DOCSLIB.ORG

The M9 Sanitation and Salvage Project Is Designed to Meet Multiple Objectives. the First Objective

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The M9 Sanitation and Salvage Project Is Designed to Meet Multiple Objectives. the First Objective M9 Sanitation and Salvage Project Silviculture Report Overall Management Direction: The M9 sanitation and salvage project is designed to meet multiple objectives. The first objective is primarily designed to recover the economic value of salvageable dead trees. Second stands will be sanitized, by means of thinning green trees, to reduce the potential for continued or future western and mountain pine beetle attack, and to increase residual stand resiliency to future stress. This objective will be met by means of thinning green trees to stocking levels low enough to reduce the competition for limiting resources and increasing individual tree growth, thereby reducing the risk of further extensive beetle related mortality (Fettig et al. 2007). These objectives are defined in the Mendocino National Forests Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) (USDA, 1995). Sanitation and salvage harvest volume is specifically addressed in the LRMP, p C-3 "Sanitation and salvage volumes from suitable lands are an integral part of the yields anticipated by the Plan ... and they are part of the scheduled Allowable Sale Quantity." This will meet the Management Direction sections in Chapter N (IV p. 2-4) under ''Timber and Other Forest Products: Provide a sustained yield of timber and other wood products to help support local economies and to contribute to meeting local, regional, and national needs." These treatments will also address the Management directions of Forest Health "Provide an integrated pest management program to prevent or control insect and disease outbreaks on forest and rangeland resources ... " Integrated goals of fire and fuels reductions including "Maintain a cost effective detection, prevention, suppression, and fuels management program mix in support of other resource programs." and wildlife "Maintain or improve the diversity and quality of habitat needed to support viable populations of all native and desired non-native wildlife and fish species, providing for consumptive and non-consumptive use at projected demand levels." will also be addressed. This project lies within the North Grindstone Management Area, this area is matrix land, subject to timber management and harvest as described in LRMP Rx 7, Timber Modified. (USDA, 1995 pg. IV -69). This general management prescription provides for emphasis on timber production while providing for other resource objectives including visual quality, watershed, rare and endemic species, and wildlife. The LRMP also states that, "In the long term, control of competing vegetation and the density of conifers through management in plantations and natural stands, will help reduce insect-caused mortality under prolonged drought conditions". (USDA, 1995 p.iii-11). Background: Forest stands occupying the areas around and including the M9 sanitation and salvage project area have been shaped by many of the forces described by Fettig et al. 2006, including altered historic fire regimes through active fire suppression in the recent century, and selective harvest 1 ~ M9 Sanitation and Salvage Project methods. These land management practices have led to overstocked tree densities as a result. These stocking levels have resulted in reduced individual tree vigor within stands as well as in­ growth of younger trees under the favorable micro-site conditions created by the disturbed canopies. Fire suppression prevented the natural cleaning method for these stands to control stocking levels and recruitment of new trees as well as brush and other woody competition control. As a result these overstocked stands have declined in individual tree growth rates, a key indicator as pointed out by Fettig et al. 2007, of susceptibility to bark beetle attack in ponderosa pine stands in the western US. Data collected in these stands in~icates all stands have individual tree growth rates below the thresholds (periodic annual increment < 0.24 em, 5 year growth rates ~ 0.66cm/yr. etc.) described by Fettig et al. 2007 (p. 27, 29.). This combination of factors created an environment in which beetles easily moved into these stands after a large storm, in the winter of 2010, knocked out and damaged a larger number of overstory ponderosa pine tops. Beetle populations in these larger damaged green boles remaining after the storm in combination with mild winter temperatures, which have reduced the usual mortality of overwintering beetles, and periodic drought coupled with the high tree densities led to more successful broods each year. These factors have led to much larger than normal pockets of pine mortality due to successful bark beetle attacks within stands. These larger populations within stands are now coalescing and overwhelming the weakened defenses of the stressed stands causing extensive stand level pine mortality (See Photo 1 & 2. ). These stands are located on the top third of south and west facing ridges between 4200 and 5400 feet in elevation. They are all located on the Sheetiron soil series a Loamy-skeletal, mixed, active, mesic Typic Dystroxerepts (NRCS, 2012). These sites are subject to a Mediterranean climate characterized by cool wet winters, averaging between 