United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project and Forest Plan Amendments #43 and #44 Environmental Assessment Lakeview Ranger District, Fremont-Winema National Forest, Lake County, Oregon April 2015 Public Comment Version
Vicinity Map
For More Information Contact: Jody Perozzi Bly Ranger District PO Box 25 Bly, OR 97622 Phone: 541-353-2723 Email: [email protected]
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication for program information (e.g. Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) please contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
Contents Contents ...... i Chapter 1 - Introduction ...... 1 Proposed Project Location ...... 2 Need for the Proposal ...... 2 Management Direction and Regulatory Framework ...... 6 Collaboration, Public Involvement and Tribal Consultation ...... 9 Chapter 2 - Proposed Action and Alternatives ...... 11 Alternatives Considered but not Fully Developed ...... 11 Alternative 1 - No Action ...... 14 Alternative 2 - Proposed Action ...... 14 Summary of Proposed Actions ...... 14 Details of Proposed Activities and Connected Actions ...... 15 Project Design and Resource Protection Measures ...... 24 Monitoring ...... 29 Chapter 3 - Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action and Alternatives ...... 31 Forest Plan Amendment to Cut White Fir Trees >21 Inches dbh ...... 32 Affected Environment ...... 32 Environmental Consequences ...... 33 Forest Plan Amendment for Treatment of Allocated Old Growth ...... 38 Affected Environment ...... 38 Environmental Consequences ...... 39 Forested Vegetation ...... 42 Affected Environment ...... 43 Environmental Consequences ...... 51 Fuels ...... 62 Affected Environment ...... 64 Environmental Consequences ...... 77 Air Quality ...... 84 Affected Environment ...... 84 Environmental Consequences ...... 85 Wildlife ...... 90 Affected Environment ...... 91 Federally Listed Species ...... 92 Region 6 Sensitive Wildlife Species – Biological Evaluation ...... 95 Management Indicator Species (MIS) ...... 110 Climate Change – Both Alternatives ...... 148 Fisheries and Aquatics ...... 149 Affected Environment ...... 150 Environmental Consequences ...... 164 Hydrology and Soils ...... 177 Affected Environment ...... 179 Environmental Consequences ...... 186 Cultural Resources ...... 194 Affected Environment ...... 196 Environmental Consequences ...... 200 Non-Forested Vegetation ...... 201 Affected Environment ...... 203 Environmental Consequences ...... 208
i Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Range Management ...... 211 Affected Environment ...... 212 Environmental Consequences ...... 213 Botany and Invasive Plants ...... 216 Affected Environment ...... 217 Environmental Consequences ...... 221 Transportation Analysis ...... 235 Affected Environment ...... 237 Environmental Consequences ...... 238 Recreation and Scenic Quality ...... 242 Affected Environment ...... 242 Environmental Consequences ...... 244 Wilderness, Potential Wilderness, and Inventoried Roadless Areas ...... 249 Affected Environment ...... 250 Environmental Consequences ...... 255 Public Health and Safety ...... 257 Prime Farmland, Rangeland, and Forestland ...... 257 Floodplains and Wetlands ...... 257 Civil Rights and Environmental Justice ...... 257 Potential or Unusual Expenditures of Energy ...... 258 References ...... 259 Appendix A – Project Maps ...... 290 Appendix B – Vegetation Treatment Scheme Maps ...... 290 Appendix C – Criteria for Retention Areas ...... 290 Appendix D – BMPs ...... 290 Appendix E – Road Recommendations Table ...... 290
List of Tables
Table 1. Current seral and structural stage for closed canopy plant associations in CMH compared to reference conditions in percent (from Silviculture report 2014)...... 12 Table 2. Current seral and structural stage for open canopy plant associations in CMH compared to reference conditions in percent (from Silviculture report 2014)...... 13 Table 3. Potential Harvest systems and respective acres in the CMH project area...... 16 Table 4. Proposed Stream Restoration Activities within RHCAs ...... 18 Table 5. Miles of Proposed Road Removal in RHCAs (as identified in CMH Project Roads Analysis) ...... 19 Table 6. Miles of Streams and Fish Passage Proposed Restoration ...... 19 Table 7. Maintenance Level Changes to Roads in the CMH Project area ...... 21 Table 8. Proposed Changes to Maintenance Level 1 and 2 Roads in CMH Project ...... 23 Table 9. Proposed Roads or Portions of Roads added to MVUM ...... 23 Table 10 Minimum Waterbar Spacing for Handline Rehabilitation ...... 26 Table 11. Minimum Waterbar Spacing for Tractor Plow Fireline Rehabilitation ...... 27 Table 12. White fir >21" across sale areas on the Fremont National Forest...... 36 Table 13. Resource indicators and measures for assessing effects ...... 42 Table 14. Resource indicators and measures for the existing condition...... 47 Table 15. Current stand densities throughout PAGs in the CMH project area...... 48 Table 16. Current seral and structural stage for closed canopy plant associations in CMH compared to reference conditions in percent...... 50
ii
Table 17. Current seral and structural stage for open canopy plant associations in CMH compared to reference conditions in percent...... 50 Table 18. Attributes for Mixed Conifer Dry stand within CMH under a No Action Alternative. 54 Table 19. Resource indicators and measures for Alternative 2 ...... 55 Table 20. Relative density thresholds by PAG within the CMH project area...... 56 Table 21. Increase in QMD for the Mixed Conifer Dry PAG over a 50 year time horizon under the Proposed Action...... 58 Table 22. Desired age and structural composition of aspen stands...... 60 Table 23. Attributes for Mixed Conifer Dry stand #11790 pre and post treatment...... 60 Table 24. Resource indicators and measures for assessing effects ...... 62 Table 25. 90-97th percentile fuel moisture summary for Summit RAWS (353421) ...... 63 Table 26. Resource indicators and measures for the existing condition within the Crooked Mud Honey Project ...... 71 Table 27. Alt. 1 Standard Fire Behavior Fuel Model distribution (88%) of the Crooked Mud Honey Project Area ...... 72 Table 28. Resource indicators and measures for Alternative 2 of the Crooked Mud Honey Project ...... 77 Table 29. Alt. 2 Standard Fire Behavior Fuel Model distribution (97%) of the Crooked Mud Honey Project Area ...... 79 Table 30. Fuel moisture and weather parameters for simulated fires ...... 85 Table 31. Alternative 1 particulate matter metrics by wildfire size ...... 86 Table 32. Alternative 2 particulate matter metrics by prescribed fire type ...... 86 Table 33. Alternative 2 particulate matter metrics by simulated wildfire size ...... 87 Table 34. Foreseeable future prescribed fire particulate matter metrics by fire type ...... 88 Table 35. Cumulative prescribed fire metrics for Alternative 2 and foreseeable activities ...... 88 Table 36. Comparison of wildfire particulate matter emissions by Alternative ...... 88 Table 37: Federally Listed and Candidate Species ...... 92 Table 38: R6 Sensitive Wildlife Species List for the Fremont-Winema National Forests ...... 96 Table 39. Measureable Indicator for woodpecker species (Acres suitable habitat) ...... 105 Table 40. R6 Sensitive Wildlife Species Summary of Impact Determinations ...... 109 Table 41. Fremont National Forest Management Indicator Species (MIS) ...... 110 Table 42. Measureable Indicator for Mule Deer (Acres of winter/summer range) ...... 115 Table 43. Measureable Indicator for Mule Deer (Acres of hiding cover) ...... 115 Table 44. Percent of Ecological Reporting Units (ERUs) in American marten habitat for current and historical conditions, and the relative change in habitat (Wisdom et al. 2000)...... 117 Table 45. Measureable Indicator for Marten (acres suitable habitat) ...... 119 Table 46. Summary of Northern Goshawk Species Assessment Scores for the Great Basin Bird Conservation Region (9). (http://www.rmbo.org/pif/scores/scores.html) ...... 121 Table 47. Percent of Ecological Reporting Units (ERUs) in goshawk habitat for current and historical conditions, and the relative change in habitat (Wisdom et al. 2000)...... 121 Table 48. Goshawk Detections on 4,946 Surveyed Acres in the Crooked Mud Honey Planning Area in 2013/2014 ...... 122 Table 49. Measureable Indicator for Goshawks (acres of suitable habitat)...... 124 Table 50. Summary of Pileated Woodpecker Species Assessment Scores for the Great Basin Bird Conservation Region (9). (http://www.rmbo.org/pif/scores/scores.html) ...... 126 Table 51. Percent of Ecological Reporting Units (ERUs) in pileated woodpecker habitat for current and historical conditions, and the relative change in habitat (Wisdom et al. 2000). 126 Table 52. Measureable Indicator for Pileated Woodpeckers (acres of suitable habitat) ...... 127 Table 53. Summary of Red-naped Sapsucker Species Assessment Scores for the Great Basin Bird Conservation Region (9). (http://www.rmbo.org/pif/scores/scores.html) ...... 129 Table 54. Measureable Indicator for red-naped sapsucker (acres of suitable habitat) ...... 130
iii Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 55. Summary of Black-backed Woodpecker Species Assessment Scores for the Great Basin Bird Conservation Region (9). (http://www.rmbo.org/pif/scores/scores.html) ...... 132 Table 56. Percent of Ecological Reporting Units (ERUs) in black-backed woodpecker habitat for current and historical conditions, and the relative change in habitat (Wisdom et al. 2000). 133 Table 57. Measureable Indicator for Black-backed Woodpecker (acres of suitable habitat) ..... 135 Table 58. Measureable Indicator for bald eagle (acres of suitable habitat) ...... 138 Table 59. Bird Species of Conservation Concern ...... 144 Table 60. Priority Habitat Features and Associated Focal Species for Conservation in Priority and Unique Habitats in the Central Oregon and Klamath Basin Subprovinces of the East Slope of the Cascades (Altman, 2000)...... 145 Table 61. Priority Habitat Features and Associated Focal Species for Conservation in Priority and Unique Habitats in the Great Basin Subprovince of the Columbia Plateau of Eastern Oregon and Washington (Altman and Holmes, 2000)...... 146 Table 62. Effects to Landbirds ...... 146 Table 63. Resource indicators and quantifiable measures for assessing effects ...... 149 Table 64. Habitat indicators and qualitative measures for assessing effects ...... 150 Table 65. List of PETS fish species found on the Fremont-Winema National Forest and addressed under this aquatics report for the Crooked Mud Honey project...... 152 Table 66. List of PETS aquatic invertebrate species found on the Fremont-Winema National Forest and addressed under this aquatics report for the Crooked Mud Honey project...... 156 Table 67. Existing watershed conditions within the Project Area ...... 159 Table 68. Resource indicators and quantifiable measures for the existing effects...... 161 Table 69. Fish-bearing streams within the Project Area ...... 161 Table 70. Habitat indicators and qualitative measures for the existing effects...... 162 Table 71. Resource indicators and quantifiable measures for Alternative 2 Proposed Action. .. 165 Table 72. Acres of Proposed Aquatic Restoration Activities within RHCAs...... 166 Table 73. Miles of Proposed Road Removal in RHCAs...... 167 Table 74. Miles of Streams and Fish Passage Restored...... 168 Table 75. Habitat indicators and qualitative measures for Alternative 2...... 169 Table 76. Summary of effects on PETS fish species found on the Fremont-Winema National Forest and addressed under this aquatics report for the Crooked Mud Honey project...... 174 Table 77. Summary of effect on PETS aquatic invertebrate species found on the Fremont- Winema National Forest and addressed under this aquatics report for the Crooked Mud Honey project...... 175 Table 78. Summary comparison of environmental effects to resources...... 176 Table 79. Resource indicators and measures for assessing effects ...... 177 Table 80. Basins, subbasins, watersheds, and subwatersheds (and corresponding HUCs) in which the Crooked Mud Honey Project area is located...... 179 Table 81. Acres of RHCA and MA 15 within the project area by subwatershed...... 181 Table 82. Miles of intermittent and ephemeral streams across the entire project area as well as on only NFS land...... 181 Table 83. Streams with impaired water quality, as denoted by placement on the ODEQ 303(d) of impaired water quality. Approximate distances in which the streams flow through the project area are also listed...... 183 Table 84. Potential for erosion (rill and gully), compaction, displacement, and sediment yield displacement within NFS land across the entire project, as defined in the Fremont LRMP, which amended the SRI...... 183 Table 85. Summary of Watershed Condition Class rating by HUC 12...... 184 Table 86. Miles of closed and open roads, miles of road within RHCAs, and open road density within each subwatershed in the project area...... 184 Table 87. Resource indicators and measures for Alternative 2 ...... 187
iv
Table 88. Roads in RHCAs ...... 187 Table 89. Soil Texture and SRI Units ...... 190 Table 90 Acres represented by slope ...... 191 Table 91. Resource Indicators and Measures for Cumulative Effects ...... 191 Table 92. Non Forested Vegetation - Resource indicators and measures for assessing effects .. 201 Table 92. (Continued) Non Forested Vegetation - Resource indicators and measures for assessing effects ...... 202 Table 93. Non-forested plant association acres on USFS lands within the Crooked Mud Honey Project Area, Lake County, Oregon...... 203 Table 94. Meadow Association Similarity to PNC in CMH Project Area...... 206 Table 95. Interpreted similarity to PNC for non-forested riparian ecotypes...... 207 Table 96. Sagebrush Similarity to PNC in CMH Project Area...... 208 Table 97. Permitted Grazing - Resource indicators and measures for assessing effects ...... 211 Table 98. Allotment acres within the project area by grazing allotment...... 212 Table 99. Invasive Plant Species within the Project Area ...... 220 Table 100. Current Conditions Road Maintenance Levels in CMH Project ...... 237 Table 101. Results of Implementing Proposed Changes to Road Maintenance Levels in CMH Project ...... 240 Table 102. Summary of effects from each Alternative on Road Systems...... 241 Table 103. Recreation Opportunities by Development Scale within Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project ...... 242 Table 104. Fremont National Forest Recreational Visitor Use Survey, Top 10 Activities by Participation Percentage (USDA 2012) ...... 247 Table 105. Potential Wilderness GIS Modeling Results ...... 253
List of Figures Figure 1. Mixed conifer stand in Crooked Mud Honey project area showing large ponderosa pine surrounded by small diameter fir and pine...... 3 Figure 2. Dry ponderosa pine stand in Crooked Mud Honey project area showing ponderosa pine regeneration. Note the accumulated duff collar around the large ponderosa pine...... 3 Figure 3. Juniper encroachment into sage/steppe habitat in the northern portion of the Drake- McDowell IRA...... 4 Figure 4. View looking north onto the Drake-McDowell IRA from Drake Peak lookout. Note mortality in lodgepole pine caused by the mountain pine beetle that occurred 6 to 7 years ago...... 4 Figure 5. An example of proposed treatments. Dry ponderosa pine stand post-harvest on Bly Ranger District, Cord Stewardship project, Black Hills EA...... 5 Figure 6. Juniper encroaching on Drake-McDowell IRA...... 20 Figure 7. Bole characteristics of young and old white fir in CMH. Photos taken in 2014...... 33 Figure 8. Crown characteristics of young and old white fir in CMH. Photos taken in 2014...... 33 Figure 9. Photo in CMH project area showing mortality from mountain pine beetle in whitebark pine. Photo taken 2014...... 44 Figure 10. Photo of the Drake-McDowell Inventoried Roadless Area in CMH project area displaying mortality from mountain pine beetle in lodgepole pine and whitebark pine. Photo taken 2013...... 44 Figure 11. Photo in CMH project area displaying a dense stand of young white fir. Photo taken 2013...... 45 Figure 12. Plant association groups within CMH project area...... 46 Figure 13. Photo in CMH project area displaying large ponderosa pine surrounded by small pine and fir. Photo taken 2013...... 46
v Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Figure 14. Photo in CMH project area displaying large ponderosa pine with nearby pine regeneration approximately 15 years old. Photo taken 2013...... 47 Figure 15. Stand density index for forested acres within the CMH project area...... 48 Figure 16. Photo in CMH project area displaying young western juniper in abundance. Photo taken 2013...... 49 Figure 17. Stand trajectory under the No Action alternative for Mixed Conifer Dry PAG over a 50 year time horizon within CMH...... 52 Figure 18. Stand trajectory under the No Action alternative for Lodgepole Pine Dry PAG over a 50 year time horizon within CMH...... 52 Figure 19. Stand trajectory under the No Action alternative for Ponderosa Pine Dry PAG over a 50 year time horizon within CMH...... 53 Figure 20. Stand trajectory under the No Action alternative for Juniper PAG over a 50 year time horizon within CMH...... 53 Figure 21. Stand trajectory of mixed conifer over 50 years...... 54 Figure 22. Species distributions for mixed conifer stand over a 50 year time horizon under a no action alternative...... 54 Figure 23. Stand trajectory under the Proposed Action alternative for Mixed Conifer Dry PAG over a 50 year time horizon within CMH...... 56 Figure 24. Stand trajectory under the Proposed Action alternative for Lodgepole Pine Dry PAG over a 50 year time horizon within CMH...... 57 Figure 25. Stand trajectory under the Proposed Action alternative for Ponderosa Pine Dry PAG over a 50 year time horizon within CMH...... 57 Figure 26. Stand trajectory under the Proposed Action alternative for Juniper PAG over a 50 year time horizon within CMH...... 58 Figure 27. Stand trajectory of mixed conifer over 50 years ...... 60 Figure 28. Types of wind driven crown fire (adapted from FlamMap 5.0) ...... 76 Figure 29. Hypothetical 10-year Cumulative Emissions by Fire Type ...... 89 Figure 31 Area of Known Wolf Activity OR-7 (photo USF&W Service) ...... 94 Figure 33: Existing Condition for Snag Densities Greater Than 10 Inches dbh Compared to the Reference Conditions in DecAID ...... 140 Figure 34: Existing Condition for Snag Densities Greater Than 20 Inches dbh Compared to the Reference Conditions in DecAID ...... 140 Figure 35. Bird Conservation Regions ...... 143 Figure 36. Location of the Crooked Mud Honey Project relative to 6th field (HUC 12) subwatersheds...... 151 Figure 37. Example of culverts to be removed in the Project Area; right, Honey Creek and FS road 3724-357; left, Little Honey Creek and FS road 3615-034...... 160 Figure 38. Location of the Crooked Mud Honey Project relative to 6th field (HUC 12) subwatersheds...... 180 Figure 39. Perennial, intermittent, and ephemeral streams within the project area...... 182 Figure 40. Forest Service monument dedicated to the site of the new Fort Warner...... 197 Figure 41. Abert Lookout (1934-1969)...... 198 Figure 42. Campsite in Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project ...... 242 Figure 43. Developed Campsite within Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project ... 246 Figure 44. Drake-McDowell IRA ...... 250 Figure 45 Drake-McDowell IRA 2013 ...... 253 Figure 46. Potential Wilderness Polygons identified through GIS modeling within the Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project...... 254 Figure 47. Drake-McDowell IRA ...... 255
vi Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Chapter 1 - Introduction The Fremont-Winema National Forest is committed to taking a holistic approach to restoration that includes the restoration of dry forest landscapes, wildlife and fisheries habitat, aquatic and riparian resources, recreation resources, and cultural and social values. Ecosystem restoration can be defined as:
“The process of assisting the recovery of an ecosystem that has been degraded, damaged, or destroyed. Ecological restoration focuses on reestablishing the composition, structure, pattern, and ecological processes necessary to facilitate terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems sustainability, resilience, and health under current and future conditions.”1
The Forest Service is proposing a suite of restoration treatments in the Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project (hereafter referred to as CMH or CMH Project) to address the overall health of vegetative and hydrologic functions in the project area. This area was selected for restoration planning efforts based upon a Values Analysis developed by The Nature Conservancy and the Lakeview Stewardship Group (2010); Watershed Condition Framework Prioritization (Fremont-Winema 2011); the relationship to private lands and the Lake County Community Wildfire Prevention Plan (Lake County CWPP Revision 2011); and a Forest assessment of combined risks related to crown fire and overstocked stands (Fremont-Winema 2010 Focus Areas Map). There is considerable opportunity for restoration within the CMH landscape.
The entire project is within the Lakeview Federal Stewardship Unit (LFSU). The Lakeview Federal Stewardship Unit, formerly the Lakeview Federal Sustained Yield Unit, was established by the Forest Service in 1950 as authorized by the Sustained Yield Forest Management Act of March 29, 1944 (58 Stat. 132; 16 USC 583-583i) to promote the stability of forest communities through continuous supplies of timber and forest products, and to secure the benefits of the forest with regards to water supply, erosion control, and wildlife habitat.
The Forest Service works in cooperation with the Lakeview Stewardship Group, a collaboration of conservationists, timber industry workers, local government officials, and other civic leaders. In 2011, the Lakeview Stewardship Group updated the 2005 Long-Range Strategy for the Lakeview Federal Stewardship Unit (Lakeview Stewardship Group 2011) which outlined a common vision and set of goals for the LFSU. An updated policy statement, signed by the Chief of the Forest Service and the Regional Forester in May 2012, states that the Forest Service will seek to achieve the following goals:
• Sustain and restore a healthy, diverse, and resilient forest ecosystem that can accommodate human and natural disturbances.
