycorrhizal Fungus Ramaria maculatipes B Mycorrhizal Fungus Ramaria B Mycorrhizal rubrievanescens Fungus Ramaria D Mycorrhizal rubripermanens Fungus Ramaria thiersii B Mycorrhizal Fungus Rhizopogon abietis B Mycorrhizal Fungus Rhizopogon B DRAFTMycorrhizal atroviolaceus Fungus Rhizopogon evadens B Mycorrhizal var. subalpinus Fungus Rhizopogon exiguous B Mycorrhizal Fungus Rhizopogon B Mycorrhizal flavofibrillosus Fungus Sarcodon fuscoindicus B Mycorrhizal Fungus Sarcodon imbricatus Dropped Mycorrhizal Fungus Sarcosphaera Dropped Mycorrhizal coronaria (= Sarcosphaera eximia) Fungus Spathularia flavida B Litter saprobe

Ursus Project—Survey and Manage Report (Plants) Page 8 of 10 Category Survey Direction Group Species 2001 list w/ ASR (2003 list) Fungus Tremiscus helvelloides D Litter saprobe C Manage High-Priority Vascular Cypripedium C Sites. montanum Conduct Pre- Disturbance Surveys. Conduct Strategic Surveys. D Manage High Priority Lichen Bryoria tortuosa Dropped Sites. Brophyte Buxbaumia viridis Dropped Conduct Strategic Fungus Cantharellus Dropped in Surveys. Mycorrhizal subalbidus Oregon

Fungus Chalciporus piperatus D Mycorrhizal (= Boletus piperatus) Fungus Craterellus Dropped Mycorrhizal tubaeformis Fungus Phaeocollybia D Mycorrhizal attenuata Fungus Rhizopogon truncatus D Mycorrhizal Fungus Sparassis crispa D Wood saprobe E Manage All Known Lichen Chaenotheca E Sites. subroscida Conduct Strategic Lichen Chaenothecopsis E Surveys. pusilla Lichen Leptogium E teretiusculum F Conduct Strategic Lichen Calicium glaucellum Dropped Surveys. Lichen Chaenotheca Dropped but furfuracea Special Consideration Lichen Collema nigrescens F Lichen Hypogymnia oceanica Dropped Fungus Gyromitra esculenta Dropped Mycorrhizal Fungus Gyromitra montana Dropped Saprobe but DRAFTmay be mycorrhizal also Fungus Otidea onotica Dropped Saprobe but may be mycorrhizal also

Ursus Project—Survey and Manage Report (Plants) Page 9 of 10 APPENDIX C

Definitions of Equivalent Effort Surveys in “Old Growth” and “Habitat Disturbing”, per the Record of Decision for Amendments to the Survey and Manage, Protection Buffer, and other Mitigation Measures Standards and Guidelines in Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management Planning Documents Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl, January 2001

Equivalent Effort Surveys For Category B species, the S&Gs (p. 9) state that “To reduce the inadvertent loss of undiscovered sites, the Agencies will not sign NEPA [National Environmental Policy Act] decisions or decision documents for habitat-disturbing activities in old-growth forest [see indented paragraph below for definition]…in fiscal year 2006 (fiscal year 2011 for fungi) and beyond, unless either: strategic surveys have been completed for the province that encompasses the project area, or equivalent-effort surveys have been conducted in the old-growth habitat to be disturbed.”

Old-growth forest (S&G, pp. 79-80): “An ecosystem distinguished by old trees and related structural attributes. Old growth encompasses the later stages of stand development that typically differ from earlier stages in a variety of characteristics which may include tree size, accumulations of large dead woody material, number of canopy layers, species, composition, and ecosystem function. More specific parameters applicable to various species are available in the USFS, Region 6, 1993 Interim Old Growth Definitions (USDA FS Region 6, 1993). The Northwest Forest Plan SEIS [Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement] and FEMAT [Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team] describe old-growth forest as a forest stand usually at least 180 to 200 years old with moderate-to-high-canopy closure; a multilayered, multi-species canopy dominated by large overstory trees; high incidence of large trees, some with broken tops and other indications of old and decaying wood (decadence); numerous large snags; and heavy accumulation of wood, including large logs on the ground. (USDA, USDI 1994a).”

Habitat-Disturbing Activities To be in compliance with the 2001 ROD, projects must have appropriate pre-disturbance surveys conducted if the activity is potentiallyDRAFT considered to be “habitat-disturbing.” “Habitat-disturbing activities are defined as those disturbances likely to have a significant negative impact on the species’ habitat, its life cycle, microclimate, or life support requirements” (Standards and Guidelines (S&G), p. 22). There are 63 (Category A and C species) that require pre-project surveys for “habitat-disturbing” activities. “The line officer should seek specialists’ recommendations to help determine the need for a survey based on site-specific information. In making such determination, the line officer should consider the probability of the species being present on the project site, as well as the probability that the project would cause a significant negative effect on the species habitat or the persistence of the species at the site.” (S&G, p. 22).

Ursus Project—Survey and Manage Report (Plants) Page 10 of 10