35-45 in. of precipitation per year, and hot dry summers with extended periods, 3-5 months, of little to no precipitation. Moisture is the limiting resource for vegetation on these sites and they are characterized by chaparral in the lower elevations 2000-3500 feet elevation, which transitions into oak woodlands with some pine and brush components between 3500-4500 feet elevation, to the ponderosa pine stands located within the project area. Forest cover does extend into the lower elevations in moist areas such as riparian areas and drainages. Ridges, which are where the units are located, are often drier with thinner soils, less tree cover, and lower site index. Due to its drought tolerant nature, ponderosa pine stands such as these occupy the transition zone between non-forested areas of grassland and shrubs to more closed canopy forests such as the sierra mixed conifer stands located on the north facing slopes of Log Springs ridge (Habeck, 1992). Old growth as defined in Potter et al. 1992 was not found in these areas. Based on the numbers collected and analyzed in Table 1, as well as field reviews in each unit to review qualitative attributes, no old growth stands were found within any of the units. 2 M9 Sanitation and Salvage Project Photo 1. Large pockets of beetle mo1tality coalescing into stand level areas of ponderosa pine mortality. The pocket in the smaller circle was over 2 ac. in size. Photo 2. Western bark beetle pitch tubes on a green tree indicating both successful and unsuccessful attacks on a live ponderosa pine in unit 18. 3 M9 Sanitation and Salvage Project Photo 3. Overtopped oak located adjacent to the ponderosa pine in Photo 2. This tree is clearl y overtopped by pines but has enough crown left to likely increase growth and vigor after release from suppressio n. I Silvicultural Prescription: Sanitation/Salvage Timber harvest: o 250 acres of salvage of dead and dying trees as well as sanitation harvest of stands to residual green tree basal areas between 60-80 ft2/ac. (20 ft?/ac. along roads). Specific sil vicultural prescriptions include: • Remove: Focus on ponderosa pine, specifically around current pockets of pine beetle mortality, target the removal of beetle infested (those showing signs of beetle infestation including pitch tubes, frass, or stripped bark) green trees, and any salvageable dead. Around existing western bark beetle pockets remove all (Jive or dead) merchantable ponderosa pine within one tree height of the nearest recently dead ( <1 yr. dead) or currently dying group or individuals. • Remove: trees by focusing on existing dense areas including groups or clumps of trees, especial those located on ridges, south or west facing slopes, or other dry more stressed sites to a target residual basal area of 60-80 ft2/ac. • Remove: all hazard trees - those trees which could result in property damage (FSM 2303; 2330; 6703; 6730), including trees within one tree height of the road -or top trees low enough so they are not able to hit the road if they are to be left as snags. Sanitize road side areas to prevent future hazard trees, if ponderosa pine is a component of the residual stand reduce these roadside areas to a residual green tree basal area of 20 telae. Leave 4 ~ M9 Sanitation and Salvage Project only healthy, vigorous trees, free of damage or other obvious pests, with open grown crowns and a live crown ration of over 40%. Leave all sub-merchantable trees and shrubs within 20' of all cut banks along roads. • Remove: focus on the smallest merchantable trees first leaving around 10-20 ft2/ac. in the 10-16 in. dbh class removing smaller, suppressed, tightly spaced, or otherwise undesirable trees. A residual basal area of 10-20 ft2/ac. should be left in tree between 16- 24 in. dbh removing smaller, suppressed, tightly spaced, or otherwise undesirable trees. The remainder of the target residual basal area should be retained in 24 in. and greater dbh trees with a target residual tree spacing of 40-50 feet after meeting residual basal area requirements. Residual trees generally should be the healthiest, most desirable trees with open grown, high live crown ratio, of the best available phenotypic form (healed mechanical damage such as flat toped defects are acceptable, not phenotypic defects such as y form multiple tops), and the best spatially distributed (evenly spaced for reduced inter-tree competition) trees. • Remove: the heaviest mistletoe infected trees especially any tree located near pockets of reproduction from past disturbance such as existing beetle kill pockets or those areas where snags and other trees have fallen and created gap phase regeneration events. • Retain: all black oaks or large single stem canyon live oaks as residuals and count this basal area in the residual BA. Focus thinning in these areas on removal of conifers especially those which are directly overtopping oaks and also those shading out oak canopies from the side.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Wildfire Damages to Homes and Resources: Understanding Causes and Reducing Losses