• Sustain and restore the lands capacity to absorb, store, and distribute quality water.
• Provide opportunities for people to realize their material, spiritual, and recreational values and relationships with the forest.
These goals go beyond providing raw materials needed for stability of the timber industry in Lakeview and Paisley. They include actions that provide for diversifying the economy of the two communities. The Forest Service has a strong partner in the Lakeview Stewardship Group and has collaborated with
1 USDA. 2012. 36 CFR Part 219. National forest system land management planning. Fed. Regist. 77(68):21162– 21276.
1 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
them to develop a holistic, long-range strategy to restore the ecological health of the unit. The CMH project design is guided by the principles and goals described in the Lakeview Federal Stewardship Unit Long-Range Strategy (2011) (hereafter referred to as the Long-Range Strategy). Proposed Project Location The project area is located approximately 20 miles northeast of the town of Lakeview, Oregon within Lake County. The proposed project would implement direction set forth in the Fremont National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (1989), as amended (USDA Forest Service 1989, often referred to as the “Forest Plan” or the “LRMP”). The Fremont National Forest is comprised of over 2 million acres, while the Lakeview Ranger District encompasses over 300,000 acres of the Forest. The CMH project analysis area contains 51,525 acres of National Forest System (NFS) lands and 632 acres of private lands. The project is in and around T36S, R21E; T36S, R22E; T37S, R21E; T37S, R22E; T38S, R21E; T38S, R21E; T38S, R22E (see vicinity map). The Forest Service proposes to conduct restoration treatments on NFS lands within twelve subwatersheds of the Warner Mountains north of Highway 140. The majority of the project acreage exists primarily within four subwatersheds: Lower Crooked Creek, Upper Honey Creek, Upper Crooked Creek, and Mud Creek.
The project area is a mix of forested and non-forested vegetation types as well as other land features such as rock outcrops and water. Forested lands account for about 65% of the area, while non-forested lands account for 34% of the area, with the remaining 1% being rock outcrops or water. The landscape ranges in elevation from 5,100 feet to 8,335 feet at Drake Peak Lookout. The landscape at lower elevations consists of stands of ponderosa pine and white fir with some inclusions of western white pine interspersed with juniper/sage steppe and meadows. Quaking aspen is present throughout the project area and typically present with lodgepole pine. As elevations increase the forest type begins to change to an ecosystem dominated by various mixed conifer species. The highest reaches of the project area consist of whitebark and lodgepole pine along with juniper/sage steppe plant types. Portions of the landscape are composed of moist and dry meadows, rock outcrops, sagebrush and mountain mahogany. Forest structure ranges from old growth forests of ponderosa pine to young stands comprised of pine and fir. Need for the Proposal The underlying needs for the proposed CMH project derive from the differences between current resource conditions as summarized here and further detailed in Chapter 3 of this EA and the desired, sustainable resource conditions as discussed in the Forest Plan and the Long-Range Strategy for the Lakeview Federal Stewardship Unit.
The dry mixed conifer vegetation in the CMH project area typically consists of ponderosa pine, white fir, incense-cedar, and western white pine. Within the project area, this forest type is associated with a historically very frequent, low-intensity fire regime (Agee 1994) with an average return interval of 12-36 years (Heyerdahl et al. in press). Frequent fires once regulated shade tolerant species and promoted bunch grasses and sprouting shrubs. In much of the project area white fir is thought to have been present in unburned areas, but was generally much less abundant than today (e.g. Hagmann et al. 2013) and was at most a codominant to other species pre-1900 due to the selective thinning effect of frequent fire (Simpson 2007; Agee 1994). Ponderosa pine chiefly dominated the overstory canopy.
2 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Figure 1. Mixed conifer stand in Crooked Mud Honey project area showing large ponderosa pine surrounded by small diameter fir and pine.
The ponderosa pine vegetation type in CMH is associated with a historically frequent, low intensity fire regime and is among the forest types most heavily impacted by fire exclusion (Simpson 2007; Fitzgerald 2005; Skinner and Chang 1996; Agee 1993, 1994; Franklin and Dyrness 1988). Relevant fire studies in the region determined composite fire intervals to range from 11 to 17 years (Heyerdahl et al. in press). See vegetation type map in Appendix B.
Figure 2. Dry ponderosa pine stand in Crooked Mud Honey project area showing ponderosa pine regeneration. Note the accumulated duff collar around the large ponderosa pine.
Invasive post-settlement western juniper in the northern half of the Drake-McDowell Inventoried Roadless Area (IRA) is adversely impacting watershed function, wildlife habitat, health of sage steppe habitat, and downstream lands. The area provides nesting and brood rearing habitat for the greater sage grouse on Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and Private lands adjacent to CMH, and brood rearing habitat on USFS lands in the CMH project. Recent telemetry work by the BLM in adjacent lands has reported use by sage grouse in these areas. Restoring habitat for sage grouse is critical to preventing it from being federally listed under the Endangered Species Act.
3 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Figure 3. Juniper encroachment into sage/steppe habitat in the northern portion of the Drake-McDowell IRA.
Figure 4. View looking north onto the Drake-McDowell IRA from Drake Peak lookout. Note mortality in lodgepole pine caused by the mountain pine beetle that occurred 6 to 7 years ago.
Pockets of mortality caused by wildfire, drought, mountain pine beetle episodes, and overstory removals have been common throughout the project area. Lack of low intensity fires has allowed stands to take on a multi-storied structure where historically it was more even aged and park like. Fire exclusion has resulted in stands in an overstocked condition. Historically, frequent low intensity fires maintained open stand structures as well as sparse, light ground fuels by killing understory vegetation and consuming surface fuels (Hessburg et al. 2005). Frequent fires also kept thin barked tree species, such as larger diameter lodgepole pine in low numbers, or limited to areas where fires occurred less frequently (Fitzgerald 2005; Simpson 2007). Past land use activities, including timber harvest, the suppression and exclusion of fire, livestock grazing, and road construction have altered ignition sources as well as the composition and structure of fuel loads.
The desired future dynamics for the CMH project area is to promote large ponderosa pine, western white pine, and whitebark pine, reduce stand densities, apply prescribed fire heterogeneously across the project area, and to improve wildlife habitat diversity. Restoration treatments would consist of re-establishing the composition, structure, pattern, and processes of the full range of plant communities with a focus on dry ponderosa pine and mixed conifer forest types. The goal of restoration management in the CMH project
4 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
is not to mimic one condition in time but to reference a time when the landscape was more resilient to exogenous disturbances.
Figure 5. An example of proposed treatments. Dry ponderosa pine stand post-harvest on Bly Ranger District, Cord Stewardship project, Black Hills EA.
Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCAs) in the project area are being encroached upon by conifers and some stream reaches contain eroded banks or headcuts, and lack large wood. Headcuts and perched culverts are currently inhibiting fish passage in some of the streams. Aspen stands have been suppressed due to conifer competition and loss of frequent fire activity. Western juniper has expanded its range into sage-steppe and increased in frequency in juniper and pine plant associations. Road densities on NFS lands in the CMH project area exceed LRMP goals. An analysis of the transportation system has been completed to determine what roads are necessary for future management activities and public access.
The general needs of the CMH project, consistent with the direction of the Forest Plan and the goals of the Long-Range Strategy, are to promote the overall sustainability of vegetative and hydrologic functions within the project area. Specifically, the needs for the proposal include:
• Reduce stand densities to improve vigor and increase resilience to disturbance from insects and wildfire, and move stands toward a sustainable late old structure (LOS) condition. LRMP Standards and Guidelines - Management of MA 5 emphasizes timber production and livestock grazing while meeting standards and guidelines for other resources (Forest Plan pages 145-152). The Regional Forester’s Eastside Forests Plan Amendment 2 (Eastside Screens) modified this emphasis by directing that a balance between Forest Plan objectives for timber production and maintenance of LOS be achieved.
• Reduce fire hazard by treating the fuel complex and aiding natural functions by reintroducing fire on the landscape. The National Fire Plan provides for targeted hazardous fuels reduction and the Lake County CWPP provides for the Forest Service to give consideration to the priorities of local communities for forest and rangeland management and hazardous fuel reduction projects.
• Revitalize sage steppe habitat and riparian vegetation including aspen stands, meadows, and RHCAs that have been altered by conifer encroachment. The LRMP states, “Habitat for sensitive plants and animals shall be managed or protected to ensure that the species do not become threatened or endangered because of Forest Service actions….maintain or increase the status of populations and habitats.” The sage steppe habitat in Drake-McDowell IRA is used by greater
5 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
sage grouse, which is a Candidate for federal listing. The LRMP (pg. 103) states that aspen stands with good site potential for response but presently in poor condition should be given priority for treatment. The objectives of the Fremont LRMP are to restore and maintain all riparian areas in a condition which enhances riparian dependent resource values. INFISH established goals for water bodies and courses, their riparian vegetation, and the immediately adjacent upland areas, which are to be managed to maintain or improve water quality, fish habitat, recreation opportunities, and riparian habitat for dependent wildlife species.
• Reduce overall road densities and improve conditions of the remaining roads that are important to the Forest transportation system. The LRMP sets as a goal “a safe and economical transportation system providing efficient access for the movement of people and materials”. The LRMP also has a goal to reduce road densities to 2.5 miles per square mile in areas that are roaded on the Forest.
• Support jobs in the local economy and provide forest products as a result of meeting the above purposes. Both the LRMP and the Long-Range Strategy have a goal of supporting the local economy through the use of forest products generated through restoration treatments. Management Direction and Regulatory Framework Development of this Environmental Assessment followed implementing regulations of the National Forest Management Act (NFMA) (36 CFR part 219), National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) NEPA Policies and Procedures (7 CFR part 1b), Forest Service NEPA Procedures (36 CFR part 220), the Clean Water Act (CWA), and the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The Proposed Action Alternative analyzed in this EA is consistent with all applicable laws, regulations, and policies.
This Environmental Assessment is tiered to the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and Record of Decision for the Fremont National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) (USDA 1989, as amended). The analysis of the standards and guidelines and desired conditions in the LRMP is documented in the FEIS for the Fremont LRMP. The FEIS for the LRMP describes eight alternatives for managing the land and resources of the Fremont National Forest, including an alternative that is described as the Preferred Alternative. It presents and compares these management alternatives, and discloses the economic and environmental consequences of their implementation. This EA is tiered to the analysis that is documented in the FEIS for the Forest Plan. The CMH project is a site-specific application of the direction provided in the LRMP.
The relevant general management direction for this project is found in the Fremont LRMP and associated amendments. The LRMP specifies Forest-wide and Management Area goals, objectives, and standards that define desired conditions and provide for land uses and resource outputs.
The primary amendments to the LRMP are:
• Regional Forester’s Eastside Forests Plan Amendment 2 (USDA 1995, frequently referred to as the “Eastside Screens”) which provides direction for retention and promotion of Late and Old structural (LOS) forest characteristics and guidelines for management and retention of certain wildlife habitat; and
• Inland Native Fish Strategy (INFISH; USDA 1995), which provides interim direction to protect habitat and populations of resident native fish. These Regional Forester decisions and supporting documents are incorporated by reference, as part of the Forest Plan.
6 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
In addition, Standards and Guidelines for specific areas (termed "Management Areas") are stipulated in the LRMP. Management Areas are lands that are grouped into categories based on particular management emphases. Management Areas (MAs) and associated Standards and Guidelines are described in Chapter IV of the LRMP.
The lands within the CMH Project are categorized by Management Area (see Map of Management Areas in Appendix A), with approximate acreages described below. In some cases management areas overlap. A brief summary of the direction for each management area is as follows:
Management Area 1 (MA 1) - Mule Deer Forage and Cover on Winter Range (8,003 acres) The LRMP states, “Food, cover, and human disturbance will be managed on mule deer winter range to provide the habitat needed to meet the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and Klamath Tribes herd management objectives” (LRMP, 132). LRMP guidelines state that habitat improvement (in mule deer winter range) can include prescribed burning and mechanical ground and vegetative disturbance after evaluation of effects on habitat and non-target species (LRMP, 132).
Management Area 5 (MA 5) – Timber and Range Production (16,000 acres) These acres are allocated for commercial production of sawtimber and forage for domestic livestock and must meet LRMP Standards and Guidelines for all resources. The Regional Forester’s Eastside Forest Plans Amendments #1 and #2 modified the objectives for MA 5. While MA 5 is still to be managed for the commercial production of sawtimber and forage for domestic livestock (within Forest-wide Standards and Guidelines for all resources), the Regional Forester’s amendments have shifted the focus toward retaining and promoting Late/Old structural (LOS) characteristics. MA 5 areas are to be managed with an objective of creating a healthy forest condition through control of stocking levels, species mix, and protection from insects, disease, and other damage while moving forest stands toward structural conditions that are within the Historic Range of Variability (HRV). HRV refers to structural forest conditions that are based on pre-European settlement conditions. Moving forest stands toward the HRV is desirable because such conditions provide the most sustainability in the long term. Sustainability refers to the ability of forested systems to withstand or resist rapid and widespread structural change due to fire, insects, and disease.
The Eastside Screens wildlife standards contain direction for the maintenance of snags and down logs. These standards and guidelines for snags and downed wood are designed to provide the amount of snags and downed wood required for 100 percent of potential population levels of primary cavity excavators, to be determined using the best available science on species requirements. The wildlife standards also contain direction for management of connectivity corridors for wildlife and protection of goshawk nest sites.
Management Area 6 (MA 6) – Scenic Viewsheds (12,365 acres) The overall objective in MA 6 is to provide high to moderate visual quality within selected viewsheds on the Forest. The overall objective in MA 6 is to provide an attractive, natural appearing forest visual character. The LRMP contains guidelines for land management prescriptions that are designed to promote the visual integrity of landscapes in the foreground-viewing zone.
Management Area 9 (MA 9) – Primitive/Semi-primitive – Drake-McDowell Inventoried Roadless Area (IRA) (5,387 acres) Provide for a spectrum of dispersed recreation experience opportunities from semi-primitive non- motorized to semi-primitive motorized through the management of user activities and natural resource settings. Modified by the 2001 Roadless Rule as identified in the Forest Service Roadless Area Conservation, Final Environmental Impact Statement Volume 2 dated November 2000.
7 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Management Area 13 (MA 13) – Developed Recreation Sites (overlapped within other MAs) Provide a wide variety of recreation opportunities at developed facilities. Developed facilities can include campgrounds, picnic areas, boating sites, swimming areas, winter ski areas, observation sites and organizational sites. Timber harvest is permitted for the purpose of improving the aesthetic quality and/or safety of the site.
Management Area 14 (MA 14) - Old-Growth Dependent Species Habitat (1,232 acres) The goal of MA 14 is to manage stands of old growth on the Forest to maintain or increase populations of dependent, native vertebrate species (LRMP, 196-198). Pine and pine associated stands will be managed under a dedicated system that does not provide for any planned timber harvests, however these stands may have wildlife habitat enhancement projects and fuels management to maintain or enhance old-growth habitat.
Management Area 15 (MA 15) – Riparian Fish and Wildlife Habitat/Water Quality (4,051 acres) The aquatic and riparian zones of all drainages and water bodies, and their immediately adjacent uplands, will be managed to meet the objectives of MA 15. MA 15 will be managed to maintain or improve water quality, fish habitat, recreation opportunities, and riparian habitat for dependent wildlife species. This includes all perennial, intermittent and ephemeral drainages. Other than water bodies, MA 15 areas also occur in other management areas so there is some duplication of acres.
The Regional Forester’s Plan Amendment for INFISH (USDA 1995) has amended the Fremont LRMP Standards and Guidelines for this management area by creating Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCAs). All project actions must be in compliance with INFISH. Riparian dependent resources receive primary emphasis in all RHCAs. Standard RHCA widths are as follows:
Perennial Fishbearing Streams: The area on either side of the stream extending from edges of active stream channel to the top of the inner gorge, or the outer edges of the 100-year floodplain, or the outer edges of riparian vegetation, or to a distance equal to the height of two site-potential trees, or 300 feet slope distance (600 feet, including both sides of the stream channel), whichever is greatest.
Perennial Non-Fishbearing Streams: The area on either side of the stream extending from edges of active stream channel to the top of the inner gorge, or the outer edges of the 100-year floodplain, or the outer edges of riparian vegetation, or to a distance equal to the height of one site-potential tree, or 150 feet slope distance (300 feet, including both sides of the stream channel), whichever is greatest.
Non-Fishbearing Intermittent streams and wetlands less than 1 acre: (1) The intermittent stream channel and the area to the top of the inner gorge, (2) the intermittent stream channel or wetland and the area to the outer edges of the riparian vegetation, and (3) the area to the edge of the channel or wetland to a distance equal to the height of one-half site potential tree, or 50 feet slope distance, whichever is greatest.
For this project the applicable INFISH direction reads: “Prohibit timber harvest in RHCAs, except as described below….b. Apply silvicultural practices for RHCAs to acquire desired vegetation characteristics where needed to attain Riparian Management Objectives. Apply silvicultural practices in a manner that does not retard attainment of Riparian Management Objectives (RMOs) and that avoids adverse effects on inland native fish.”
Road Best Management Practices and Timber Best Management Practices Best Management Practices (BMPs) are the primary mechanisms to enable the achievement of water quality standards (Environmental Protection Agency 1987). For the Fremont National Forest, BMPs have been selected and tailored for site-specific conditions to arrive at the project level BMPs for the protection of water quality. The Fremont BMPs are a supplement to the “General Water Quality Best Management
8 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Practices: Pacific Northwest Region” (1988). They are also consistent with the Forest Service’s National Core BMPs, which are described in National Best Management Practices for Water Quality Management on National Forest System Lands, Volume 1: National Core BMP Technical Guide (USDA 2012). See Appendix D for complete documentation of BMPs.
Collaboration, Public Involvement and Tribal Consultation The Forest Service first described the CMH proposal in the January 2014 edition of the Fremont-Winema National Forest’s quarterly Schedule of Proposed Actions (SOPA). The SOPA is distributed quarterly to the Forest’s SOPA mailing list, and is available on the Forest’s public website.
The initial Proposed Action Statement was distributed in a scoping packet of March 3, 2014 that was mailed to adjacent landowners, government agencies at all levels, conservation and environmental organizations, livestock and timber industry representatives, and other private interested individuals that are on the Southeast Zone NEPA mailing list. Project information was also posted on the Fremont- Winema National Forest’s public website (www.fs.fed.us/r6/frewin/projects).
The Forest Service also consulted the following individuals, Federal, State, tribal, and local agencies during the development of this EA:
Lakeview Stewardship Group Klamath Tribes Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife USDI Fish and Wildlife Service
The initial scoping process produced responses from the following individuals and organizations:
1. Doug Heiken, Oregon Wild 2. Jim Walls, Lakeview Stewardship Group 3. Irene Jerome, American Forest Resource Council (AFRC)
Comments ranged from full support for the Proposed Action, including non-commercial treatments in the Drake-McDowell IRA, to suggestions and recommendations for the design of the proposed treatments.
Oregon Wild expressed concern that the scoping map for the project appears to anticipate treatments on virtually every acre. They suggest that there should be an optimal mix of treated and untreated areas across the landscape. This has been addressed by design of treatment schemes and development of design criteria for retention areas (see Appendix B and C). While most acres have the potential to be treated, not all acres would be treated.
Oregon Wild requests that the Forest Service retain all old trees regardless of size. They believe old trees (>150 years) deserve protection even if they are not 21” dbh. The rating system within the guide Identifying Old Trees and Forests in Eastern Washington (Van Pelt 2008, pg. 90) would be used to help identify old ponderosa pine for retention within the project area. While the proposal includes an amendment to cut white fir greater than 21” dbh if it contributes to restoring dry and mixed conifer forests, old white fir would not be targeted for removal. These trees are identified by observing the bark fissures, crown and height of the tree, and branch characteristics (e.g. Ageing grand fir on the Malheur National Forest (Johnston 2014)). Because the relationship between dbh and age for white fir/grand fir is poor, the described tree characteristics will be used to help identify old white fir for retention (Appendix C).
9 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Oregon Wild may support limited removal of large "young" white fir when it is carefully confined to circumstance where net ecological benefits are clear, e.g., consistent with the agreement reached in the Burnt Willow project, which recognized exceptional circumstances when it may be appropriate to remove white fir <26" dbh and <150 years old when they are within the dripline of even larger ponderosa pine or other desired trees. Data from 1914 to 1922 collected on the Fremont NF (Hagmann et al. 2013), shows that white fir over 21” dbh was about 1 to 2 trees per acre (TPA) in dry mixed conifer stands and about 6 TPA on moist mixed conifer stands. Current data (2013) for the CMH project shows that white fir over 21” dbh is on average 8 to 10 TPA across plant associations. The proposal includes an LRMP amendment which would allow for cutting of white fir trees >21” dbh where it would support ecological restoration goals and moving conditions closer toward HRV. This proposal may not be quite as constrained as the criteria for Burnt Willow was because conditions warrant a slightly different approach.