    Wildfire Damages to Homes and Resources: Understanding Causes and Reducing Losses Kelsi Bracmort Specialist in Agricultural Conservation and Natural Resources Policy March 12, 2012 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov RL34517 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Wildfire Damages to Homes and Resources: Understanding Causes and Reducing Losses Summary Wildfires are getting more severe, with more acres and houses burned and more people at risk. This results from excess biomass in the forests, due to past logging and grazing and a century of fire suppression, combined with an expanding wildland-urban interface—more people and houses in and near the forests—and climate change, exacerbating drought and insect and disease problems. Some assert that current efforts to protect houses and to reduce biomass (through fuel treatments, such as thinning) are inadequate, and that public objections to some of these activities on federal lands raise costs and delay action. Others counter that proposals for federal lands allow timber harvesting with substantial environmental damage and little fire protection. Congress is addressing these issues through various legislative proposals and through funding for protection programs. Wildfires are inevitable—biomass, dry conditions, and lightning create fires. Some are surface fires, which burn needles, grasses, and other fine fuels and leave most trees alive. Others are crown fires, which are typically driven by high winds and burn biomass at all levels from the ground through the tree tops. Many wildfires contain areas of both surface and crown fires. Surface fires are relatively easy to control, but crown fires are difficult, if not impossible, to stop; often, crown fires burn until they run out of fuel or the weather changes.
    [Show full text]
  • Clearcutting in the National Forests: Background and Overview
    98-917 ENR CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web Clearcutting in the National Forests: Background and Overview November 6, 1998 (name redacted) Natural Resources Economist and Policy Specialist Environment and Natural Resources Policy Division Congressional Research Service The Library of Congress ABSTRACT Clearcutting is a controversial method of harvesting and regenerating stands of trees in which all trees are cleared from a site and a new even-aged stand is grown. It is a proven, efficient method of harvesting trees and establishing new stands, but is criticized for degrading soil and water quality, wildlife habitat, and aesthetics. Clearcutting is still the primary timber management method used in the national forests, although its use has declined over the past decade. Legislation to ban clear-cutting on federal lands has been introduced in the past few Congresses. This report provides background and an overview on clearcutting use and effects; it will probably not be updated. Clearcutting in the National Forests: Background and Overview Summary Clearcutting is a method of harvesting and regenerating trees in which all trees are cleared from a site and a new, even-aged stand of trees is grown. Clearcutting is the primary method of timber production and management in the national forests. However, this method of harvesting trees has been controversial since at least the 1960s. Many environmental and citizen groups object to clearcutting in the national forests, citing soil and water degradation, unsightly landscapes, and other damages. The wood products industry argues that clearcutting is an efficient and successful silvicultural system. Between 1984 and 1997, clearcutting accounted for 59% of the area harvested for regeneration in the national forests.
    [Show full text]
  • Siberian Expectations: an Overview of Regional Forest Policy and Sustainable Forest Management
    Siberian Expectations: An Overview of Regional Forest Policy and Sustainable Forest Management July 2003 World Forest Institute Portland, Oregon, USA Authors: V.A. Sokolov, I.M. Danilin, I.V. Semetchkin, S.K. Farber,V.V. Bel'kov,T.A. Burenina, O.P.Vtyurina,A.A. Onuchin, K.I. Raspopin, N.V. Sokolova, and A.S. Shishikin Editors: A. DiSalvo, P.Owston, and S.Wu ABSTRACT Developing effective forest management brings universal challenges to all countries, regardless of political system or economic state. The Russian Federation is an example of how economic, social, and political issues impact development and enactment of forest legislation. The current Forest Code of the Russian Federation (1997) has many problems and does not provide for needed progress in the forestry sector. It is necessary to integrate economic, ecological and social forestry needs, and this is not taken into account in the Forest Code. Additionally, excessive centralization in forest management and the forestry economy occurs. This manuscript discusses the problems facing the forestry sector of Siberia and recommends solutions for some of the major ones. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Research for this book was supported by a grant from the International Research and Exchanges Board with funds provided by the Bureau of Education and Cultural Affairs, a division of the United States Department of State. Neither of these organizations are responsible for the views expressed herein. The authors would particularly like to recognize the very careful and considerate reviews, including many detailed editorial and language suggestions, made by the editors – Angela DiSalvo, Peyton Owston, and Sara Wu. They helped to significantly improve the organization and content of this book.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Analysis Rollins Area Sanitation Timber Project