AFRC expressed support for harvesting white fir trees greater than 21” dbh. They would like to see riparian areas addressed and suggest removal of over 21” dbh trees from aspen stands. The proposal includes an amendment to cut white fir >21” dbh where it meets the criteria of certain scenarios and supports restoration goals. Riparian areas are addressed in the design of the proposal.
AFRC is concerned about road closures and decommissioning. Road proposals are the result of looking at the existing transportation system and considering both short and long-term needs for access related to management and public uses, as well as identifying roads that may be negatively impacting resources. This is a reasoned approach to addressing the need to reduce road densities closer to Forest Plan goals.
Lakeview Stewardship Group supports the harvesting of white fir >21” dbh while retaining historic levels. They request that the treatment with the Drake McDowell IRA be designed to maintain or improve the roadless characteristics of the area. The specific design of the proposed action addresses both of these ideas.
The comments were sorted into key issues that would drive alternative development and other issues or comments that would be addressed by narrative discussion in the analysis and those which would be addressed by incorporation of resource protection measures and/or specific project design features. The Forest Service did not identify any comments that would rise to the level of being considered “key issues” that required development of other action alternatives. All mailing lists, scoping documents, public responses, and Forest Service consideration of scoping comments are on file in the CMH Project record.
10 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Chapter 2 - Proposed Action and Alternatives Introduction This chapter contains a description and comparison of the alternatives considered for the CMH project. It includes a description, including resource protection measures that are incorporated in the action alternative, and a map of each alternative considered. This EA discloses and analyzes fully the effects of two alternatives, one action alternative (Proposed Action) and a no-action alternative, and the degree to which each alternative addresses the needs for the proposal.
Precision of Information Acres, miles, other quantifiable amounts, and mapped area boundaries used to describe these alternatives are based on the best available information. Information used in designing the Proposed Action Alternative was generated from a mix of extensive field reconnaissance, use of ortho-photos, Global Positioning System (GPS) technology, Geographic Information System (GIS) and various resource- specific databases. Alternatives Considered but not Fully Developed During the development of this project the inter-disciplinary team (IDT) considered alternatives to the Proposed Action that were eliminated from further analysis. The alternatives that were considered but not fully developed are listed below:
• Exclude the Drake-McDowell IRA from the project boundary.
Early on in development of the CMH proposal the Forest Service considered this approach; however, the Lakeview Stewardship Group supported consideration of the Drake-McDowell IRA and identification of restoration needs associated with it. Fire exclusion has led to an abundance of invasive western juniper impacting watershed function and the health of sage steppe habitat for the greater sage grouse in the IRA. This led to inclusion of the IRA in the analysis area and incorporation of treatment proposals to enhance sage steppe habitat in the Proposed Action Alternative (see Need for Proposal page 3).
• Apply prescribed burning within the IRA
An alternative was considered that would have utilized prescribed fire in the Drake-McDowell IRA, but was not fully developed after IDT discussions with the Lakeview Stewardship Group led to the determination that prescribed fire in the IRA would not necessarily help meet the purpose and needs for this project. There were concerns about potential adverse effects to regeneration of the population of whitebark pine (Candidate species for Federal listing) and the overall difficulty of applying prescribed fire in the roadless area, in conjunction with consideration of the adjacent private lands.
• Limit juniper cutting to trees less than 12” dbh within the IRA
Oregon Wild requested in their scoping comments that all junipers larger than 12” dbh be retained in the IRA. They suggest that juniper is a native species that is responding naturally to top-level forces such as CO2 enrichment and fire exclusion and that it would be better to restore fire and let natural processes determine how much juniper should persist in the area.
Decades of fire suppression has enabled encroachment of conifers in sage steppe ecosystems (Hessburg and Agee 2003). The amount of western juniper has increased dramatically since the late 1800s and can have a significant impact on soil resources, plant community, and wildlife habitat if left to expand (Miller
11 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
et al. 2005). This is also true for juniper and meadow plant associations within the Drake-McDowell IRA in the CMH Project.
Invasive post-settlement western juniper in the IRA is adversely impacting watershed function, wildlife habitat, health of sage steppe habitat, and downstream lands (Pierson et al 2007). The area provides nesting and brood rearing habitat for the greater sage grouse on BLM and Private lands adjacent to CMH, and brood rearing habitat on USFS lands in the CMH project. Recent telemetry work by the BLM in adjacent lands has reported use by sage grouse within and adjacent to the project area. The 950 acres proposed for treatment within the IRA is late summer brood habitat for greater sage grouse (Communication with Craig Foster ODFW Wildlife Biologist 2014).
Currently, the meadow systems within the IRA boundary contain 25 to 88 juniper trees per acre of varying sizes. Few of the trees (approximately 1 to 3 per acre) are classified as old growth juniper according to characteristics in Miller et al. (2007). Currently the meadow plant associations are overstocked with conifer species (particularly western juniper and trace amounts of ponderosa pine and white fir) and lack understory grasses, forbs, and shrubs.
One of the primary objectives of the CMH project is to move habitats closer to historical conditions in terms of stand density, snag density, late old structure and open canopy condition. These objectives should also have application within the Drake-McDowell IRA. Habitats occupied by the sagebrush ecosystem are declining and becoming increasingly fragmented at an alarming rate because of conifer encroachment, exotic annual grass invasion, and anthropogenic development. This is causing range-wide declines and localized extirpations of sagebrush associated fauna and flora (Davies et al 2011).
The current condition within the Drake-McDowell IRA and specifically the proposed 950 acres of sage steppe habitat is not within historical range of open canopy conditions. The amount of closed canopy stand conditions have increased due to past management activity and lack of frequent fire. As displayed in Table 1, the amount of late-seral, closed canopy juniper Plant Association Group (PAG) is well over- represented within CMH project area. Table 2 displays early and late seral stand conditions that are open canopy. Currently, only 3 percent of juniper woodlands are in an open canopy condition, when historically this stand condition was represented 50 to 70 percent across this PAG. What these tables display is a major departure in species composition and structure from historic conditions (Miller et al 2007, Silviculture report 2014).
Table 1. Current seral and structural stage for closed canopy plant associations in CMH compared to reference conditions in percent (from Silviculture report 2014). Reference Condition Current Condition Viable Code Historical CMH Project Area Early Seral Closed Canopy Dry Lodgepole Pine, Pole Stage 5- 40 86 Moist White Fir, Small Tree Stage 3-8 25 Cold Dry White Fir, Small Tree Stage 0-8 37 Mid Seral Closed Canopy Ponderosa Pine-Lodgepole Pine, Small Tree Stage 1-8 25 Late Seral Closed Canopy Juniper Steppe, Large Tree Stage 0 19 Juniper Woodlands, Small Tree Stage 15-30 65 Ponderosa Pine-Lodgepole Pine, Large Tree Stage 1-4 31 Dry Ponderosa Pine, Small Tree Stage 0-4 32
12 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Dry Ponderosa Pine, Large Tree Stage 0-4 35 Cold Dry White fir, Large Tree Stage 4-8 18
Table 2. Current seral and structural stage for open canopy plant associations in CMH compared to reference conditions in percent (from Silviculture report 2014). Reference Condition Current Condition Viable Code Historical CMH Project Area Early Seral Open Canopy Juniper Woodlands, Grass-Forb-Shrub Stage 50-70 3 Late Seral Open Canopy Wet White Fir, Small Tree Stage 0-2 46 Dry Ponderosa Pine, Large Tree Stage 15-33 0
The CMH project includes a proposal to cut <9 inch dbh ponderosa pine and white fir and non-old growth juniper <21 inch dbh within 950 acres of the 5,387 acre Drake-McDowell IRA. The treatment is proposed to improve habitat conditions for the greater sage grouse, while maintaining or enhancing the roadless characteristics of the area.
Cutting of western juniper increases water availability and nitrogen, and results in large increases in biomass and cover of herbaceous species within the first two years of treatment (Bates et al. 2002). Juniper maintained at low densities would increase the abundance, diversity, and richness of avian and mammal populations in shrub-steppe (Miller et al. 2005). Wildlife response would depend on vegetation response post treatment. Eddleman (2002) showed that uncut juniper plots had little herbaceous response whereas cut treatments had large increases in shrub and grass cover 2 years post cutting. Bates et al. (2000) also report positive vegetation response within 2 years of treatment within needlegrass-bluebunch plant communities. No treatment within the IRA would promote conifer expansion to the detriment of the sage/steppe habitat.
Sage grouse require an extensive mosaic of sagebrush of varying densities and heights throughout the year for security, shade, and forage (Gregg, et al. 1994, Remington and Braun, 1985). In summer, high levels of native grass cover provide areas for nesting and high-protein forbs and insect foods (Barnett and Crawford 1994). Open sites surrounded by sagebrush, but adjacent to quality nesting and brood-rearing habitat, serve as leks, breeding display grounds for males (Shroeder et al. 1999). These leks and nesting sites are typically in the same specific areas in successive years (Fisher et al. 1993). Hens with broods tend to use sagebrush uplands adjacent to nest sites and will move to wetter sites in June and July as spring habitats dry (Connelly et al. 1988; Drut et al. 1994; Dunn and Braun 1986). This upland habitat for brood-rearing in early spring is critical to brood survival.
From a wildlife perspective, limiting cutting of juniper to only those trees <12” dbh within 950 acres of the IRA would only cut approximately half of the post-settlement conifer encroachment within the treatment units and would not meet our criteria for open canopy conditions in the juniper PAG.
The invasion of juniper and other conifers into sagebrush rangelands degrades habitat for sage grouse. A new study in eastern Oregon found no active leks where conifers covered more than 4% of the land area. As important, active leks were nonexistent not only where trees were well established, but even in early stages of encroachment where many small trees were scattered across the landscape (Baruch-Mordo et al. 2013). The sage steppe and juniper removal project ODFW is conducting on private land adjacent to the Drake-McDowell IRA would tie in nicely with the proposed work of the USFS. Creating large blocks of
13 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
treated habitat across artificial boundaries would move the area closer to historical conditions and create habitat that would be used by greater sage grouse for brood rearing (Miller et al 2000). Alternative 1 - No Action The No-Action Alternative provides a baseline of current conditions against which to compare the effects of the Proposed Action Alternative. Resource narratives in Chapter 3 contain detailed descriptions of current conditions in CMH. Under this alternative, none of the forest vegetation treatments, prescribed fire, stream restoration, wildlife habitat enhancement, or adjustments to the Motor Vehicle Use Maps (MVUM) or other restoration actions, unless authorized by another planning process, would occur in response to the need for the proposal (see Project Area vicinity Map in Appendix A).
Ongoing management practices such as domestic livestock grazing, fire suppression, invasive species management, public recreation use and limited road maintenance are expected to continue with the selection of this alternative. Alternative 2 - Proposed Action The Forest Service proposes restoration activities on approximately 45,000 acres in the North Warners. The following is a slightly modified version of the original Proposed Action presented in the Proposed Action Statement that was released as part of the scoping package of March 3, 2014. Here the proposed action has been further refined by the addition of details of the prescribed treatments and specific project design elements. Other differences between the original and current version are some areas that were originally described as “timber units” are now either Goshawk core areas or PFAs, areas of retention, or are now areas that would be classified as “other units” on the Proposed Action Map. This change decreased the amount of “timber units” and increased the amount of “other units” that could receive treatment (see Map Figure 2 Proposed Action in Appendix A).
The analysis in this document occurs prior to the administrative step of designating specific activity names or unit numbers (i.e. specifically-named timber sales with numbered “units” or burning/prescribed fire “units”). Implementation of the actions discussed below is expected to begin during 2015 and is expected to take approximately 10 years to complete.
Actions could be implemented through a variety of mechanisms including, but not limited to, Stewardship authority, Public Works Contract, Cooperative Agreement, and Forest Service workforce.
Summary of Proposed Actions • Commercially harvest approximately 19,000 acres of dry ponderosa pine and mixed conifer stands, moving them towards a more resilient and sustainable condition. Where conditions exist, treatments may include cutting and /or removing conifers within aspen clones, mountain mahogany stands, and RHCAs. • Construct approximately 5 to 10 miles of temporary roads. • Routine maintenance would occur on existing transportation system roads. • Temporary roads, landings, and skid trails would be rehabilitated in accordance with BMPs. • Non-commercial treatment (mechanically and by hand) of approximately 26,000 acres of aspen, dry and moist meadows, sage and shrublands, juniper woodlands, and plantations. Treatments may include cutting encroaching conifers (e.g., within aspen clones), reducing stand densities (e.g., thinning plantations), and planting conifers in old plantations that experienced poor survival and where needed as part of the restoration strategy for whitebark pine.
14 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
• Treat (by hand cutting) approximately 950 acres of encroaching conifers within sage steppe systems in the northern half of the Drake-McDowell IRA. This treatment would consist of cutting <9” dbh ponderosa pine, lodgepole pine and white fir, and cutting non-old growth juniper <21” dbh to enhance sagebrush ecosystems. Subsequent burning of individual felled trees would take place 1 to 3 years post treatment. • Apply prescribed fire throughout the project area (excluding Drake-McDowell IRA). • Restore streams (e.g., repair headcuts and incised stream channel, streambank stabilization, culvert replacement). • Treatments to promote longevity of local populations of whitebark pine (e.g., culturing or planting). • Manage road system (e.g., road decommission, road closures, potential motor vehicle use map (MVUM) amendments).
Details of Proposed Activities and Connected Actions
Commercial Thinning Treatments The Proposed Action would commercially harvest approximately 19,000 acres of dry ponderosa pine and mixed conifer stands, moving them towards more resilient and sustainable conditions (see Appendix A Proposed Action Map). Where conditions exist, treatments may include cutting and /or removing conifers within aspen clones, mountain mahogany, and RHCAs. Treatments could include low thinning (thinning from below), variable density thinning, prescribed fire, Individual Clumps and Openings (ICO) approach, and skip/gap techniques. Treatments could be followed by small tree thinning, which may or may not be extracted for commercial use (see Appendix B Vegetation Treatment Scheme Maps). Depending on plant association, stands would be treated to achieve a residual basal area ranging from approximately 20 to180 square feet per acre favoring ponderosa pine, western white pine, and whitebark pine where it exists. These basal area (BA) recommendations are derived from SDI calculations by the Cochran et al. (1994) method. Whitebark pine would not be cut.
Each treatment unit larger than 40 acres within the CMH project would have retention areas and openings dispersed throughout the unit based on specific criteria identified in Appendix C – Criteria for Retention Areas. Generally, each unit could have up to 15-20% of the unit left in retention areas that would contribute to diversity across the landscape.
Treatments would be designed to move stands towards a late old structure condition while retaining appropriate levels of both early and mid-seral stands in the project area. Treatments would be guided by the HRV analysis done for the project area. For example, the HRV analysis determined that the project area is in excess of the cold dry white fir Plant Association Group (PAG), small tree stage (10 to 19.9 inch dbh) condition by more than 29 percent. These stands would be treated in a fashion that begins to move this stand condition closer to its historic range of 0 to 8 percent (currently at 37 percent). This could mean reducing the amount of white fir within dry ponderosa pine PAGs and dry mixed conifer PAGs. Approximately 539 acres of designated old growth stands would be treated. Designated old growth stands within Drake-McDowell IRA would not be treated. Up to 3,034 acres of the proposed 19,000 of commercial harvest occurs on areas of greater than 35 percent slope (refer to Table 3). Trees may be removed using ground-based systems, including harvester-forwarder and cable (with mitigation). The degree to which slash is removed would depend on the type of harvesting system. It is important to note that approximately 5,900 acres would not receive any tree thinning treatment with the exception of possible firewood gathering along the perimeter of area. These areas contain dead and dying lodgepole pine primarily set aside for black-backed woodpecker habitat. These areas could receive prescribed fire treatment.
15 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 3. Potential Harvest systems and respective acres in the CMH project area. Harvest System Acres Slope (percent) Ground based- feller buncher and skidder 15,966 <35 Ground based- harvester forwarder 2,307 <55 Cable 727 >35 Mechanical treatments outside timber units 1,726 <35 Chainsaw 24,274 all
When commercial thinning treatments are completed, landings would be scarified to provide a seedbed for re-vegetation and appropriate drainage installed to reduce erosion potential. Ponderosa pine and white fir stumps, except those in RHCAs, would be treated with a borax product to prevent the spread of annosus root rot (Use of Borax to Prevent Spread of Annosus Root Disease, Fremont-Winema National Forest 7/2/2010 Letter to District Rangers). We estimate that the thinning component of the Proposed Action would yield approximately 40-45 million board feet of merchantable timber.
Existing large down wood and snags would be retained. Snags within harvest units that pose a safety hazard (as defined in Field Guide for Danger Tree Identification and Response, 2008) would be felled and retained on site as down wood if needed to meet down wood standards per the LRMP. Danger trees on Forest roads used for contractor access or timber haul would be felled and left in place as needed in RHCAs. Outside of RHCAs, danger trees may be removed.
Forest Plan Amendment to Cut White Fir Trees > 21 Inches dbh Project level Forest Plan Amendment of Regional Forester’s Eastside Forests Plan Amendment 2 for the Fremont National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. The Pacific Northwest Region (R6) encouraged Forests to consider site-specific Forest Plan amendments where it will better meet LOS objectives by moving the landscape towards HRV, and provide LOS for the habitat needs of associated wildlife species (Guidance for Implementing Eastside Screens, USDA Forest Service, Goodman 2003). For the CMH Project, flexibility in implementing the 21” diameter limitation would be appropriate under the following scenarios as described in the Regional guidance:
• Moving multiple-layered ponderosa pine stands towards LOS of a single layer where the pine are competing with grand fir or other shade-tolerant species historically held in check by wildfire.
• Maintaining shade-intolerant desirable trees <21 inch dbh where their recruitment into the >21 inch class is reasonably foreseeable in the near future, and when giving preference to them better meets LOS objectives.
White fir has expanded its range and has been allowed to increase in size and frequency due to the lack of frequent fire. In order to restore both dry ponderosa pine and mixed conifer forests, non-old growth white fir would be cut (see Appendix B Figure 27 – Plant Associations Map). According to historic Government Land Office (GLO) data white fir existed throughout the project area at much lower densities compared to current conditions. The GLO data reports that from 1868 and 1869 the majority of species composition was large ponderosa pine. Large ponderosa pines (50” dbh+) were commonly reported across the CMH Project area, as well as large white fir at lower frequencies. Hagmann et al. (2013) reports that data from 1914 to 1922 collected on the Fremont NF, shows that white fir over 21” diameter at breast height (dbh) was about 1 to 2 trees per acre (TPA) in dry mixed conifer stands and about 6 TPA on moist mixed conifer stands. Current data (2013) shows that white fir over 21” dbh is on average 8 to 10 TPA across plant associations in CMH project area. This LRMP amendment would allow for cutting of white fir trees greater than 21” dbh where it would support ecological restoration goals consistent with the scenarios described above. Old white fir (>150 years) would not be targeted for harvest. These trees are identified by observing the bark fissures, crown and height of the tree, and branch characteristics. The
16 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
publication Ageing grand fir on the Malheur National Forest (Johnston 2014) would be used to help in identifying old trees that may be less than 21 inches dbh and are appropriate to retain within the context of restoration prescriptions. Empirical data from the Fremont-Winema has shown that old white fir typically exhibits large diameter branches showing developing in an open stand condition and fire scars showing these trees to be in excess of 200 years old.
Forest Plan Amendment to Treat with Commercial Harvest Allocated Old Growth MA 14 The LRMP allocates MA 14 for old growth dependent species habitat. Within the CMH project area, a total of approximately 1,231 acres have been so allocated (see Appendix A Maps – Management Areas). Specifically, the LRMP allocates about 373 acres of old growth pine-associated areas for goshawk habitat and about 858 acres for pine martin habitat in the project area.
The Fremont LRMP describes two prescriptions associated with old growth management areas. Allocated pine and pine-associated old growth stands are to be “dedicated” while lodgepole pine old growth stands are to be “managed”.
LRMP Standards and Guidelines for allocated pine-associated old growth (MA 14), such as occurs in CMH, include the following:
. Old-growth pine and pine-associated stands are dedicated, i.e. receive no timber management; however, these stands may have wildlife habitat enhancement projects to maintain or enhance old-growth habitat (LRMP, pages 139 and 196).
The Forest Service proposes an amendment to the LRMP to utilize a commercial timber sale in the CMH Project as a tool to accomplish thinning treatment in “dedicated” pine-associated stands to develop sustainable conditions that would benefit old growth habitat. Alternative 2 proposes thinning approximately 539 acres of pine-associated old growth, excluding the designated old growth stands within Drake-McDowell IRA. Treatments would be focused on maintaining or promoting LOS conditions, while creating resilient forest conditions.
Temporary Roads From 5 to 10 miles of temporary roads may be necessary to provide access to thinning treatment areas and allow for removal of forest products. All temporary roads would be constructed to low-standards, used for only a short duration, and decommissioned following timber harvest and hauling activities. All temporary road-related activities would follow the direction contained in BMPs (Appendix D).
Non-Commercial Treatments The proposed action would non-mechanically treat approximately 24,274 acres of aspen, dry and mesic meadows, sage and shrub lands, juniper woodlands, and plantations (see Appendix B – Vegetation Treatment Scheme Maps). Additionally, ~1,726 acres would be treated via mechanical means (refer to Appendix A Maps - Crooked Mud Honey Project Map “other treatments”). Treatments may include cutting (generally <12”dbh) encroaching conifers (e.g., within aspen clones), reducing stand densities (e.g., thinning plantations), and planting conifers where deemed necessary. Old growth juniper would be retained, regardless of size (Miller et. al. 2005).
Prescribed Fire Landscape Treatments Prescribed fire would be applied throughout most of the project area, targeting 60% of the area on average, in order to reduce natural and activity fuel accumulations, and to mimic natural historic disturbance patterns by creating a mosaic of vegetation and fuel structures on the landscape. The logical sequence of treatments would first be thinning where stocking levels exceed management recommendations and then applying prescribed fire 3 to 5 years post-thinning. In some cases prescribed
17 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project burning could be the only method utilized. To the extent possible, large snags and large down woody debris would be protected. Existing roads, natural openings and features would be used as control lines where possible. Where roads are overgrown, road clearing and brushing would occur if needed to insure fire line effectiveness. Fire control lines would be constructed to the minimum level sufficient to ensure firefighter safety and to control fire spread. Constructed fire line would be rehabilitated in accordance with the guidelines contained in the project resource protection measures and BMPs.
Prescribed fire applications would generally be implemented after the completion of thinning activities, over a period of about 3-10 years to allow adequate time for contract work to be performed, and to allow enough windows of the proper conditions to conduct underburning. To maintain the benefits of treatments, future maintenance underburns would need to be accomplished to prevent fuels buildup, restrict establishment of white fir trees and otherwise maintain desired conditions on the landscape.
Stream Restoration and Fish Passage Restore streams and fish passage as described in Tables 4, 5 and 6 (e.g., repair headcuts and incised stream channel, streambank stabilization, culvert replacement). Activities would be designed to meet goals outlined in INFISH.
Table 4. Proposed Stream Restoration Activities within RHCAs Acres Priority Stream Activity Location (estimated) Road crossing removal and road 1 Honey Creek decommissioning (Road 3615-357 and T37S, R21E, Sec 12 250 358) and stream restoration Little Honey Road decommissioning (Road 3615- T36S, R21E, Sec 25 and 36; 2 190 Creek 372 and 015) and stream restoration T37S, R21E, Sec 1 and 2 Road crossing removal, road Tributary to T36S, R21E, Sec 23, 24, 3 decommissioning (Road 3615-370), and 35 Little Honey and 25 stream restoration Road crossing removals (Road 3624- Loveless T37S, R21E, Sec 9, 10, and 4 128 and 3624-012) and stream 15 Creek 16 restoration Road crossing removal and road First Swale 5 decommissioning (Road 3720-132 and T37S, R22E, Sec 5 46 Creek 133) White Pine 6 Headcut repair in meadow T36S, R21E, Sec 35 112 Creek White Pine 7 Willow planting and beaver protection T36S, R21E, Sec 25 and 26 70 Creek Long John 8 Headcut repair T37S, R21E, Sec 12 and 13 65 Creek Rebuild spring enclosures to protect 9 Springs Throughout project area 10 water quality Total acres: 793
18 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 5. Miles of Proposed Road Removal in RHCAs (as identified in CMH Project Roads Analysis) Road Miles Priority Stream Activity Location (estimated) Culvert removal; Road Little Honey T36S, R21E, Sec 25 and 36; 1 decommissioning (Roads 3615-372 and 2.4 Creek T37S, R21E, Sec 1 and 2 015) Road crossing removal and road 2 Honey Creek decommissioning (Road 3615-357 and T37S, R21E, Sec 12 6 358) White Pine Road crossing removal and road 3 T36S, R21E, Sec 24 and 25 2.6 Creek decommissioning (Road 3615-370) Porcupine Road decommissioning (Road 3615- T38S, R21E, Sec 2; T38S, 4 1.4 Creek 025) R21E, Sec 1; Road decommissioning (Road 3720- T37S, R21E, Sec 12, 13, 5 Sage Creek 0.3 117) and 14 Road crossing removal and road First Swale 6 decommissioning (Road 3720-132 and T37S, R22E, Sec 5 1.1 Creek 133) Total Road Miles: 13.8
The following culvert removal/replacements (Table 6) have been identified as either being on roads that are no longer needed for future management activities and/or are current migration barriers for fish.
Table 6. Miles of Streams and Fish Passage Proposed Restoration Miles of Priority Stream Activity Location Stream (estimated) Little Honey Culvert removal (Road 3615-034); 1 T36S, R21E, Sec 25 2.2 Creek drivable ford to be installed. 2 Honey Creek Culvert removal (Road 3615-357) T37S, R21E, Sec 12 2.5 Loveless Culvert removals (Road 3624-128 and 3 T37S, R21E, Sec 16 2 Creek 3624-012). Porcupine Replace culvert (Road 3615-018) and T38S, R21E, Sec 2; T38S, 4 1.9 Creek remove culvert (Road 3615-024) R21E, Sec 1; Replace culvert (Road 3615-000) and S. Fork 5 remove culvert from spur road just T37S, R21E, Sec 25 1.2 Crooked Crk above Rd. 3615 S. Fork 6 Replace culvert (Road 3615-000) T37S, R22E, Sec 31 1 Crooked Crk Little Honey 7 Replace culvert (Road 3615-000) T37S, R21E, Sec 2 0.85 Creek White Pine 8 Replace culvert (Road 3615-000) T36S, R21E, Sec 26 1.7 Creek Second 9 Replace culvert (Road 3720-012) T37S, R22E, Sec 6 0.8 Swale Creek Total Miles of Stream restored: 14.15
Treat Encroaching Conifers within Drake-McDowell IRA to Restore Sage Steppe Habitat Decades of fire suppression has enabled encroachment of conifers in sage steppe ecosystems. Invasive post-settlement western juniper in the Drake-McDowell IRA is adversely impacting watershed function, wildlife habitat, health of sage steppe habitat, and downstream lands. The area provides nesting and brood rearing habitat for the greater sage grouse on BLM and Private lands adjacent to CMH, and brood rearing habitat on USFS lands in the CMH project.
19 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Figure 6. Juniper encroaching on Drake-McDowell IRA.
Treat (chainsaw hand cutting) approximately 950 acres of meadow plant communities within the Drake- McDowell IRA to remove encroaching conifers (refer to Appendix A Maps – Proposed Action). Treatment would be focused on cutting non-old growth junipers in areas which historically had no conifer component. This treatment would consist of cutting <9” dbh ponderosa pine, lodgepole pine and white fir, and cutting juniper <21” dbh to enhance sagebrush ecosystems. Western juniper that do not exhibit old growth characteristics (Miller et. al., 2005) and are less than 21” dbh would be cut. Slash would be lopped, scattered and left on site. Subsequent burning of individual cut juniper would take place 1 to 3 years post treatment, to prevent raptors from using them as perches to hunt sage grouse. No road construction or reconstruction would occur.
This proposal fits under Roadless Area Conservation Rule exception situation in 36 CFR §294.13(b)(1) The cutting, sale, or removal of generally small diameter timber is needed for one of the following purposes and will maintain or improve one or more of the roadless area characteristics as defined in §294.11. (i) To improve threatened, endangered, proposed, or sensitive species habitat.
The treatment proposed in the IRA is expected to maintain or improve the following roadless area characteristics:
• Habitat for threatened, endangered, proposed, candidate, and sensitive species and for those species dependent on large, undisturbed areas of land;
• Natural appearing landscapes with high scenic quality
Road Management Activities Routine road maintenance would occur on existing transportation system roads. Road maintenance actions may include clearing brush and trees from the travel way, ditch and culvert cleaning, slough and slide removal, blading and watering, installation of waterbars, earthen berms and/or cross ditches.
An interdisciplinary team completed a project level roads analysis as a separate component of this landscape restoration project. The roads analysis was focused on providing a transportation system that is safe, reduces ecological impacts, and meets immediate and projected long-term public and resource management needs. Appendix E contains a summary of Road Recommendations CMH Project. As identified and recommended through the CMH Roads Analysis:
20 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
• 43.2 miles of roads would be closed post-implementation. Road Closures are identified by an interdisciplinary team to reduce impacts to Forest resources by restricting vehicular use of certain system roads. If these roads are used under the timber sale as haul routes, they are closed following harvest/treatment activities.
Road closure is performed by constructing barricades of rock, earth berms or logs, or a combination of any of these near the beginning of a road. Closure materials are usually acquired onsite, if possible. Drainage structures on these roads are maintained to properly functioning condition prior to closure. Closed roads are designated as “Operational Maintenance Level 1” in the Forest transportation system database following their implementation. Closing roads is dependent upon available funding and, therefore, is subject to prioritization typically based on resource impacts caused by the road.
• 29.2 miles of roads would be decommissioned post-implementation. Another action identified by the interdisciplinary team, road decommissioning effectively removes the road from vehicular access and is meant to allow full re-vegetation and hydrologic function of the roadway’s footprint on the land.
Road decommissioning can be a collection of actions ranging from surface scarification or subsoiling with the road prism left intact, to a complete recontouring of the road prism back to a natural slope. For all roads being decommissioned, drainage structures are removed and their sites rehabilitated. Typically, re-vegetation is accomplished through natural seeding or tree seedling planting of the former roadway.
Proposed changes to road Maintenance Levels (ML) and the transportation system within the CMH Project are shown in Table 7 below and on the Travel Analysis (Road Recommendations) Map in Appendix E.
Table 7. Maintenance Level Changes to Roads in the CMH Project area Currently ML 2, change to ML 1 (closed) 3615189 (1.00 miles) 3615142 (0.31 miles) 3615219 (1.27 miles) 3615267 (0.48 miles) 3615335 (0.23 miles) 3615179 (0.25 miles) 3615157 (0.61 miles) 3615049 (0.61 miles) 3615021 (3.72 miles) 3615183 (0.18 miles) 3615332 (1.45 miles) 3616117 (0.39 miles) 3615024 (1.15 miles) 3615377 (0.68 miles) 3615294 (0.48 miles) 3615244 (0.84 miles) 3615341 (0.75 miles) 3720146 (0.45 miles) 3720106 (1.61 miles) 3615247 (0.19 miles) 3615281 (0.56 miles) 3615261 (1.03 miles) 3615086 (0.73 miles) 3615123 (0.70 miles) 3615297 (0.45 miles) 3615265 (1.03 miles) 3615173 (0.81 miles) 3615133 (0.43 miles) 3615182 (0.25 miles) 3615306 (0.70 miles 3615149 (0.47 miles) 3615376 (0.60 miles) 3624110 (0.27 miles) 3615264 (1.10 miles) 3624105 (0.23 miles) 3615181 (0.22 miles) 3720139 (0.56 miles) 3720120 (0.39 miles) 3615387 (0.10 miles) 3615317 (0.11 miles) 3720101 (0.36 miles) 3615026 (0.98 miles) 3615385 (0.19 miles) 3615221 (0.58 miles)
21 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
3615382 (1.25 miles) 3615172 (0.68 miles) 3615214 (0.14 miles) 3720015 (0.70 miles) 3615299 (0.29 miles) 3615012 (0.68 miles) 3624128 (1.96 miles) 3615011 (1.11 miles) 3615208 (0.75 miles) 3615034 (3.52 miles) 3720023 (0.67 miles) Currently ML 1, raise to ML 2 3615350 (0.28 miles) 3615016 (0.35 miles) 3615034 (0.54 miles) 3615015 (0.90 miles) 3615108 (0.06 miles) 3615033 (0.85 miles) 3615231 (1.44 miles) 3900012 (0.11 miles) 3615232 (0.81 miles) 3720100 (0.51 miles) 3615367 (0.01 miles) 3720117 (0.09 miles) Currently ML 2, raise to ML 3 3615000 (7.70 miles) Currently ML 1, change to Decommission 3615372 (0.50 miles) 3615137 (0.34 miles) 3900012 (0.27 miles) 3615058 (0.32 miles) 3615072 (0.29 miles) 1400040 (0.21 miles) 3615223 (0.54 miles) 3616121 (0.31 miles) 3720132 (0.61 miles) 3720106 (0.06 miles) 3615050 (0.13 miles) 3624021 (0.27 miles) 3615196 (0.67 miles) 3616120 (0.74 miles) 3615203 (0.18 miles) 3615371 (0.22 miles) 3615015 (2.30 miles) 3615184 (0.79 miles) 1400038 (1.00 miles) 3720133 (1.27 miles) 3615358 (0.45 miles) 3616123 (0.48 miles) 3615296 (0.22 miles) 3615025 (1.35 miles) 3615373 (0.24 miles) 3616012 (1.03 miles) 3615230 (0.72 miles) 3615349 (0.32 miles) 3615228 (0.13 miles) 3615363 (0.17 miles) 3624133 (0.16 miles) 3615316 (0.91 miles) 1400039 (0.20 miles) 3900012 (0.21 miles) 3615052 (0.13 miles) 3615292 (0.57 miles) 3616119 (0.66 miles) 3720134 (0.16 miles) 3720146 (0.44 miles) 3615365 (0.66 miles) 3615028 (0.86 miles) 3900012 (0.16 miles) 3720117 (1.41 miles) 3720119 (0.14 miles) 3615106 (0.18 miles) 3615367 (0.71 miles) 3615370 (2.48 miles) 3615298 (0.21 miles) 1400041 (0.08 miles) 1400039 (0.03 miles) Currently ML 2, change to Decommission 3615320 (0.22 miles) 3615083 (0.16 miles) 3615060 (0.28 miles) 3615357 (0.61 miles) 3624132 (0.28 miles) 3615032 (0.91 miles) 3615163 (0.06 miles) 3615297 (0.25 miles)
22 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Summary of proposed miles of change by maintenance level to existing ML 1 and ML 2 roads are shown in Table 8.
Table 8. Proposed Changes to Maintenance Level 1 and 2 Roads in CMH Project Existing Maintenance Level PROPOSED CHANGES
change change ML1 change change decom Grand ML1 decom ML2 ML3 Total 1 - BASIC CUSTODIAL CARE 6.07 26.46 32.53 (CLOSED) 2 - HIGH CLEARANCE 43.22 2.77 7.70 53.69 VEHICLES Grand Total 43.22 2.77 6.07 7.70 26.46 86.22
Changes to the Forest Motorized Travel Management Plan
The Fremont-Winema National Forest completed the Motorized Travel Management Project Environmental Assessment and the Decision Notice was signed on July 8, 2010. Implementation of the decision began with publication of the Motor Vehicle Use Map (MVUM) in 2011. In accordance with the MVUM, motor vehicle use is allowed only on designated roads and trails and in designated areas. Project level decisions that would result in changes to motorized access would be incorporated into updated publications of the MVUM.
Components of the road management proposals that are included in the proposed action alternative of the CMH Project would lead to changes of the MVUM. The proposed maintenance level changes that are included in the proposed action alternative of the CMH Project would result in changes to the MVUM as follows:
Road 3615000 would allow all motorized vehicles. Motorized access to dispersed camping would be allowed.
The following roads or portions of roads in Table 9 would be added to the MVUM, allowing access for all motorized vehicles and motorized access to dispersed camping:
Table 9. Proposed Roads or Portions of Roads added to MVUM 3615350 (0.28 miles) 3615016 (0.35 miles) 3615034 (0.54 miles) 3615015 (0.90 miles) 3615108 (0.06 miles) 3615033 (0.85 miles) 3615231 (1.44 miles) 3900012 (0.11 miles) 3615232 (0.81 miles) 3720100 (0.51 miles) 3615367 (0.01 miles) 3720117 (0.09 miles)
Roads shown as ML 1 (closed) in Appendix E - Road Recommendations CMH Project would temporarily be opened for use by Forest Service personnel or contractors during implementation of the activities contained in the action alternative. These roads would remain closed to motorized access for the public.
ML 2 roads proposed for closure or decommissioning under the action alternatives as listed above and in the table of Appendix E would no longer be available for motorized vehicle use and the MVUM would be updated in the future to reflect these changes.
23 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Project Design and Resource Protection Measures In response to public comments on the proposal, existing standards and guidelines, and resource specialist concerns, project specific design and resource protection measures were developed to prevent or reduce potential impacts to resources as a result of implementing the proposed action. These are measures that are considered routine, have been used on similar projects, and have proven to be effective. Project design and resource protection measures are required during implementation of the project, and would be either incorporated into contract provisions or accomplished by appropriate resource specialists. These measures were considered a part of the action alternative when analyzing and disclosing effects in Chapter 3, Environmental Consequences.
Special Uses
The following water conveyance features are authorized within the project area and must be protected:
1. Simms’ ditch: records indicate this system pre-dated the designation of the Fremont National Forest, so its constructed features are historic. Its right of way is approximately 10’ wide and 4,523.24 feet long and is located in T.36S., R.21E., WM., section 21 SW1/4SW1/4 and section 28 W1/2NW1/4 and NW1/4SW1/4.
2. Taylor’s ditch: water right records from 1961 indicate the constructed features of this system are historic. Its right of way is approximately 20’ wide and approximately 16,000 feet long and is located in T.36S., R.22E., WM., section 32 N1/2NE1/4, E1/2NW1/4, N1/2SW1/4, SW1/4SW1/4; T.37S., R.22E., WM., section 5 government lot 2, section 6 government lots 1, 2, 3, 6, S1/2NE1/4, SE1/4NW1/4, NE1/4SW1/4.
3. Warner Canyon Ski Area’s water line is partially located on National Forest System land. This water line and spring source is located in T.38S., R.21E., WM., section 30 SW1/4
If we have a need to cross these water conveyance systems, for any reason, (not just motorized access) we need to request written consent from the facility owners.
Communication site within the project area.
Drake Peak has multiple communication features. Lake County; US Fish & Wildlife; and Rob Thornton have authorizations for their features and use. If we have any proposed activities in this vicinity, we need to ask for these users’ input.
Recreation permitted uses authorized under Granger-Thye Act within the project area.
1. Aspen Cabin and Drake Peak Lookout are recreation rentals.
2. Camas Sno-park Building is used by the Hi Desert Stormtroopers snowmobile club (snowmobile trails – Forest roads are groomed by the club, also authorized under special use permit)
Recreation
1. Treatment within units should not allow equipment to cross the National Recreation Trails. If skidding or removal of logs damages the trail, it would be repaired to Regional Trail Standards.
2. Trail closures would be in effect when logging units along National Recreation Trails for public safety.
24 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
3. Design of the units immediately adjacent to develop recreation sites would blend into the natural landscape. Understory vegetation would be maintained to the extent possible, a higher density of trees would be retained when prescriptions allow, and slash piles would be burned away from view rather than an underburn.
Scenic Quality
The goal of design and mitigation features for scenic quality in MA6A is to minimize the effects of management actions on the visual characteristics of the natural landscape. Management activities are not prohibited in MA6A, but design of treatment units and other management activities should enhance the natural landscape. The mitigation and design criteria for the MA6A include the following:
1. To the extent practicable, landing or slash piles would be placed out of sight of the foreground retention areas associated with the National Recreation Trail, FS Road 3615, and Highway 140.
Cultural and Heritage Resources
There would be pre-operations coordination between the assigned Archaeologist and either the sale administrator, contracting officer’s representative, or force account work leader to discuss all information pertaining to cultural resource protection. A clear protective strategy for each of the known sites in the project area would be communicated. Known sites can be fully protected by implementation of the following mitigation measures:
• “Flag-and-Avoid” known sites prior to implementation of activities using ground-disturbing machinery. Machinery shall not enter the boundaries of known sites. Hand-felling is acceptable if felled trees are removed by hand.
• No slash piles within known sites or within 100 feet of the boundary of a known site, unless a Heritage Specialist determines that a smaller distance is sufficient to protect the site.
• Prior to project implementation all activity units would be reviewed on the ground to ensure that all known sites are flagged.
In the event of new cultural materials being discovered during on-the-ground preparation for the project or at any time during any ground disturbing activity, work in the immediate vicinity would cease until a Forest Service Archeologist has reviewed the site on the ground and protection measures have been developed.
Soils/Hydrology
1. Best Management Practices – All roadwork associated with implementation of the project would follow the Roads Best Management Practices (Fremont National Forest Supplement). All timber sale-associated work (all thinning treatments) would follow the Timber Sale Best Management Practices (Fremont National Forest Supplement). See Appendix D. BMPs provide project specific incorporation of the guidelines in the Fremont National Forest Soil Productivity Guide (USDA 2000, as amended 2002).
2. Thinning treatments of encroaching conifers from aspen stands and meadows would be accomplished under appropriate conditions (i.e. dry soils, frozen ground, or adequate snowpack) that prevent adverse impacts to soils (see Appendix D - BMPs).
25 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
3. Active ignition could occur within RHCAs as needed to ensure that encroaching juniper or other conifers actually burn. In areas where active ignition does not occur within the RHCA, prescribed fire would be allowed to back into the riparian areas.
Fisheries
Small Tree (Pre-commercial) Thinning 1. No-cut zone of 20 feet adjacent to all fish-bearing streams (INFISH), with the exception that all juniper trees would be cut from RHCAs, where applicable, regardless of proximity to streams.