    Environmental Analysis for the Rollins Area Sanitation Timber Project Prepared By Kalispell Unit, Northwestern Land Office Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation June 2011 - 1 - Table of Contents Environmental Assessment Attachment I: Maps Attachment II: Resource Analyses • Vegetation Analysis • Hydrology Analysis • Soils Analysis • Wildlife Analysis Attachment III: Prescriptions Attachment IV: Mitigations Attachment V: Preparers and Consultants - 2 - CHECKLIST ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Project Name: Rollins Area Sanitation Timber Project Proposed Implementation Date: July 2011 Proponent: Department of Natural Resources and Conservation, Northwestern Land Office, Kalispell Unit Location: Sections 8, 16, 18, 20, 30, Township 25N, Range 20W Section 36, Township 25N, Range 21W County: Lake I. TYPE AND PURPOSE OF ACTION The Kalispell Unit, Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation (DNRC) is proposing the Rollins Area Sanitation Timber Project. The project area is located approximately 20 air miles south of Kalispell, Montana (see Vicinity Map in Attachment I). The land involved in the project is held by the State in trust for the support of specific beneficiary institutions (Enabling Act, 1889: 1972 Montana Constitution, Article X, Section 11). s. 8 & 18 – School of Mines; s. 16 & 36 – Common Schools; s. 20 – University of Montana; s. 30 – School for the Deaf and Blind. Under the proposed action, approximately 1 million board feet would be harvested from approximately 1,120 acres. No new road construction would be needed. Estimated revenue of $140,000 would be generated for the beneficiary. Specific objectives of this project are to maintain and improve forest health by removing dwarf mistletoe infected trees and thinning dense clumps of overstory trees, and increase forest productivity beneficial to future trust actions.
    [Show full text]
  • Management of Douglas-Fir Bark Beetles Southeast of Kamloops, BC
    Management of Douglas-fir Bark Beetles Southeast of Kamloops, BC FPB/IRC/204 March 2017 Table of Contents Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1 The Complaint ........................................................................................................................ 1 Applicable Legislation ............................................................................................................ 1 Background ............................................................................................................................ 4 Investigation Results ............................................................................................................... 5 Was Tolko’s management of the Douglas-fir bark beetle outbreak in the Upper Salmon River adequate? .............................................................................................................................. 5 Considering the Douglas-fir bark beetle outbreak, are Tolko’s harvesting practices reasonable? ........................................................................................................................... 8 Did Tolko comply with FRPA requirements for ungulate winter range and trap trees? ............ 9 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................. 9 Recent Developments .............................................................................................................10
    [Show full text]
  • SUMMARY COMMENTS Morgan Monroe State Forest Compartment 4 Tract 6 30 Day Comment Period Ending: 5/31/2016 Comments Received: 2
    Indiana Department of Natural Resources Division of Forestry State Forest Resource Management Guide Public Comment Summary SUMMARY COMMENTS Morgan Monroe State Forest Compartment 4 Tract 6 30 Day Comment Period Ending: 5/31/2016 Comments Received: 2 The table below is a summary of public comments received concerning this draft Resource Management Guide (DRMG). The public comments received have been reviewed in their entirety and given due consideration summarized in the Division of Forestry response below. Summary of Comments Division of Forestry Response Concern of potential impact to interior species, Indiana and Northern long Habitats, communities and species are considered as part eared bat and other RTE species. Recommends detailed environmental of the management planning process. Along with field inventory of birds, wildlife and plants be conducted/included in DRMG. observations, Natural heritage data has been reviewed to Concern on impacts to soil and water resources and effective implementation and monitoring of BMPs. Suggests riparian areas be check for threatened or endangered bird and wildlife avoided or buffered during harvests species on or near the management unit. No HCVF or old Concerns about long term forest stainability and harvest levels on State growth forests were noted on this tract. Forests. Further information on direct and indirect impacts on Contends the removal of Ash through the prescribed sanitation harvest will species and habitats are found in the Indiana State Forest not slow the spread of Emerald Ash Borer. Suggests harvest of Ash may Environmental Assessment. reduce ash genetic diversity important to long term survival of the species. http://www.in.gov/dnr/forestry/files/fo-StateForests_EA.pdf DRMG does not evaluate area potential for High Conservation Value or old Implementation of the RMG will utilize guidance from the forest designation.