2. No ground disturbing equipment within 30 feet of any stream channel and no ground disturbing equipment within RHCAs with slopes greater than 15%.
3. Where practicable, trees would be felled toward stream channels. Number of trees placed in channel would follow the INFISH standard (>20 pieces per mile; > 12 inch diameter; > 35 foot length) if feasible. Trees would be spaced accordingly and not dropped on top of other trees which would create debris jam; choose leave trees with larger dbh rather than smaller trees for channel placement.
4. Where practical, trees would generally be felled and left whole to increase floodplain roughness (not lopped and scattered) in RHCAs. Do not jackstraw felled material, creating excess fuel loading in the RHCAs. Where available material is excess to the needs for floodplain roughness, material would need to be lopped and scattered in the RHCAs.
Commercial Thinning within RHCAs 5. No-cut zone of 20 feet adjacent to all fish-bearing streams (INFISH).
6. No ground disturbing equipment within 30 feet of any stream channel and no ground disturbing equipment within RHCAs with slopes greater than 15%.
Prescribed Fire Operations 7. Generally prescribed fire would be allowed to back into or pass through RHCAs. Fire ignition in RHCAs would be limited to areas where it would be necessary to eliminate encroaching juniper or undesired conifers.
8. Firelines would not be constructed within RHCAs.
9. To the greatest extent possible/feasible all fireline would be restored to pre-disturbance contours. All fireline rehabilitation would occur in the same calendar year that the burning is implemented. Firelines would be rehabilitated to the following standards:
Hand-Constructed Fireline: Hand construct waterbars according to the spacing guidelines shown in the table below. Where feasible, angle waterbars to direct water outlet into the unburned side of the fireline, and pull back berms.
Table 10 Minimum Waterbar Spacing for Handline Rehabilitation Fireline Gradient (%) Minimum waterbar spacing (ft.) 0-20 100 21-40 50 41+ 25
26 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Tractor Plow-Constructed Fireline: Construct waterbars according to the spacing guidelines shown in the table below. Where feasible, angle waterbars to direct water outlet into the unburned side of the fireline, and pull back berms.
Table 11. Minimum Waterbar Spacing for Tractor Plow Fireline Rehabilitation Gradient (%) Cross drain spacing (feet) 0–5 200–160 6–10 160–120 11–15 120–100 16–20 100–60 21–30 60–40 31–45 40–25 46 + 25
Botany - Sensitive Plant Species
Proposed harvest and thinning activities within occupied whitebark pine tree habitat would apply the following measures:
1. All live, mature whitebark pine trees would be protected from cutting during proposed harvest and thinning activities.
2. Within occupied habitat, the Eastside Botanist would be consulted on the placement of temporary roads, skid trails, and landings to ensure no live, mature whitebark pine trees and minimal seedlings and saplings are impacted.
3. Within occupied whitebark pine habitat, mechanized equipment tracks and tires may be excluded from small portions of the proposed units to reduce damage to five-needled pine seedlings and saplings.
Prescribed fire, including pile burning within occupied whitebark pine tree habitat would apply the following measures:
1. Within occupied whitebark pine habitat, the Eastside Botanist would be consulted on the placement of fire line and burn piles to ensure no live, mature whitebark pine trees and minimal seedlings and saplings are impacted.
2. Within occupied whitebark pine habitat, proposed prescribed broadcast burning would be permitted if there were no live, mature trees remaining and regeneration of seedlings and saplings is poor. Jackpot pile burning may be permitted within occupied habitat after cutting of conifer encroachment occurs. Pile size and placement shall be determined such that no latent heat would negatively harm live, mature trees.
Invasive Species
1. Notify Eastside Botanist at least 30 days prior to any off-road equipment operating within the project area to ensure all noxious weed sites are properly flagged for avoidance.
2. Weed sites would be avoided when possible. Forest Service personnel implementing activities would be provided a map of known weed locations within the area so disturbance can be
27 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
minimized. Avoidance of weed sites would minimize the potential of spreading seeds through the implementation of project activities.
3. Areas infested with weeds would not be used as log deck landings, fire crew bases, helibases, camps, or staging areas.
4. If noxious weed sites are discovered within the project area, report the sighting to District Weed Personnel. The site would be reviewed on the ground and additional invasive plant prevention practices would be developed as appropriate.
5. Actions conducted or authorized by written permit by the Forest Service that would operate outside the limits of the road prism (including public works and service contracts), require the cleaning of all heavy equipment (bulldozers, skidders, graders, backhoes, dumptrucks, etc.) prior to entering National Forest System Lands. This does not apply to initial attack of wildland fires, and other emergency situations where cleaning would delay response time (USDA Forest Service, 2005).
6. Inspect active gravel, fill, sand stockpiles, quarry sites, and borrow material for invasive plants before use and transport. Treat or require treatment of infested sources before any use of pit material. Use only gravel, fill, sand, and rock that are judged to be weed free by District or Forest weed specialists (USDA Forest Service, 2005).
7. Conduct road blading, brushing and ditch cleaning in areas with high concentrations of invasive plants in consultation with District or Forest-level invasive plant specialists, incorporate invasive plant prevention practices as appropriate (USDA Forest Service, 2005).
8. Native plant materials are the first choice in re-vegetation for restoration and rehabilitation where timely natural regeneration of the native plant community is not likely to occur. Non-native, non- invasive plant species may be used in any of the following situations: 1) when needed in emergency conditions to protect basic resource values (e.g., soil stability, water quality, and to help prevent the establishment of invasive species); 2) as an interim, non-persistent measure designed to aid in the re-establishment of native plants; 3) if native plant materials are not available; or 4) in permanently altered plant communities. Under no circumstances would non- native invasive plant species be used for re-vegetation (USDA Forest Service, 2005).
Wildlife
1. Protect goshawk nests from disturbance if any are located during project activities. Six activity centers are currently located within the CMH project area. Defer harvest on 30 acres of the most suitable nesting habitat around nest sites. Retain late and old structure forest in a 400-acre post- fledging area (PFA) as determined by the District Wildlife Biologist. Restrict disturbance activities within 0.25 mile of any known or newly discovered goshawk nests from March 1 through August 31. This condition may be waived in a particular year if nesting or reproductive success surveys reveal that the species indicated is non-nesting or that no young are present that year
2. Restrict all activities during bald eagle breeding season as follows (January 15-August 31): a. 0.25 mile buffer around nest for visually disturbing activities (e.g. parking vehicles, tree marking, planting, etc.) and noise disturbing activities (e.g. falling, hauling, chainsaws, heavy equipment use, etc.).
28 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
b. The first three days of implementation of a buffer to minimize disturbance would be monitored if activities occur during the breeding season, specifically to determine if the buffer if effective at preventing disturbance. If a buffer is found to not be effective, a larger buffer would be implemented based on recommendations from the monitoring regarding site-specific observations. c. If a wildlife biologist determines that an activity will not result in reproductive failure or cause adverse effects to nesting eagles for that year, it may be allowed on a case-by-case basis. Any activities allowed should occur as late in the breeding season as possible and after the eggs have hatched. Monitoring of the nest site must take place if an activity is allowed to determine if adverse effects to nesting eagles are occurring. If monitoring determines there are unacceptable affects to nesting eagles, the activity must be terminated immediately. At the discretion of a wildlife biologist, if it is determined the eagles have not successfully nested by May15 the restrictions may be lifted around the nest site for that year. 3. Should any proposed or listed endangered, threatened, or sensitive species be found during project activities within, adjacent, or near enough that activities could be a disturbance, activities would be halted until the effects of the activity can be determined and protection measures adopted.
4. If an active raptor nest is found during operations, LRMP Standards and Guidelines would be followed at a minimum. The LRMP states that “major activities such as logging and road construction adjacent (within 300 yards) to active raptor nests, should be postponed until young have fledged (usually around July 30)” (LRMP p.180).
5. Slash shall not be piled against large trees or snags in order to reduce losses from prescribed burning.
6. To provide habitat for marten and other small mammals retain one small pile (at least 3’ x 6’) of slash or natural fuel per acre.
Air Quality
1. Conduct prescribed fire in compliance with the Oregon Smoke Management Plan regulations and restrictions.
Roads
1. Forest specifications for snow removal would govern winter haul operations on all FS system roads.
Range
1. Implementation of project activities would be coordinated with the grazing permittees, through the Range Specialist, so that permitted use of the grazing allotments is not adversely affected. Monitoring The Fremont National Forest Land and Resources Management Plan includes a monitoring plan in Chapter 5 (pages 207-231). This monitoring plan identifies key activities and outputs to be tracked to ensure that activities reasonably conform to Management Area direction and that outputs satisfy the
29 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project objectives of the LRMP. Forest Plan monitoring would be relied upon and is considered adequate with the exception of project-specific monitoring identified below.
Noxious Weeds
1. Revisit project areas to determine the effectiveness of prevention measures, and to detect and treat new infestations before they spread.
Range
1. Measures to protect range C&T plots within the project area should include two evaluations of the plots by qualified range specialists. Evaluation should occur once prior to beginning activities and once 1-2 years after the commencement of activities. The evaluation of these plots would ensure that the location remains useful as a consistent data source.
30 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Chapter 3 - Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action and Alternatives This section summarizes the physical, biological and social environments of the affected environment and the potential changes to those environments due to implementation of the alternatives. It also presents the scientific and analytical basis for comparison of alternatives. This section is a summary of information and analysis from various resource reports. Supplemental information can be found in the project record.
“Affected environment” is a term that refers to the existing biological, physical, and social conditions of an area that are subject to change, directly, indirectly, or cumulatively as a result of a proposed human action. Information on affected environment is found in each resource section under the headings “Existing Condition” or “Affected Environment”.
The references listed in Chapter 4 and cited throughout this EA, establish the consideration of the best available science used to complete this analysis.
All acreage and road mileage was estimated using current GIS information.
Framework for Cumulative Effects Analysis Residual impacts of past actions, activities, or disturbances are represented in the description of the current condition for each resource. The incremental impacts associated with on-going and reasonable foreseeable future actions will be considered as additions to the direct and indirect effects of the action to determine cumulative effects.
The primary past events currently affecting conditions in the planning area is the Grassy Fire, timber harvest, and the North Warner Sage/Shrub Project. The 2004 Grassy Fire burned a total of 4,202 acres, of which 1,436 were National Forest System lands. Approximately 600 acres were salvage logged and subsequently planted with ponderosa pine seedlings. Recent harvest activities have been the result of the Bull Stewardship Project of 2005. This project consisted of commercial and non-commercial harvest and aspen improvement (1,369 acres). The most recent activities have been the result of the North Warner Sage Shrub Project with non-commercial thinning and burning occurring from 2009 to 2014. Western juniper and other small conifers were cut, followed by prescribed fire to enhance sage grouse habitat (3,215 acres).
Looking out over the next 5-10 years, there is no reasonably foreseeable future actions beyond those included in CMH anticipated within the planning area. Ongoing actions include recreation and dispersed camping, hunting, livestock grazing, road maintenance, and firewood cutting.
“Cumulative impact” is defined in the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) NEPA regulations as the “impact on the environment that results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions…” 40 CFR 1508.7.
The cumulative effects analysis in this EA, for each resource, focuses on those past, ongoing, and reasonably foreseeable future actions and activities whose effects overlap in both time and space with the direct and indirect effects of the Proposed Action. Such a relationship defines relevancy for the cumulative effects analysis.
With the exception of the effects of North Warner Sage/Shrub Project, in general, there is limited potential for overlap in both time and space to occur between the residual impacts from past activities or actions and the direct/indirect effects attributed to the alternatives of the CMH Project.
31 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Forest Plan Amendment to Cut White Fir Trees >21 Inches dbh The Pacific Northwest Region (R6) encouraged Forests to consider site-specific Forest Plan amendments where it will better meet LOS objectives by moving the landscape towards HRV, and provide LOS for the habitat needs of associated wildlife species (Guidance for Implementing Eastside Screens, USDA Forest Service, Goodman 2003). For the CMH Project, flexibility in implementing the 21” diameter limitation would be appropriate under the following scenarios as described in the Regional guidance:
• Moving multiple-layered ponderosa pine stands towards LOS of a single layer where the pine are competing with grand fir or other shade-tolerant species historically held in check by wildfire.
• Maintaining shade-intolerant desirable trees <21 inch dbh where their recruitment into the >21 inch class is reasonably foreseeable in the near future, and when giving preference to them better meets LOS objectives.
White fir has expanded its range and has been allowed to increase in size and frequency due to the lack of frequent fire. In order to restore both dry ponderosa pine and mixed conifer forests, non-old growth white fir would be cut. This LRMP amendment would allow for cutting of white fir trees greater than 21” dbh where it would support ecological restoration goals consistent with the scenarios described above. Empirical data from the Fremont-Winema has shown that old white fir typically exhibits large diameter branches showing developing in an open stand condition and fire scars showing these trees to be in excess of 200 years old.
Affected Environment According to historic GLO data, white fir existed throughout the project area at much lower densities compared to current conditions. Historic GLO data from 1868 to 1869 reports that the majority of species composition was largely ponderosa pine. Large ponderosa pines (50” dbh+) were commonly reported across the CMH project area as well as large white fir at lower frequencies. Hagmann et al. (2013) reports that data from 1914 to 1922 collected on the Fremont National Forest, shows that white fir densities >21” dbh were about 1 to 2 trees per acre (TPA) in dry mixed conifer stands and about 6 TPA on moist mixed conifer stands. Data collected in 2013 showed that white fir >21” dbh is on average 8 to 10 TPA across plant associations. Empirical data collected in the summer of 2014 found that 81 percent of white fir trees measured >21” dbh were less than 150 years old. Only 19 percent of trees measured were older than 150 years old (n=31) with 30 measured trees less than 32” dbh and one measured at 36” dbh. Common characteristics of old white fir trees found in CMH were bark fissures at least 2 inches deep, bark plates 4 to 6 inches wide, dead limbs in the main crown, and slightly rounded tops. Most trees nearing 150 years of age had most of these characteristics with the exception of dead limbs in the main crown and rounded tops. Age was taken at breast height.
32 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Figure 7. Bole characteristics of young and old white fir in CMH. Photos taken in 2014.
The tree to left in Figure 7 is a white fir within CMH that is 76 years old. The center tree in the second photo is a white fir that is 270 years old. Note the deepness of the bark fissures in old tree. The fissures were 2 to 3 inches deep compared to the young white fir which had bark fissures that were 1 inch deep.
Figure 8. Crown characteristics of young and old white fir in CMH. Photos taken in 2014.
The tree to the left in Figure 8 is the crown of a 80 year old white fir in CMH. The tree to the right is 270 years old and 32” dbh. Note the rounded top in the second photo compared to the more conical top of the younger tree.
Environmental Consequences
Alternative 1 – No Action Large, young white fir would continue to compete with desired species (ponderosa pine and western white pine) for resources. The No Action Alternative would not begin to move forested stands into the desired future condition or as outlined by the Eastside Screens or the Long Range Strategy. Large, old trees (particularly ponderosa pine) would continue to senesce and their life span would be reduced due to competition for water and growing space.
33 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Direct effects would be the reduction in stand density and canopy cover since these large young trees dominate the overstory along with ponderosa pine. Canopy cover would be reduced by cutting 2 to 4 white fir TPA that are >21” dbh. In the past, white fir >21” dbh has been cut when in direct completion with a large ponderosa pine or sugar pine. For CMH project, white fir >21” dbh would be cut to more closely resemble historic conditions of 1 to 6 TPA, in respective plant associations. Direct competition in the past has only pertained to crown competition, however ponderosa pine root spread can range from 1.2 to 5.4 times the crown radius (Hall 2003). Both types of competition would be considered. Indirect effects would be increased growth to residual trees particularly large, old ponderosa pine. Thinning young to mid-story trees in these areas would enhance the existing old trees by allowing them more growing space and relieving them of competition. Recent studies have shown that reducing stand densities does increase growth of old trees (Franklin and Johnson 2012). Indirect effects would also be the reduced risk of crown fires to carry from crown to crown due to more open canopies. This treatment would begin to move forested stands back to a species composition dominated by ponderosa pine with a few large white fir in the overstory. Increasing the growing space for large ponderosa pine and western white pine as well as moving conditions closer towards HRV are the main impetus for cutting white fir >21” dbh.
Under the 2012 Planning Rule (Title36, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 219-Planning) the responsible official may complete and approve a plan revision in conformance with the provisions of the prior planning regulation, including the transition provisions of the reinstated 2000 rule (36 CFR part 299, published at 36 CFR parts 200 to 299, revised as of July 1, 2010). The transition provisions allow the use of the 1982 planning procedures (See CFR parts 200 to 299, Revised as of July 1, 2000). See the following hyperlink for the 1982 planning procedures http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/nfma/includes/nfmareg.html
Criteria in Forest Service Manual (FSM) 1926.52, Changes to the Land Management Plan that are Significant and 1926.51 for Changes to the Land Management Plan that are Not Significant provide direction for amending the LRMP.
The following examples indicate circumstances that may cause a significant change to a land management plan:
1 Changes that would significantly alter the long-term relationship between levels of multiple-use goods and services originally projected (see section 219.10(e) of the planning regulations in effect before November 9, 2000 (see 36 CFR parts 200 to 299, revised as of July 1, 2000)).
2 Changes that may have an important effect on the entire land management plan or affect land and resources throughout a large portion of the planning area during the planning period.
Changes that would significantly alter the long-term relationship between levels of multiple-use goods and services originally projected (see section 219.10(e) of the planning regulations in effect before November 9, 2000 (see 36 CFR parts 200 to 299, revised as of July 1, 2000)). This amendment is limited in scope and does not in any measurable way alter the levels of multiple-use goods and services originally projected by the LRMP.
Changes that may have an important effect on the entire land management plan or affect land and resources throughout a large portion of the planning area during the planning period. The amendment is limited to the site-specific situation in the CMH Project area and would not be a significant change.
34 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
This amendment is being proposed specific to the CMH Project in association with Forest Service policy found at FSM 1926.51. Changes to the Land Management Plan are considered not significant when:
1. Actions do not significantly alter the multiple-use goals and objectives for long-term land and resource management.
2. Adjustments of management area boundaries or management prescriptions resulting from further on-site analysis when the adjustments do not cause significant changes in the multiple-use goals and objectives for long-term land and resource management.
3. Minor changes in standards and guidelines are proposed.
4. Opportunities for additional projects or activities that will contribute to achievement of the management prescription.
Actions do not significantly alter the multiple-use goals and objectives for long-term land and resource management. The amendment is limited to the site-specific situation in the CMH Project area and does not apply to future decisions of any other areas. It does not alter the multiple-use goals or objectives of the LRMP. The Regional Forester’s Forest Plan Amendment 2 (Eastside Screens) modified the emphasis on timber production by directing that a balance be struck between LRMP objectives for timber production and maintenance of late and old seral structure. This amendment is intended to compliment the other treatments proposed in the CMH Project, with the objective of improving LOS conditions and moving conditions in the area closer toward HRV.
Adjustments of management area boundaries or management prescriptions resulting from further on-site analysis when the adjustments do not cause significant changes in the multiple-use goals and objectives for long-term land and resource management. This amendment would not change any management boundaries. The amendment would be consistent with the management prescriptions of the Regional Forester’s Eastside Forests Plan Amendment 2 to enhance LOS and move conditions in the area closer toward HRV.
Minor changes in standards and guidelines are proposed. This amendment proposes to change the standard and guideline of the Regional Forester’s Eastside Forests Plan Amendment 2 that requires retention of live trees greater than 21 inches dbh. This change would apply to approximately 19,000 acres of dry mixed conifer and ponderosa pine stands that are proposed for thinning treatments and would result in cutting 2-4 white fir trees per acre greater than 21 inches dbh.
Opportunities for additional projects or activities that will contribute to achievement of the management prescription. The amendment would apply only to the CMH Project; no other projects or activities would be affected by this amendment.
Cumulative Effects White fir is generally more susceptible to insects and disease than ponderosa pine. When grown together, white fir tends to tolerate high stand densities better than ponderosa pine, which generates high competitive pressure on the pine. Under such pressure ponderosa becomes susceptible to pine beetle attacks.
When average annual rainfall is less than 32 inches, white fir can thrive in the absence of fire and drought, but its longevity on the site is tenuous (Cochran 1998). In the North Warner’s (CMH project area) it is quite common for rainfall to fall below 25 inches in this area for a period of years, making white fir an unstable component of these forests. In the late part of the 20th century, presence of insect and
35 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
disease outbreaks at the landscape level became evident. Most significantly, during the drought of the early 1990s a fir engraver beetle epidemic decimated stands below 7,500 feet causing mortality in much of the white fir on the Fremont NF. Such infestations are thought to recur on a 20- year cycle related to presence of the host type and drought. Generally, annual precipitation ranges from about 25 to 28 inches in the North Warner’s. This is a reason these forests were historically dominated by ponderosa pine. In many cases, young-mature growth white fir over 21 inches in dbh could be cut to enhance the growth and protection of ponderosa pine (Franklin et al. 2008).
Table 12. White fir >21" across sale areas on the Fremont National Forest. NEPA doc Sale name 2WF >21" dbh TPA 3% of WF >21 Black Hills (2012, EA) PB 0.441 0.91% Black Hills (2012, EA) SPA 1.743 2.86% West Drews (2009, EA) Dent South 0.228 0.36% Abe (2007, EA) ABE 0.285 0.39% West Drews (2009, EA) Stack 0.332 0.63% West Drews (2009, EA) Hay (before BP fire) 0.106 0.15% Deuce EA (2014, EA) Deuce 0.072 0.182 Deuce EA (2014, EA) Pilot 3.361 3.209 Min. 0.072 0.15% Max. 3.361 3.20% Avg. 0.821 1.086%
Table 12 above displays the number of white fir, over 21 inches dbh that were cruised (counted and measured) to be cut on a per acre basis across 8 different sale areas on the Fremont side of the Fremont- Winema NF. Results show that the average number of white fir over 21 inches dbh that were cruised to be cut is .821 trees per acre (TPA), less than 1 TPA. When comparing the number of white fir trees over 21 inches dbh to the total number of trees cut per acre by sale area (last column in Table 12), the percent ranges from about .15 to 3.2 percent, averaging about 1 percent.
Data from CMH Project area, shows that current white fir densities average about 9 white fir per acre over 21” dbh in mixed conifer stands. CMH does have more white fir than other sales listed above in Table 12. The Pilot sale from the Deuce EA best reflects the number of trees that could be cut in CMH.
It is important to note that in the above sale areas, white fir > 21” dbh was only to be cut when competing with larger (generally >21” dbh), older ponderosa pine and sugar pine trees. Specific prescription language for the above sales is as follows: White Fir greater than 21 inches can be cut when in direct competition (within 2x the radius of the drip line) with a ponderosa pine with reddish-orange bark, wide plates, and deep wide fissures or sugar pine greater than 21 inch dbh.
According to historic General Land Office (GLO) data, white fir existed throughout the CMH project area at much lower densities compared to current conditions. The GLO data reports that from 1868 to 1869 that majority of species composition was largely ponderosa pine. Large ponderosa pines (50 inches dbh+) were commonly reported across the CMH project area as well as large white fir at lower frequencies. Hagmann et al. (2013) reports that data from 1914 to 1922 collected on the Fremont NF, shows that white
2 The number of white fir “cut trees” >21” that were cruised per acre. 3 The percent of white fir “cut trees” >21” compared to the total number of trees cut per acre.
36 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project fir densities >21 inch dbh were about 17ft² per acre in dry mixed conifer stands. Data collected in 2013 showed that white fir >21 inch dbh ranges from 0 to 120, averaging about 60ft² across plant associations.
The LRMP amendments for the above sales and the proposed amendment in CMH, allows the cutting of white fir trees greater than 21” dbh where it would support ecological restoration goals. Franklin et al. (2008) recommend retaining at least two large white firs per acre in moist mixed conifer sites. Many of the plant associations in the above NEPA documents have little moist mixed conifer plant associations. For example, CMH has a total of 1 percent of moist mixed conifer stands.
As shown above in Table 12, the harvesting of white fir over 21” dbh is a minor component of the total number of trees that are being cut in any given sale area, with an average of less than 1 tree per acre and on average 1 percent of the total trees being cut. This does not represent a significant cumulative effect on the Fremont National Forest.
37 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Forest Plan Amendment for Treatment of Allocated Old Growth The LRMP allocates MA 14 for old growth dependent species habitat. The Fremont LRMP describes two prescriptions associated with old growth management areas. Allocated pine and pine-associated old growth stands are to be “dedicated” while lodgepole pine old growth stands are to be “managed” (USDA Fremont National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan 1989, as amended).
LRMP Standards and Guidelines for allocated pine-associated old growth (MA 14), such as occurs in CMH, include the following:
. Old-growth pine and pine-associated stands are dedicated, i.e. receive no timber management; however, these stands may have wildlife habitat enhancement projects to maintain or enhance old-growth habitat (LRMP pages 139 and 196).
The LRMP allocates approximately five percent of the Fremont National Forest to increase and/or manage stands of old growth on the Forest to maintain minimum viable populations of dependent, native vertebrate species. In addition to these allocated old growth acres, there are areas with old growth or “late and old structural” (LOS) characteristics that do not specifically fall under the LRMP direction for managing old growth. Like the majority of the Fremont-Winema National Forest, these ‘non-allocated’ old growth areas are managed, under Regional Forester’s amendments to the LRMP with the objective of retaining and promoting the Late/Old structural (LOS) characteristics in the stand.
The Forest Service proposes an amendment to the Forest Plan to utilize a commercial timber sale in the CMH Project as a tool to accomplish thinning treatment in “dedicated” pine-associated stands to develop sustainable conditions that would benefit old growth habitat. Similar to pine-associated (also called mixed conifer) forested conditions elsewhere in the CMH Project planning area, increased stand densities and fuel levels put these old growth stands at risk of high intensity wildfire and insects, such as bark beetles. The objectives of proposing treatments in pine and pine-associated “dedicated” old growth stands are: 1) retention of all old trees taking into account age and diameter; and 2) thinning of young growth trees predominantly white fir and lodgepole pine to protect residual old growth and promote sustainable conditions.
Affected Environment Within the CMH project area, a total of approximately 1,231 acres have been allocated to old growth habitat (MA 14). Specifically, the LRMP allocates about 373 acres of old growth pine-associated areas for goshawk habitat and about 858 acres for pine martin habitat in the project area. Alternative 2 proposes thinning approximately 539 acres of pine-associated old growth, not including old growth stands within Drake-McDowell IRA. Currently these old growth stands have canopy cover of 50 to 65 percent and stocking levels above management recommendations. Old growth stands have certain attributes associated with them as outlined in the Region 6 Interim Old Growth Definitions (Hopkins et al. 1992). The six attributes are: 1) number of large trees, 2) number of snags, 3) amount of down woody debris, 4) number of canopy layers, 5) conditions of native shrub/herb component, and 6) amount and size of gaps/openings. Old growth stands or MA14 within CMH do not contain all of these attributes. Depending on the site productivity (low, moderate, high) the number of large trees can range from 10 to 45 TPA; however, the typical range for a low site is 15 to 25 TPA >21 inches dbh and 18 to 45 TPA for a moderate to high site. The number of snags are typically three >14” dbh per acre and or 10 percent of the stand in spire tops. The down, woody material is typically 3 to 6, eight foot pieces per acre of large (at least 12 inch diameter on the large end) woody debris. The number of canopy layers typically range from 1 to 2. The native shrub and herb component usually ranges from 20 to 40 percent cover. Lastly, the number and size of gaps and openings are at least ½ acre in size.
38 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Past management has not included treatment within designated old growth areas which puts these areas at high risk to insect and disease mortality and potential for severe fire effects. Currently, the designated old growth stands in CMH are not within the desired condition of the LRMP. Treatments would be focused on maintaining or promoting LOS conditions, while creating resilient forest conditions.
Environmental Consequences
Alternative 1 – No Action There would be no direct effects of the No Action Alternative. The No Action Alternative would forgo the opportunity to thin the proposed stands to achieve the desired conditions.
As stand densities near maximums (a large number are there or nearing that level now), density dependent stress mortality would increase. Individual large and medium diameter conifers would continue to die from site resource competition and continued insect and disease mortality. This would provide a habitat pulse for species that require large diameter snags such as pileated woodpeckers. There would be little or no increase in understory grasses, forbs and brush species which could limit habitat for prey species. These plants would continue to decline as litter layers deepen and conifers continue to utilize the limited site resources.
Stand structures would remain the same in the near term, with a continuation of increased density and layering. This would favor species that are provided habitat from closed canopies such as goshawks, pine martens and canopy nesting birds. Long term the risk of stand replacing events such as insect outbreaks and stand replacing fire would continue to increase. Stand replacing events, fire or insects, would eventually have the result of reducing late, old and mid succession forest to earlier stages. When this occurs, these stands would then favor disturbance dependent species such as black-backed woodpeckers.
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action The LRMP amendment would allow treatment within designated old growth stands (MA14). Treatment would occur on 539 acres. Treatment objectives within designated old growth stands are to promote the desired density and structure of dependent species, the American marten. Habitat for this species is described as closed canopy with large amounts of downed wood. Direct effects would be an immediate decrease in canopy cover and increase in fine fuels. Indirect effects would be increased forest health and reduction of crown fire potential and severe fire effects (Graham et al. 1999, Powell 2010). Thinning young growth trees predominantly white fir and ponderosa pine would take place in order to allocate growth to the larger old trees, an indirect effect. Kolb et al. (2007) report that the thinning of neighboring trees often increases water and carbon uptake of old trees within one year of treatment, and increases radial growth within several years to two decades post treatment. Indirect effects would result in stand trajectory towards old growth. Leaving these stands at the higher range of management recommendations with regards to stocking, would allow for slow accumulation of snags, an indirect effect, which would cause future downed wood both of which benefit the marten. Treatment within these stands would begin to move the stands towards sustainable old growth conditions for dependent species and begin to attain old growth characteristics outlined in the (Hopkins et al. 1992).
Consideration was given to connectivity corridors between LOS stands and between all Forest Plan designated old growth habitats as required by Regional Forester’s Eastside Forests Plan Amendment 2. Implementation of the proposed action would continue to allow the vegetation to support “edge” sensitive wildlife interactions and dispersal of young similar to that which occurred prior to euro-American settlement, while providing vegetation conditions that are more sustainable and resilient (Wildlife Report Appendix B).
39 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Under the 2012 Planning Rule (Title36, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 219-Planning) the responsible official may complete and approve a plan revision in conformance with the provisions of the prior planning regulation, including the transition provisions of the reinstated 2000 rule (36 CFR part 299, published at 36 CFR parts 200 to 299, revised as of July 1, 2010). The transition provisions allow the use of the 1982 planning procedures (See CFR parts 200 to 299, Revised as of July 1, 2000). See the following hyperlink for the 1982 planning procedures http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/nfma/includes/nfmareg.html
Criteria in Forest Service Manual (FSM) 1926.52, Changes to the Land Management Plan that are Significant and 1926.51 for Changes to the Land Management Plan that are Not Significant provide direction for amending the LRMP.
The following examples indicate circumstances that may cause a significant change to a land management plan:
1. Changes that would significantly alter the long-term relationship between levels of multiple-use goods and services originally projected (see section 219.10(e) of the planning regulations in effect before November 9, 2000 (see 36 CFR parts 200 to 299, revised as of July 1, 2000)).
2. Changes that may have an important effect on the entire land management plan or affect land and resources throughout a large portion of the planning area during the planning period.
Changes that would significantly alter the long-term relationship between levels of multiple-use goods and services originally projected (see section 219.10(e) of the planning regulations in effect before November 9, 2000 (see 36 CFR parts 200 to 299, revised as of July 1, 2000)). This amendment is limited to the site-specific situation in the CMH Project area and does not apply to future decisions of any other areas. This amendment does not change the allocation of old growth provided by the LRMP. It does not in any measurable way alter the levels of multiple-use goods and services originally projected by the LRMP.
Changes that may have an important effect on the entire land management plan or affect land and resources throughout a large portion of the planning area during the planning period. This amendment is limited to the site-specific situation on up to approximately 539 acres in the CMH Project area and does not apply to future decisions of any other areas.
This amendment is being proposed specific to the CMH Project in association with Forest Service policy found at FSM 1926.51. Changes to the Land Management Plan are considered not significant when:
1. Actions do not significantly alter the multiple-use goals and objectives for long-term land and resource management.
2. Adjustments of management area boundaries or management prescriptions resulting from further on-site analysis when the adjustments do not cause significant changes in the multiple-use goals and objectives for long-term land and resource management.
3. Minor changes in standards and guidelines are proposed.
4. Opportunities for additional projects or activities that will contribute to achievement of the management prescription.
40 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Actions do not significantly alter the multiple-use goals and objectives for long-term land and resource management. This amendment is specific to the CMH Project and does not apply to other actions. It does not alter the multiple-use goals or objectives of the LRMP. This action would be consistent with the LRMP goal to manage stands of old growth on the Forest to maintain populations of dependent, native vertebrate species (LRMP pages 137-139 and 196-198). Treatment activities would enhance old-growth habitat and provide for maintaining healthy stands of old growth into the future.
Adjustments of management area boundaries or management prescriptions resulting from further on-site analysis when the adjustments do not cause significant changes in the multiple-use goals and objectives for long-term land and resource management. This amendment would not change any management boundaries. This amendment proposes adjustments to the management prescriptions for specifically identified “dedicated” pine-associated old-growth stands in the CMH Project. The amendment would involve a total of 539 acres. The amendment here would not cause significant changes in the multiple-use goals and objectives for long-term land and resource management of the Fremont National Forest.
Minor changes in standards and guidelines are proposed. This amendment proposes to change the standard and guidelines for “dedicated” pine-associated old growth that states “Old-growth pine and pine- associated stands are dedicated, i.e. receive no timber management. Alternative 2 proposes commercial thinning of about 539 acres of pine-associated old growth. Treatments would be focused on maintaining or promoting LOS conditions, while creating resilient forest conditions. This amendment does not change the allocation of old growth habitat; it only seeks to improve conditions for the long-term health of these stands.
Opportunities for additional projects or activities that will contribute to achievement of the management prescription. The amendment would apply only to the identified old growth stands in the CMH Project; no other projects or activities would be affected by this amendment.
Cumulative Effects Ongoing actions including recreation, dispersed camping, hunting, livestock grazing, and firewood cutting would not impact allocated old growth. There are no reasonably foreseeable future projects expected in the next 5 to 10 years in the planning area. These areas would continue to provide old growth habitat. There would not be any cumulative effects to allocated old growth as a result of implementing Alternative 2 of the CMH Project.
41 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Forested Vegetation The purpose and need of this project describes the need to reduce stand densities to improve vigor and increase resilience to disturbance from insects and wildfire, and move stands toward a sustainable late old structure (LOS) condition. Currently the amount of LOS stands is below HRV as it relates to single strata stands. Current HRV analysis determined that the project area is deficit in ponderosa pine, large tree structure, open canopy stands among many stand types. Currently the ponderosa pine, large tree structure, closed canopy condition is in excess of historic conditions by 31 percent. Ponderosa pine dominated forests have been described as the rarest type of old growth in the region and should be the highest priority for fuels reduction and restoration (Hessburg et al. 2005; Simpson 2007). Other stands within the project area are dry mixed conifer forest types that contain an excess of small tree structure when compared to historic ranges. The desired future condition for both stand types (dry ponderosa pine and dry mixed conifer) is to promote ponderosa pine (where it historically was the dominant species), reduce stand densities, apply prescribed fire heterogeneously across the project area, and to improve wildlife habitat diversity. Dry ponderosa pine stands would generally have lower stand densities when compared to mixed conifer stands with treatments focused on improving forest health and reducing the potential for severe fire effects. One of the goals of this project is to treat the landscape holistically rather than piecemeal which has been the practice of past treatments. Taking a holistic approach to restoration includes the restoration of dry forest landscapes, wildlife and fisheries habitat, aquatic and riparian resources, recreation resources, and cultural and social values all of which can be influenced by manipulating forested vegetation.
Resource Indicators and Measures The resource indicators and measures used in this report are taken in part from scoping comments and the Purpose and Need as they relate to forested vegetation. The resource elements are forest health and HRV. Stand density and LOS affect all indicators listed in Table 13. and are the primary drivers related to the resource elements in this report. Treatment within the Inventoried Roadless Area (IRA) will be addressed in the stand density indicator. Table 13. below describes the measure associated with each indicator.
Table 13. Resource indicators and measures for assessing effects Measure Used to Source Resource Element Resource Indicator address: P/N Site visit by Area Forest Health/HRV Stand density Acres Yes entomologist/SDI4/Existing conditions Late Old Structure HRV Acres Yes Reference conditions Stands
Methodology Project area reconnaissance, Geographic Information System (GIS), aerial photos, and stand exams were the main tools used for project analysis as it relates to forested vegetation. Stand trajectories were modeled using the Forest Vegetation Simulator (FVS) over a 50 year time horizon. It is important to note that the South Central Oregon and Northeast California (SORNEC) FVS variant does not include natural regeneration when stands are modeled. Natural regeneration of white fir, ponderosa pine, incense-cedar, western white pine, whitebark pine, and western juniper is expected to occur over time where a seed source exists. Adequate crops of seed for ponderosa pine can be expected every 4 to 5 years (Munger 1917, Barrett 1979).
4 Stand density index (SDI)
42 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Information Sources Stand exams were implemented in the summer of 2013 to field truth Gradient Nearest Neighbor (GNN) extrapolations of stand characteristics and to determine current stand densities. Stand Density Index (SDI) is the measure chosen to compare current densities to desired densities as calculated by Cochran et al. (1994) method. Government Land Office (GLO) data was used to determine the historic presence of large (>21 inch dbh) white fir as well as recently published data in Hagmann et al. (2013). GLO data was also used to semi-quantitatively estimate seral/structural state classes using reference tree and observations of species along section lines by area ecologists. The Viable Ecosystem data was the main tool used for the HRV analysis via GIS. Through a combination of stand exam data, GNN, and the Viable Ecosystem approach, current conditions of structural stage, density, and seral stage were derived. Field reconnaissance within the IRA was done during the summer of 2013 and 2014. Within the IRA, informal stand exams were completed in areas identified for treatment to gather current conifer density in what were historically meadow plant associations.
On July 1, 2013 a field review by Andy Eglitis, Area Entomologist, and Lora Arciniega, the SE Zone silviculturist, was initiated throughout the project area. The two day field review was followed by a document containing descriptions of mortality agents and respective forest types along with management recommendations.
Affected Environment The amount of forested acres in the CMH project area is 34,000. The landscape ranges in elevation from 5,100 feet to 8,335 feet at Drake Peak Lookout. The landscape at lower elevations consists of stands of ponderosa pine and white fir with some inclusions of western white pine. Quaking aspen is present throughout the project area and typically present with lodgepole pine. As elevations climb, the forest type begins to change to an ecosystem dominated by various mixed conifer species. The highest reaches of the project area consist of whitebark pine. Western juniper occurs at low elevations in the warmest and driest portions of the project area. Typical understory species include blue bunch wheatgrass, Idaho fescue, antelope bitterbrush, and big sagebrush. Portions of the landscape are composed of mesic and dry meadows, rock outcrops, sagebrush and mountain mahogany. Forest structure ranges from old growth forests of ponderosa pine to young stands comprised of pine and fir.
From about 1870 to the late 1930s, domestic livestock grazing was the principle disturbance agent. At this time, grazing was largely unregulated and livestock numbers were much greater than today, up to three times. This activity limited the distribution and frequency of grasses and forbs. This encouraged the establishment and growth of higher than typical amounts of tree regeneration, particularly for lodgepole pine, western juniper, and white fir.
The area where CMH project resides has experienced logging activity as early as 1867 near Honey Creek (Bach 1990). Subsequent entries occurred throughout the early 20th century. These entries were most likely selective harvests, taking the largest ponderosa pine and western white pine trees from the 20s through the 40s by the Forest Service. Overstory removal was the most common stand treatment in pine forests in the late 1970s where old forests were converted to vigorous second growth ponderosa pine stands (Barrett 1979). Proceeding harvests, across portions of the project area, were commercial entries throughout the 80s to early 90s. These treatments were a combination of commercial thins followed by pre-commercial thinning (PCT), clear cuts (followed by planting), seed tree cuts, and shelterwood cuts. The latter two types of harvests left few trees in the overstory to reseed the cut area resulting in some areas below desired stocking objectives.
More recent activity in the project area was the Grassy Wildfire of 2004 that burned 4,202 acres, 1,436 of which were Forest Service Lands. The Grassy Salvage Environmental Assessment (EA) signed in 2005
43 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
approved logging of approximately 590 acres and reforestation with ponderosa pine to roughly 250 TPA in 2007. The most recent harvest activities were the result of the Bull Stewardship project signed in 2005. This project consisted of commercial and non-commercial harvest and aspen improvement on roughly 2,000 acres. Although many harvest activities have occurred within the CMH project area, their presence lacks landscape level design and holistic approach that is the focus of this current analysis.
Existing Condition
Figure 9. Photo in CMH project area showing mortality from mountain pine beetle in whitebark pine. Photo taken 2014.
Various native insects and diseases are common throughout the project area. The two most common are the mountain pine beetle and annosus root disease. On Abert Rim and Drake Peak, mortality has been very high in the larger, older whitebark pines due to infestation by the mountain pine beetle over the past decade. On Drake Peak, mountain pine beetle populations were first detected around 2002 and grew to their highest level around 2008, declining thereafter and practically disappearing in 2012. The whitebark pines on Abert Rim had a similar history. Although the mortality of large trees has been extreme, there are some surviving smaller trees and regeneration can be found in some areas. Throughout the project area, the level of tree mortality due to mountain pine beetle has been extreme in the lodgepole pine vegetation type. Beetle populations grew every year beginning around 2001, and began to drop off in 2010, leaving most of the stands with very few surviving trees. These high beetle populations in lodgepole pine may have been the source of the outbreak within the higher-elevation whitebark pine. Area experts believe that at this time the mountain pine beetle outbreak in lodgepole and whitebark pine hosts is over and vulnerable stands have already been affected to their maximum potential (Eglitis 2014).