    [Show full text]
  • Existing Opportunities to Increase Efficiencies in the Timber Sale Process
    Existing Opportunities to Increase Efficiencies in the Timber Sale Process Prepared by: American Forest Resource Council December, 2015 Table of Contents Existing Opportunities to Increase Efficiencies in the Timber Sale Process NEPA Basic and References ...........................................................................................................2 EIS vs. EA ........................................................................................................................................3 Use of Categorical Exclusions .........................................................................................................4 Categorical Exclusions (FS and BLM) ...........................................................................................5 Timber stand improvement activities, no herbicides, < 1 mile of low standard road construction .........................................................................................................................5 Harvest of live trees, <=70 acres, <= ½ mile of temp road, no even-aged regeneration or vegetation type conversion. ...............................................................................................5 Salvage of dead and/or dying trees, <= 250 acres, <= ½ mile of temp road. ......................5 Commercial harvest of trees to control insects or disease, <=250 acres, <= ½ mile of temp road ............................................................................................................................6 Farm Bill insect and disease projects,
    [Show full text]
  • The Forest Service & Categorical Exclusions
    The Forest Service & Categorical Exclusions: Misuse and Obfuscation Reveal a Clear Need for Changes Introduction The United States Forest Service manages 193 million acres across the country. Its mission is to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the nation’s forests and grasslands. Among the numerous laws and regulations that guide the agency’s achievement of its mission is the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA).1 Often considered the bedrock of environmental law, NEPA requires federal agencies to take a hard look at potential environmental consequences of proposed actions such as logging, mining, road-building and other extractive uses, in order to arrive at fully informed decisions. Government transparency, accountability, and meaningful public involvement are at the heart of NEPA.2 By requiring analysis of site-specific actions documented in an environmental impact statement or assessment, NEPA ensures the Forest Service considers reasonable alternatives and adheres to a “look-before-you-leap” approach to public land management. Over the years, numerous court opinions have refined the law’s application, providing critics of NEPA with fodder for accusations that the requisite analysis has become too burdensome, and that lawsuits challenging Forest Service actions prevent the agency from doing good work. This is certainly a false narrative, but one that resulted in numerous legislative and administrative efforts to modify and weaken the law and its implementing regulations. Among those efforts is expanding the use of categorical exclusions (CEs), which allows the agency to forego detailed analysis of, and public participation in, certain types of actions. The use of CEs has been increasing, but the extent is unclear and difficult to track based on publicly available information.
    [Show full text]
  • Division of Forestry Draft Resource Management Guide Location
    Indiana Department of Natural Resources – Division of Forestry Draft Resource Management Guide State Forest: Morgan-Monroe Tract: 6370105 (Comp 1 Tract 5) Tract Acreage: 137 Commercial Acreage: 137 Forester: Ramey / Jones Date: September 23, 2015 Management Cycle End Year: 2030 Management Cycle Length: 15 Location: Tract 05 is located in Morgan County, Washington Township, Section(s) 21,28 – T 11 N – R 1 E. It is approximately 2 miles north of Rosenbaum road and located west of Hatfield Ridge road. General Description: Most of the tract’s 137 acres are covered with hardwood forests, especially oak-hickory timber types. Other type(s) present include mixed hardwood. The most recent tract wide harvest occurred in 1994. This was primarily an improvement cut and light thinning which focused on removal of fire damaged and other lower quality trees. There were also 15 regeneration openings created totaling 14.5 acres. TSI was performed in 1996 and focused on cull removal, vine control, and opening completion. As a result, the current overall timber quality within this tract is good and consists mainly of medium sawtimber size class. The old regeneration openings are now 20 years old and contain poletimber size mixed hardwoods. History: 1929 - Acquisition 1985 - Road Construction / Maintenance 1994 - Timber Harvest - Marking 1994 - Timber Sale Wright Timber 320,250bf for $85,000. 1996 - TSI – completed 1999 – Wildfire 28 acres 2002 - Timber Harvest - Salvage Cut – Hamilton logging 38,900bf 2014 - Inventory/Cruising Forester-Mc Guckin 2015 - Resource Management Guide Landscape Context: The surrounding landscape near the tract is predominantly Closed-canopy deciduous forest. The primary block of the State Forest lies to the north and east, with a small portion to the west.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological, Social, and Economic Context Setting the Black Hills Is Composed Primarily of Ponderosa Pine Forest. the Forest