Figure 10. Photo of the Drake-McDowell Inventoried Roadless Area in CMH project area displaying mortality from mountain pine beetle in lodgepole pine and whitebark pine. Photo taken 2013.
44 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
A large portion of the project area contains complex stands of white fir and large-diameter ponderosa pine. Western white pine also commonly occurs in these mixed stands and appears to be healthy despite growing under crowded conditions. Numerous stumps from old harvest entries were examined and decay was often found which is typical of annosus root disease. Given the nature of the sites, the disease is most likely the S-strain which affects true firs. Many white fir snags were noted in these stands, ultimately killed by the fir engraver, either in response to drought or infection by annosus root disease. Some small pockets of mortality in ponderosa pine stands were found, and were most likely caused by the mountain pine beetle. Some of these stands were also infected with western dwarf mistletoe, which can act as a mortality agent by itself, and can compromise the health of the trees to the point that mountain pine beetle is the responsible mortality agent. Quaking aspen is common throughout the project area and in many places there is a good representation of age classes. Aspen are shade intolerant and susceptible to conifer competition and replacement in the absence of disturbance such as fire, timber harvest, or pest/disease outbreak. The most challenging forest health issues for this species can include damage by ungulates and encroachment of conifers from the edges of stands. Other insects and diseases that are present at endemic or natural levels are western gall rust observed on lodgepole pine and western tent caterpillar observed on bitterbrush on a frequent basis. White pine blister rust is of minimal concern in the Warner Mountains (Eglitis 2014).
Figure 11. Photo in CMH project area displaying a dense stand of young white fir. Photo taken 2013.
The white fir plant associations are on the higher end of the moisture spectrum relative to ponderosa pine plant associations. The dry ponderosa pine (DPP) plant association group (PAG) has an average total tree cover of 30 to 35 percent and have slightly more stockability (i.e., proportion of a given area capable of growing and holding trees) than that of the xeric pine plant associations. Xeric plant associations receive less moisture and experience higher temperatures than dry ponderosa pine (Simpson 2007). Where ponderosa pine and western white pine were historically dominant, white fir, a shade tolerant species, has been allowed to flourish in the understory. Historically, white fir typically occurred in areas where it was difficult for fire spread.
45 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Dry Juniper Juniper Ponderosa Whitebark Steppe Woodlands Pine- Pine 5% 1% Lodgepole 3% Pine 4% Dry Ponderosa Pine 8% Cold Dry Xeric Pine White Fir 8% 34%
Dry White Fir 36% Moist White Fir 1%
Figure 12. Plant association groups within CMH project area.
For this report, Dry white fir and Cold dry white fir PAGS will be grouped and addressed with the mixed conifer dry (MCD) PAG. Typically, ponderosa pine and white fir dominate the overstory of these stands and with disturbance ponderosa pine is the climax species (Simpson 2007). Refer to Figure 12. for plant associations within CMH. The moist white fir PAG will be grouped and addressed with the mixed conifer wet PAG where white fir is the dominant overstory species and disturbances are infrequent. As shown in the chart above, this PAG is minor in the project area.
Figure 13. Photo in CMH project area displaying large ponderosa pine surrounded by small pine and fir. Photo taken 2013.
46 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Figure 14. Photo in CMH project area displaying large ponderosa pine with nearby pine regeneration approximately 15 years old. Photo taken 2013.
The Juniper Steppe and Juniper Woodland PAGs primarily differ in amounts of juniper present and in soil character. Juniper Steppes occur on shallow soils and are considered less productive than Juniper Woodlands. Lower productivity also results in sparser vegetative cover and thus longer fire return intervals (Juniper Steppe approximately 80 to 120 years, Juniper Woodland approximately 40 to 50 years, Simpson 2007). Juniper fuel loads are often light in the Juniper PAGs. Large downed fuels commonly account for 70 percent or more of the total downed woody fuels. Discontinuous patches of needle-mat layers characterize stands. The most abundant surface fuel is curing grass or shrubs such as bitterbrush (or sagebrush on the more productive sites). Old growth juniper typically appear in rocky areas where they are protected from fire spread.
Table 14. Resource indicators and measures for the existing condition Resource Indicator Measure Existing Condition Resource Element (Alternative 1) Forest Health/HRV Stand density Acres 45,950 Late Old Structure HRV Acres Reference conditions Stands
Resource Indicator and Measure 1: Stand density In the summer and fall of 2013, empirical data was collected throughout the project area to assess current stand densities. These densities represent all forested acres within CMH including steep slopes and designated old growth (MA 14). In general, stand densities have increased, species composition has shifted from ponderosa pine to concentrations of white fir and lodgepole pine, shrubs and grasses have decreased, all of which have increased the potential of a large scale fire event. Dense understories of shade-tolerant species multiply the problem of declining vigor of overstory ponderosa pine by increasing inter-tree competition for soil moisture and nutrients (Hessburg et al. 1994). Table 15. below summarizes stand exam data for primary PAGs within the project area.
47 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 15. Current stand densities throughout PAGs in the CMH project area. Plant Association Trees per Basal Area per acre Quadratic Mean Stand Density Group acre (BAA) (sq.ft/ac) Diameter (in.) Index
Mixed Conifer Dry 602 173 9.3 338 Dry Ponderosa Pine 536 136 7.6 269 Ponderosa pine-Lodgepole pine 651 43 3.5 120 Dry Ponderosa Pine (plantations) 130 53 9.1 102
Stand Density Index (SDI) is used as a measure of density relative to an average biological maximum for a given species. This density measure is based on the relationship between number of trees per acre and their average diameter (Reineke 1933). Currently, SDI ranges from 102 in pine plantations to 338 in the white fir stands. As displayed in Table 15 above, the current SDI (on average) for dry ponderosa pine stands in CMH is at 77 percent of max SDI (269/350*100= 77 percent). The quadratic mean diameter (QMD) is the average diameter of the tree with the average basal area. Increasing the QMD or increasing the average diameter of the stand is one of the objectives of silvicultural treatments. Figure 15 below shows SDI values derived from the 2012 GNN data. Results show that approximately 64 percent of the total forested acres within CMH are above management recommendations for forest health as it relates to mountain pine beetle risk.
Stand Density Index for forested acres in CMH 25,000 20,000
15,000
Acres 10,000 5,000 0 0-50 50-100 100-170 170-300 >300 SDI
Figure 15. Stand density index for forested acres within the CMH project area.
Since about 1900, frequent fire has decreased through fire suppression, along with reduced surface level fuels through domestic livestock grazing. Western juniper has expanded its range at unprecedented rates compared to any other time during the Holocene (Miller et al. 2005). Juniper expansion across the west has been well documented in literature (Cottam and Stewart 1940, Burkhart and Tisdale 1976, Tausch et al. 1981, Tausch and West 1988, 1995, Miller and Rose 1995, 1999, Gedney et al. 1999).
48 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Figure 16. Photo in CMH project area displaying young western juniper in abundance. Photo taken 2013.
The amount of western juniper has increased dramatically since the late 1800s and can have a significant impact on soil resources, plant community, and wildlife habitat if left to expand (Miller et al. 2005). This is also true for juniper and meadow plant associations within the IRA. Currently, the meadow systems within the IRA boundary contain 25 to 88 juniper trees per acre of varying sizes. Few of the trees (approximately 1 to 3 per acre) are classified as old growth juniper according to characteristics in Miller et al. (2007). Historically, these meadow plant associations had little to no conifer stocking. Conifers have been encroaching upon meadows and quaking aspen stands, systems once maintained by fire as the primary disturbance. Aspen trees are short-lived. Aspen stands are early seral, giving way to conifers that shade the sprouts and understory, halting aspen overstory recruitment. Conifers will eventually overtop the aspen, reducing the aspen overstory and contributing to stand collapse.
Steep slopes (>35 percent) in the CMH project have not been treated in the past. This is due mainly to the potential adverse effects of traditional ground based systems (feller buncher and skidder) on steep slopes and the availability of advanced logging systems in the area. Currently these areas are highly stocked with small, medium, and large trees of all species mentioned earlier but particularly white fir. Approximately 10,554 acres of the CMH project area is greater than 35 percent slope. This includes land within the IRA. Currently these areas are overstocked respective to management recommendations and lack understory grasses, forbs, and shrubs.
Resource Indicator and Measure 2: Late, Old Structural stands The CMH project area is below HRV with respect to ponderosa pine open canopy LOS stands and above LOS multi strata stands. When one or both of the LOS stages fall below HRV, the following direction from Scenario A of the Eastside Screens specifically applies:
• No net loss of LOS (late and old structural) components. • Outside of LOS, the intent is to maintain and/or enhance LOS components by adhering to the following standards: o Maintain all live trees equal to or >21 inches dbh; o Manipulate vegetative structure that does not meet LOS conditions in a manner that moves it toward LOS as appropriate to meet HRV; o Maintain open, park-like stand conditions where this condition occurred historically; o Manipulate vegetation in a manner to encourage the development and maintenance of large diameter, open canopy structure;
49 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
o Maintain connectivity and reduce fragmentation of LOS stands by maintaining or enhancing the current level of connectivity between LOS stands and old growth habitats.
The Ochoco Viable Ecosystems model, described by Simpson and others (1994) uses the HRV as a baseline for comparing the existing vegetation with the patterns resulting from natural disturbances. Within this model, vegetative conditions that are over-represented on the landscape are actually identified as opportunities for management, and can be modified to address those conditions that are under- represented. Within the CMH project area, several plant association groups are over-represented and several are under-represented. Table 16. and Table 17. list the vegetation groups that are over and under- represented by more or less than 10 percent. Fulé (2008) suggests that reference conditions should not be regarded simply as a snapshot of what existed for a couple of thousand years prior to human-caused degradation, but in a long-term functional view as the result of evolutionary processes.
Table 16. Current seral and structural stage for closed canopy plant associations in CMH compared to reference conditions in percent. Reference Condition Current Condition Historical CMH project area Early Seral Closed Canopy Dry Lodgepole Pine, Pole Stage 5- 40 86 Moist White Fir, Small Tree Stage 3-8 25 Cold Dry White Fir, Small Tree Stage 0-8 37 Mid Seral Closed Canopy Ponderosa Pine-Lodgepole Pine, Small Tree Stage 1-8 25 Late Seral Closed Canopy Juniper Steppe, Large Tree Stage 0 19 Juniper Woodlands, Small Tree Stage 15-30 65 Ponderosa Pine-Lodgepole Pine, Large Tree Stage 1-4 31 Dry Ponderosa Pine, Small Tree Stage 0-4 32 Dry Ponderosa Pine, Large Tree Stage 0-4 35 Cold Dry White fir, Large Tree Stage 4-8 18
Table 17. Current seral and structural stage for open canopy plant associations in CMH compared to reference conditions in percent. Reference Condition Current Condition Viable Code Historical CMH project area Early Seral Open Canopy Juniper Woodlands, Grass-Forb-Shrub Stage 50-70 3 Late Seral Open Canopy Wet White Fir, Small Tree Stage 0-2 46 Dry Ponderosa Pine, Large Tree Stage 15-33 0
50 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
The amount of closed canopy stand conditions have increased due to past management activity and lack of frequent fire. As displayed in Table 16. the amount of late seral, closed canopy juniper PAGs is well over represented within CMH. The amount of dry ponderosa pine, both small and large tree structure, is also well over-represented in terms of late seral, closed canopy stands. Table 17. displays early and late seral stand conditions that are open canopy. Currently, only 3 percent of juniper woodlands are in an open canopy condition when historically this stand condition was represented 50 to 70 percent across this PAG. The dry ponderosa pine, late seral, open canopy stand type is currently at 0 percent compared to historic reference conditions of 15 to 33 percent, while the cold dry white fir, small tree stage (Table 16.) is at 37 percent compared to reference condition of 0 to 8 percent. What these tables display is a major departure in species composition and structure from historic conditions.
Environmental Consequences
Alternative 1 – No Action There would be no direct effects of the No Action Alternative. The No Action Alternative would forgo the opportunity to thin the proposed stands to achieve the project objectives. With increasing stand density, insects and pathogens would benefit resulting in mortality of stressed and host susceptible trees. The opportunity to improve stand vigor, and resistance to insect/disease impacts would not be achieved within these stands. Increased competition for sunlight, nutrients, and soil resources would increase tree and stand stress. This reduces stand vigor which increases stand mortality and increases susceptibility to primary and secondary insect and disease. As tree density increases, so does vertical structure with the establishment of shade tolerant species such as white fir. This would largely affect steep slopes where past disturbance has been limited to none. Large, young white fir would continue to compete with desired species (ponderosa pine and western white pine) for resources. The No Action Alternative would not begin to move forested stands into the desired future condition or as outlined by the Eastside Screens or the Long Range Strategy. Large, old trees (particularly ponderosa pine) would continue to senesce and their life span would be reduced due to competition for water and growing space. No action within designated old growth stands would put these areas at high risk of a stand replacing event. No treatment within the IRA would promote conifer expansion to the detriment of the sage habitat and therefore the sage grouse, a candidate species for listing. Stand trajectory for major PAGs under the No Action Alternative are displayed in the charts below. Stand trajectories were modeled using the FVS over a 50 year time horizon.
51 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
No Action for MCD PAG over a 50 year time horizon 450
400
350
300 Average of TPA 250 Average of BA 200 Average of SDI 150 Average of QMD
100
50
0 2014 2024 2034 2044 2054 2064
Figure 17. Stand trajectory under the No Action alternative for Mixed Conifer Dry PAG over a 50 year time horizon within CMH.
No Action for LPD PAG over a 50 year time horizon 400
350
300
250 Average of TPA 200 Average of BA Average of SDI 150 Average of QMD 100
50
0 2014 2024 2034 2044 2054 2064
Figure 18. Stand trajectory under the No Action alternative for Lodgepole Pine Dry PAG over a 50 year time horizon within CMH.
52 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
No Action for PPD PAG over a 50 year time horizon 300
250
200 Average of TPA 150 Average of BA Average of SDI 100 Average of QMD
50
0 2014 2024 2034 2044 2054 2064
Figure 19. Stand trajectory under the No Action alternative for Ponderosa Pine Dry PAG over a 50 year time horizon within CMH.
No Action for JUN PAG over a 50 year time horizon 600
500
400 Average of TPA 300 Average of BA Average of SDI 200 Average of QMD
100
0 2014 2024 2034 2044 2054 2064
Figure 20. Stand trajectory under the No Action alternative for Juniper PAG over a 50 year time horizon within CMH.
As shown in the preceding figures, stand density in terms of basal area per acre (BAA) and SDI continue to increase over the time horizon. Average TPA has a general decrease over time due to competition induced mortality as shown in the increase in SDI. QMD increases steadily due to reduced stand density. Stand attributes were averaged across several stands within the CMH project area and lumped into their respective PAG. Stand density (BAA and SDI) does decrease over time starting at about 40 years from now under a no action scenario. At this time, under a no action scenario, stand densities would be
53 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
reduced through competition. Residual species would likely be mostly white fir due to its shade tolerance. The species longevity would be short lived due to its susceptibility to insect, disease, and future drought predictions. If fire would occur at this time (2054) the effects would likely be severe.
2013 2043 2063 Figure 21. Stand trajectory of mixed conifer over 50 years.
Table 18. Attributes for Mixed Conifer Dry stand within CMH under a No Action Alternative. Year TPA SDI BAA5 QMD
2013 539 466 245 9.1 2043 504 474 255 9.6 2063 461 469 255 10.1
Figure 22. Species distributions for mixed conifer stand over a 50 year time horizon under a no action alternative.
Over time, under a no action alternative, stand density continues to increase and species composition continues to be majority white fir with ponderosa pine. In 50 years the aspen (AS) component in the stand shown above is greatly reduced due to conifer encroachment and lack of disturbance. The amount of dead and down trees is due to competition induced mortality. Essentially in 50 years without treatment these stand condition could be widespread throughout the project area.
5 BAA= basal area per acre in square feet.
54 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action
Direct and Indirect Effects
Table 19. Resource indicators and measures for Alternative 2 Resource Indicator Measure Resource Element Alternative 2
Forest Health/HRV Stand density Acres 45,950 Late Old Structure HRV Acres Reference conditions Stands
Resource Indicator and Measure 1: Stand density Across the project area stand density would be reduced upon implementation of the Proposed Action. The rating system within the guide Identifying Old Trees and Forests in Eastern Washington (Van Pelt 2008, pg. 90) would be used to help identify old ponderosa pine within the project area as well as the Western Juniper Guide by Miller et al. (2007) to help identify old growth juniper. Leave trees would first be old ponderosa pine (reddish-orange bark, wide plates, deep wide fissures, visible signs of old knot/whorls below main crown, and overall crown form). Additional species would then be prioritized. Due to future drought forecasts, white fir would be reduced across the area. Cochran (1998) caution the future of white fir in areas that receive mean annual precipitation rates below 32 inches even if stand densities are kept very low. In order to avoid competition induced mortality, the lower and upper limits of the management zone was defined. The lower limit of the management zone (LLMZ) is where the stand has little inter tree competition and exhibits high stand growth. The upper limit of the management zone (ULMZ) is where stand vigor starts to decline and density based mortality starts to occur. It is also referred to as the “lower limit of the self-thinning zone.”
Past prescriptions have been aimed at developing/achieving high stand growth whereas more recent prescriptions are aimed at increasing individual tree growth and achieving natural variability by leaving clumps of trees. This could require stand density reduction to the onset of competition and/or the lower limit of site occupancy. Management recommendations are to manage between the LLMZ and ULMZ for the respective PAGs as calculated by Cochran et al. (1994) as shown in Table 20. below. This could change based on canopy closure needs (e.g., marten habitat). The maximum SDI value for the most limiting species, or species being managed for, is used as reference for relative density in management of the stand (Cochran et al. 1994). Ponderosa pine maximums are considered as its density limitations are generally the most limiting and it is predominantly the species being managed for. Ponderosa pine quickly responds to new growing space even at old ages and would quickly take advantage of the available site resources (Cochran 1998). Most stands can respond to new growing space within 5 years after treatment (Cochran 1994). This type of response is seen in diameter growth (Barrett 1979). Diameter growth is of great importance due to the photosynthetic allocation of trees when responding to increase in growing space. Diameter growth is the trees last response when all other growth is allocated after maintenance respiration, production of fine roots, seed production, terminal and lateral growth (Oliver and Larson 1996). Reducing stand densities directly achieves the desired future condition of forests resiliency to disturbance. Juniper would be cut in both juniper PAGs and meadow systems where it has expanded. 950 acres of meadow plant associations within the IRA would be treated by cutting all non-old growth juniper and other small conifers. The cutting of western juniper increases water availability and nitrogen, and results in large increases in biomass and cover of herbaceous species within the first two years of treatment (Bates et al. 2002).
55 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 20. Relative density thresholds by PAG within the CMH project area. Fire SDI SDI SDI *LLMZ BAA *ULMZ BAA Acres in Regime PAG Max LLMZ ULMZ equivalent equivalent CMH III Juniper low sagebrush6 - - - 1-4 TPA 3,000 I-III Dry Lodgepole Pine 276 114 170 62 93 23 Ponderosa Pine- 1,722 I Lodgepole Pine 350 73 109 40 60 I Dry Ponderosa Pine 350 90 134 49 73 3,497 I Xeric Pine 350 60 90 33 49 3,887 I Dry White Fir 565 127 190 69 104 16,459 I, III Moist White Fir 669 215 321 117 175 635 III Wet White Fir 568 181 270 99 147 63 I Cold Dry White Fir 565 127 190 69 104 15,913 Dry Whitebark Pine 350 30 45 16 24 1,316 III Wet Lodgepole Pine 377 114 170 62 93 28 *Calculated assuming a 10 inch QMD. BAA can increase if average QMD increases.
The following figures display stand density attributes for major PAGs across CMH. Stand trajectories were modeled using the FVS over a 50 year time horizon and begin with Figure 23..
Openings would be placed throughout stands which would increase sunlight, a direct effect. Indirect effects of openings would be regeneration of shade intolerant species such as ponderosa pine and western white pine (Graham 2007). Jain and Graham (2005) found that canopy cover ranging from 25 to 45 percent can develop western white pine if seed is available.
Proposed Action for MCD PAG over a 50 year time horizon 450 400 350 300 Average of TPA 250 Average of BA 200 Average of SDI 150 Average of QMD 100 50 0 2014 2024 2034 2044 2054 2064
Figure 23. Stand trajectory under the Proposed Action alternative for Mixed Conifer Dry PAG over a 50 year time horizon within CMH.
6 Taken from the Plant Associations of the Fremont National Forest (Hopkins 1979)
56 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Proposed Action for LPD PAG over a 50 year time horizon 350
300
250
200 Average of TPA Average of BA 150 Average of SDI Average of QMD 100
50
0 2014 2024 2034 2044 2054 2064
Figure 24. Stand trajectory under the Proposed Action alternative for Lodgepole Pine Dry PAG over a 50 year time horizon within CMH.