    Black Hills National Forest Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Project FY 2011 – FY2020 Page 1 of 14 Ecological, Social, and Economic Context Setting The Black Hills is composed primarily of ponderosa pine forest. The forest has changed dramatically since Euro-American settlement in the 1800’s. Intensive grazing, selective harvesting of large trees and fire suppression has led to changes in forest structure and composition that are unprecedented in the evolutionary history for these frequent fire ecosystems. These changes have decreased biological diversity, increased risk of stand-replacing crown fires, and increased vulnerability to disease and insect outbreaks that will compromise the long-term sustainability of the ecosystem and surrounding communities. The Black Hills of South Dakota and Wyoming are known as “the Forest” of South Dakota and Great Plains. It’s national, regional, and local importance has been identified by politicians, visitors, and residents. It is a forested “Island in the Plains” revered by Indian tribes and treasured by visitors for its beauty and national treasures (Mount Rushmore National Memorial, and Crazy Horse Mountain.) This area is home to many small communities and numerous enclaves of homes. The public and private forests are working forests providing valuable public benefits, including critical wildlife habitat, magnificent hunting and sight-seeing opportunities, biodiversity, clean water, wood products, superb recreational access and opportunities, and other ecosystem services (such as carbon sequestration.) These benefits support rural jobs and economies and a high quality of life. While some of the landscape is ecologically intact and functioning properly, much is in need of restoration to keep the forests thriving and sustainable.
    [Show full text]
  • Sustainable Forest Management Plan
    SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN 2003/04 Annual Report TREE FARM LICENCE 30 Canadian Forest Products Ltd. Prince George Operations Page i CSA – SFM SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN for Canadian Forest Products Ltd. Prince George Operations – TFL 30 DFA Prepared by: Bill Aro R.P.F., Planning Forester June 1, 2004 Page ii CSA Sustainable Forest Management TABLE OF CONTENTS CSA – SFM ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ....................................................................................................................................................... iii LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................................................................................... v LIST OF APPENDICES ........................................................................................................................................................... v 1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 SFM INDICATORS AND OBJECTIVES ......................................................................................................................... 2 2.1 Late Seral Stage Distribution ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Depository Grider Fire Recovery Project
    DEPOSITORY A 13.92: K 66/2x/REC. ..I )d States GRIDER FIRE Department of RECOVERY PROJECT Agriculture KLAMATH NATIONAL FOREST Forest Service RECORD OF DECISION Pacific Oak Knoll Ranger District Southwest Siskiyou County, California Region AII' ~~~LP0 ~~~~~I.~~~~~~B;1' RECORD OF DECISION GRIDER FIRE RECOVERY PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Klamath National Forest Oak Knoll Ranger District Siskiyou County, California INTRODUCTION Between August and October, 1987, fires burned approximately 260,000 acres of land on the Klamath National Forest. Of that, 7,283 acres burned in the unroaded portion of the Grider Creek drainage on the Oak Knoll Ranger District. The aftermath of these catastrophic fires demanded a prompt and massive recovery effort. Development and implementation of a project plan for the Grider Fire Recovery Area is part of that massive effort. In order to develop and select an effective recovery plan for the project area, two questions had to first be answered: (1) what recovery actions would most benefit the project area in terms of both short- and long-term recovery from fire impacts, and (2)what opportunities existed for the prompt recovery of fire-killed, stressed and dying timber. Since the project area is currently unroaded, additional data were necessary to determine the type of access options available for salvage and other recovery projects. The level of fire recovery and salvage activities would vary, depending on the kind and amount of access into the project area. To determine the environmental consequences of implementing the range of recovery project options available to the Forest Service, an environmental analysis was conducted in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
    [Show full text]