Proposed Action for PPD PAG over a 50 year time horizon 200 180 160 140
120 Average of TPA 100 Average of BA Average of SDI 80 Average of QMD 60 40 20 0 2014 2024 2034 2044 2054 2064
Figure 25. Stand trajectory under the Proposed Action alternative for Ponderosa Pine Dry PAG over a 50 year time horizon within CMH.
57 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Proposed Action for JUN PAG over a 50 year time horizon 600
500
400 Average of TPA 300 Average of BA Average of SDI 200 Average of QMD
100
0 2014 2024 2034 2044 2054 2064
Figure 26. Stand trajectory under the Proposed Action alternative for Juniper PAG over a 50 year time horizon within CMH.
As shown above, stand density is reduced upon the implementation of the Proposed Action. Immediately after treatment, SDI is reduced from 291 to about 144 and BAA is reduced from 152 to 80 for the MCD PAG. The direct effect of stand density reduction is the removal of trees and the immediate increase in light to the forest floor. An indirect effect would be the increase in QMD which increases over time as shown in Table 21 below. Increasing the QMD can also be referred to as increasing the average diameter of the stand which occurs when stand density is reduced (Zhang et al. 2013).
Table 21. Increase in QMD for the Mixed Conifer Dry PAG over a 50 year time horizon under the Proposed Action. Year QMD for MCD PAG (inches)
2014 10 2024 12 2034 13 2044 14 2054 15 2064 16
Juniper Steppe and Woodland PAGs would be treated to resemble historic conditions. According to local guides (Hopkins 1979) juniper lands typically contain 1 to 4 juniper trees per acre. Treatments aimed at restoring pant communities post juniper treatment have been both success and failures. Three main components that influence plant community response are 1) site selection, 2) method, and 3) follow-up treatment. The level of plant response is largely influenced by post weather conditions, available seed banks, grazing, and site potential (Miller et al. 2005). Juniper maintained at low densities will increase the abundance, diversity, and richness of avian and mammal populations in shrub-steppe (Miller et al. 2005). Wildlife response would depend on vegetation response post treatment. Eddlerman (2002) showed that uncut juniper plots had little herbaceous response whereas cut treatments had large increases in shrub and grass cover 2 years post cutting. Bates et al. (2000) also report positive vegetation response within 2 years of treatment within needlegrass-bluebunch plant communities. Treatment within these PAGs would resemble those conditions; however, western juniper with old growth characteristics
58 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
(outlined by Miller et al. 2007) would not be cut. As juniper ages, canopy morphology shifts from a cone shape to a more rounded top. As age advances, juniper trees may also develop a combination of the following: 1) broad non-symmetrical tops, 2) deeply furrowed, more cinnamon-colored bark, 3) twisted trunks or branches, 4) dead branches and spike tops, 5) large lower limbs, 6) trunks containing narrow strips of cambium, 7) hollow trunks, 8) large trunk diameters relative to tree height, 9) branches covered with bright yellow-green lichen (Letheria sp.).
Direct effects of thinning juniper PAGs would be the reduction in stand density which has future indirect effects of increases in water yield and species such as blue bunch wheatgrass, Idaho fescue, antelope bitterbrush, and big sagebrush. Aspen and mesic plant communities would be treated by removing encroaching conifers. Direct effects would be an increase in aspen suckers likely one year post treatment. Aspen suckers can be expected to average 1,000 stems per acre with some areas being as high at 3,500 per acre on areas with 20 percent or less conifer cover (Swanson et al. 2010). The aspen stand influences the area around it (usually 30 to 50 feet out), and this area of open grasses, herbs, forbs, or shrubs is considered part of the aspen ecosystem. The diverse plant communities in the understory are dependent upon the partial shade of the deciduous overstory and the deep, rich soils that hold moisture into the summer (Seager et al. 2013). Indirect effects would be the increase of aspen stand health due to conifer removal. Typical responses in aspen after treatment differ by treatment type. Heavy conifer reduction and prescribed burning around meadows would allow aspen (and other deciduous trees) to reclaim this area and increase overall habitat and transition zone (Seager et al. 2013). Conifer removal and/or prescribed burning could occur in aspen stands. An example prescription from Seager et al. 2013 is to radially thin conifers from within and around the aspen stems for 60 feet. Reduce the conifer basal area to below 20 percent canopy cover to reduce shading for 60 to 150 feet from the last aspen stem. Retain the large and old ponderosa pine. The desired future condition for aspen stands is a representation of all structural stages, but mostly young early seral aspen. Table 26 describes those stages and desired percentages (Swanson et al. 2010).
The 15,966 acres less than 35 percent slope would be treated through a combination of ground based systems such as a feller-buncher and rubber tired skidder and harvester-forwarder. The remaining 3,034 acres that are greater than 35 percent slope would be treated via a combination of harvester forwarder and cable system (refer to Appendix B – Vegetation Treatment Scheme Maps for locations). Treatment of steep slopes would reduce stand density therefore the potential for severe fire effects. The harvester- forwarder approach reduces soil disturbance normally associated with conventional tractor logging due to the creation of common use trails (slash-mats), the machine’s ability to utilize existing road systems, and through reduced use of traditional landings. This approach is highly effective on steep slopes with minimum disturbance. Severe fire effects are often seen on steep slopes with dense vegetation as seen in the 2012 Barry Point Fire on the Fremont-Winema National Forest. Direct effects of treatment would be reduction in stand density and increase in fine fuels. Indirect effects would be allocated growth to residual trees, therefore increased resilience to insect and disease (Barrett 1979). Indirect effects also include the decreased potential of severe fire effects. Busse et al. (2009) reported that thinning alone doubled the diameter growth increment of ponderosa pine and resulted in lower tree mortality compared to un-thinned areas. Treatment within these areas would begin to move forested stands in steep areas closer to the desired future condition of resistance and resiliency.
59 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 22. Desired age and structural composition of aspen stands7. Age (years) Structural Class8 Proportion of aspen stand area (percent) 0-40 Stand initiation 45-50 40-80 Stem exclusion, understory reinitiation, young 45-50 forest multi strata 80+ Old forest multi strata, old forest single strata 5-10
Resource Indicator and Measure 2: Late Old Structure Stands Several plant associations are either above or below the HRV, however some are within. Treatment would depend on the degree to which they are departed from reference conditions. The goal of HRV is to mimic a time when forests were resistance and resilient to disturbances. Those closed canopy, late old structure stands that are over represented (e.g. Juniper steppe, Juniper Woodlands, Dry Ponderosa Pine, and Dry White Fir) within the project area would be treated in a fashion that would begin to move those stand types closer within their historic range (refer to Figures below). This is also true for those stand types that are under-represented in the project are (e.g. Wet White Fir and Dry Ponderosa Pine late seral open canopy stands). For example, ponderosa pine, large tree stage, closed canopy stands (over- represented) would be treated in a fashion that would begin to move them towards ponderosa pine, large tree stage, open canopy conditions (under-represented). Direct effects would be reduction in canopy cover and stand density and increase in understory vegetation. Indirect effects over time would be increasing the QMD, number of snags and downed wood recruitment, and increase in native shrub distribution. The promotion and increase of LOS stands follows direction from the LRMP as amended by the Eastside Screens.
2016 2016 post treatment 2064 Figure 27. Stand trajectory of mixed conifer over 50 years
Table 23. Attributes for Mixed Conifer Dry stand #11790 pre and post treatment. Year TPA SDI BAA9 QMD
2016 225 300 175 11.9 2016 (post treatment) 60 110 68 13.7 2064 59 156 108 18.3
Above shows a Stand Visualization System (SVS) modeled in FVS for a treatment in a closed canopy stand. Canopy cover (calculated in FVS) is 63 percent. The prescription for this stand is a low thinning to 25 percent of max SDI or 70 BAA (refer to Table 23). As shown, the stand over time consists mostly of large diameter trees with few trees in the understory. The image provides a visual of a stand post treatment over the next 50 years.
7 Based on HRV estimates by M.L. Tatum and K.Schuetz. Applies to aspen stands in areas dominated by dry forest plant association groups. 8 Definitions contained in appendix of Silviculture Specialist Report. 9 BAA= basal area per acre in square feet.
60 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Cumulative Effects The spatial boundaries for analyzing the cumulative effects to forested vegetation are the Bull Stewardship project and the North Warner Sage Shrub project boundaries. These activities overlap with the proposed action of CMH. The short term temporal boundary is the next 5 years because that is when the effects of overlapping treatments would be realized. The long term temporal boundary is the next 50 years because that is when the effects of treatments would be realized with regards to reference conditions. The short term effect of the overlapping projects would be reduced canopies and reduced stand density to little competition. Long term effects would be the continuing movement of these stands closer towards reference conditions.
Recent harvest activities have been the result of the Bull Stewardship Project of 2005. This project consisted of commercial and non-commercial harvest and aspen improvement (1,369 acres). The most recent activities have been the result of the North Warner Sage Shrub Project with non-commercial thinning and burning occurring from 2009 to 2014. Western juniper and other small conifers were cut, followed by prescribed fire to enhance sage grouse habitat (3,215 acres). Looking out over the next 5 years, there is no reasonably foreseeable future actions beyond those included in CMH anticipated within the project area. Ongoing actions include recreation and dispersed camping, hunting, livestock grazing, road maintenance, and firewood cutting. The cumulative effects of the past activities including the overlapping treatments of Bull Stewardship (1,369 acres) and North Warner Sage Shrub project (3,215 acres) along with the proposed action of CMH are expected to improve conditions of forested stands in the CMH Project area of the North Warners.
Compliance with LRMP and Other Relevant Laws, Regulations, Policies and Plans The Proposed Action would comply with the Forest Plan standards of MA 5 and begin to move the stands into the desired future condition of both the Forest Plan and the Long Range Strategy. The Proposed Action would be in compliance with the Eastside Screens Amendment 2, guidance from area entomologist, and the Long Range Strategy.
Summary The No Action alternative does not meet the purpose and need related to forested vegetation nor does it begin to move stands toward the desired future condition. The Proposed Action would begin to move stands toward more resilient and resistant condition with respect to insect, disease, and future drought forecasts. Treating the landscape holistically would not only benefit the health of forested systems but also wildlife habitat, watershed functioning, and reduce the potential for severe fire (and other disturbance) effects.
61 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Fuels This section summarizes the historical and current conditions of the fuels and predominant forested vegetation and anticipated effects of implementing each alternative in the CMH project as analyzed in detail in the Fuels Report (Arciniega, 2014). The report consists of a narrative of historical and current fuels and vegetative conditions as well as a comparison of fire hazard and subsequent behavior as modeled under each alternative. The Fuels Report including maps displaying all the Resource Indicators is available in the project record.
All proposed activities directly related to vegetation manipulation are analyzed due to inherent effects on fire hazard. Other proposed activities such as those associated with stream channel stabilization/culvert replacement, road maintenance, and temporary road construction are not analyzed due to a minor extent of direct effects to vegetation and subsequent fire behavior.
The state of wildland fuels (volume, type, condition, arrangement, and location), fire behavior, and prescribed fire are directly related to the purpose and need and were also referred to in scoping comments.
Resource Indicators and Measures Two primary factors are involved when assessing the threat of wildland fire; fire risk and fire hazard. Fire risk is the probability that a fire will occur (natural or human-caused ignition). It can be obtained through fire history analysis and the number of fires that have occurred in the vicinity of the area of interest. Fire hazard is described as a fuel complex, defined by volume, type, condition, arrangement, and location that determines the degree of ease of ignition and the resistance to control. Fire hazard expresses the potential fire behavior for a fuel type, regardless of the fuel type’s weather-influenced fuel moisture content (Hardy 2005). Fuels include all of the live and dead vegetation present that would be consumed by a wildfire. Examples of dead fuel include duff, needle cast, limbwood, snags and down logs. Examples of live fuel include grass, shrubs and trees. Of the factors contributing to fire behavior (fuels, topography, weather) and severity (fire effects), the forest fuels are the only parameter that can be directly manipulated to alter a wildfire’s rate of spread, intensity, and subsequent severity. The resistance to control aspect of fire hazard can be estimated through fire behavior and fire effects modeling and by examining those facets of nearby fires that have occurred in similar fuel types.
Table 24. Resource indicators and measures for assessing effects Resource Element Resource Indicator Measure Source 1. Conditional Burn a. Probability simulated fires Fire Risk Research – Finney (2006) Probability affect a given area a. Canopy height b. Canopy base height Research – Agee (1994), Keyes & Fire Hazard 2. Live Fuel Loading c. Canopy cover O’Hara (2002) d. Canopy bulk density e. Fuel model a. Flame length Research – Fire Hazard 3. Fire Behavior b. Rate of spread Agee (1993, 1996) c. Crown fire activity
Methodology The analysis was conducted using a combination of project area reconnaissance, remotely sensed imagery, and Geographic Information System (GIS). Live and dead fuel characteristics were obtained from the LANDFIRE database (www.landfire.gov) via the LANDFIRE Data Access Tool (LFDAT 2012). These data were augmented by widespread forest inventory tree lists as assigned by 2012 Gradient
62 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Nearest Neighbor methods (GNN; http://lemma.forestry.oregonstate.edu) whose canopy characteristics were derived from Forest Vegetation Simulator outputs (FVS; Suppose v. 2.02 – Southern Oregon Variant; Dixon 2012). Fuel models were assigned to the landscape by these same methods (LANDFIRE data augmented by GNN-FVS outputs) and refined further by manual assignment in a small portion of the landscape. These data were combined into a landscape file and fire behavior metrics were derived from FlamMap v. 5.0.1.3 outputs (www.firemodels.org). Proposed Action effects to vegetation were modeled via FVS and similar methods were used as described above to derive post-activity fire behavior metrics from FlamMap outputs. FVS inputs were prepared with the use of a beta program called GNN to FVS Ready Program v. 5/20/2014. This unpublished program was produced by Leo A. Yanez of the Deschutes National Forest.
FVS is a forest growth model that simulates tree growth and mortality over time and provides various quantitative outputs. For the purposes of this exercise, it was assumed that all proposed treatments occurred within a 10-year period beginning in 2014. One limitation to this modeling approach is that all similar actions occurred in the same year (all thinning treatments occurred in 2014, all pile burning occurred one year later and all understory burning occurred in year 2022). Another limitation is that only one prescription was assigned to all commercial treatments (although removal intensities varied based on species composition, individual tree condition and size classes). A limitation to modeling prescribed fire effects in FVS is the homogenization of fuel loading and static weather conditions.
FVS inputs were prepared with the use of a beta program called GNN to FVS Ready Program v. 5/20/2014. This unpublished program was produced by Leo A. Yanez of the Deschutes National Forest. Mr. Yanez was critical to production in providing insight and guidance to a modeling approach and provision of the actual program to automate and organize large amounts of data for input to FVS.
FlamMap is a fire behavior mapping and analysis program that computes potential fire behavior characteristics (spread rate, flame length, fireline intensity, etc.) across a user-defined landscape under constant weather and fuel moisture conditions. FlamMap fire behavior calculations are independent, that is, calculated fire intensity in one stand does not augment intensity in a neighboring stand. This ignores the momentum of fire behavior where high intensity may carry over from one area to another.
Fire behavior modeling of the current fuel and forest conditions in the CMH project area was conducted to demonstrate the potential for loss of key ecosystem components. Potential fire behavior was modeled for the project area under warm, dry summer conditions using FlamMap v. 5.0.1.3 (www.firemodels.org). Weather and fuel moisture conditions were summarized from the Summit Remote Automated Weather Station (RAWS; 353421), and modeled under 90-97th percentile weather conditions. Fuel moistures used in fire behavior modeling are included in Table 25..
Table 25. 90-97th percentile fuel moisture summary for Summit RAWS (353421) 90th – 97th Percentile Fuel Moisture Conditions (20-Year Average of Jun. 1 to Oct. 31, 1994-2013) Fuel Time Lag Class Moisture Content (%) 1-hr. 4 10-hr. 5 100-hr. 8 Live Herbaceous 28 Live Woody 64 Foliar 80
63 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
All inputs were based on a 30 m2 area which equates to approximately 0.22 acres. One must consider that models simplify reality and will not fully reflect reality.
Information Sources The foundation of this analysis is based on widely accepted knowledge and theory of complex interactions between fire and the environment. A thorough review of (mostly) peer reviewed published documents was conducted in order to define, refine and support statements made throughout the document. All utilized models have been cited in the document and appropriate associated documents or website links are available in the project record and/ or References Cited section of this document.
All fuel characteristic (i.e., fuel model, canopy cover, canopy height, canopy base height, and canopy bulk density) data were derived by blending LANDFIRE v. 1.20 and GNN-FVS outputs. All fire behavior characteristics were produced by FlamMap v. 5.0.1.3 through a process utilizing fuel, topographic, and weather parameter inputs. FlamMap was also used to produce conditional burn probabilities. Post- treatment conditions were derived by simulating the entire suite of proposed treatments (where spatially appropriate) via FVS on a 30 m2 basis, that is, each forested stand was based on conditions at a quarter- acre scale across the entire analysis area. LANDFIRE data supplemented those areas where no GNN- FVS outputs were available. All outputs were scrutinized for accuracy and manually adjusted where appropriate. Manual adjustment was mainly applied to fuel model assignments, especially where recent disturbances occurred. Historic fire occurrence was obtained from Fremont-Winema N.F. corporate spatial data.
2011 imagery from National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP) were used in part to verify vegetation conditions as were various site visits with SE Zone Fire Ecologist James Arciniega, SE Zone Silviculturist Lora Arciniega and Area Ecologist Michael Simpson. Quick plot stand exams were conducted by Lora and James Arciniega and utilized for comparison of post-treatment forested fuel conditions.
Affected Environment
Existing Condition The current condition is better understood when contrasted with historical conditions so as to provide context of change. Vegetative conditions are the primary emphasis as they define fire hazard. The vegetation types are grouped based on fire regime i.e., classification of fire frequency and severity.
Fire Hazard Historical Conditions FRCC Fire Regime 1 The CMH project area generally consists of fire adapted forest and shrub dominated vegetation types. Predominant forested vegetation types in CMH include dry mixed conifer, ponderosa pine, western juniper, lodgepole pine and whitebark pine. The dry mixed conifer vegetation in the area typically consists of ponderosa pine, white fir, incense-cedar, and western white pine. Within the project area, this forest type is associated with a historically very frequent, low-intensity fire regime (Agee 1994) with an average return interval of 12-36 years (Heyerdahl et al. in press). This fire frequency and behavior is classified as Fire Regime Condition Class (FRCC) Fire Regime 1 (0-35 year frequency and low to mixed severity; Barrett et al. 2010). Frequent fires once regulated shade tolerant species and promoted bunch grasses and sprouting shrubs. Downed woody debris in this fire regime is typically of low abundance and there is little vertical continuity of live fuels between the understory and forest canopy (USDA Forest Service 2006). In much of the project area white fir is thought to have been present in unburned areas,
64 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
but was generally much less abundant than today (e.g. Hagmann et al. 2013) and was at most a codominant to other species pre-1900 due to the selective thinning effect of frequent fire (Simpson 2007; Agee 1994). Ponderosa pine chiefly dominated the overstory canopy. Lodgepole pine is a seral tree species associated with these vegetation types and western white pine was probably more significant before white pine blister rust was introduced into the area (Simpson 2007). Simpson (2007) advocates stand densities of 15 to 50 [large diameter] stems per acre under the historical fire regime. Small patches of age and species cohorts were more common historically (Agee 1994; Thomas and Agee 1986; Bonnicksen and Stone 1981), indicative of group torching or short crown runs and generally were not large enough to warrant placement into a mixed severity fire regime (Simpson 2007). Although stands within the CMH project area have been managed for timber resources, some areas within the ponderosa pine and mixed conifer vegetation types consist of old-growth stands. The proportion of large, old pine to fir species within these stands support the conclusion that historically, overstory vegetation was often composed of well-spaced to clumpy, fire tolerant tree species even in the moister mixed-conifer sites (e.g., Hagmann et al. 2013, Larson and Churchill 2012). The open canopy structure and relatively dry sites contribute to fuel burning availability early in the season (USDA Forest Service 2006).
The ponderosa pine vegetation type in the area is associated with an historically frequent, low intensity fire regime (FRCC Fire Regime 1; Barrett et al. 2010) and is among the forest types most heavily impacted by fire exclusion (Simpson 2007; Fitzgerald 2005; Skinner and Chang 1996; Agee 1993, 1994; Franklin and Dyrness 1988). Relevant fire studies in the region determined composite fire intervals to range from 11 to 17 years (Heyerdahl et al. in press). Youngblood et al. (2004) endorse general reference conditions for eastside old-growth ponderosa pine forests based on their study of stand structure in eastside old-growth ponderosa pine forests of Oregon and northern California. These conditions include, but are not limited to either aggregated (very small clumps up to less than an acre; supported by Larson and Churchill 2012, Agee 1994 and Morrow 1986) or randomly distributed overstory trees with more than three age classes represented in the upper canopy (Larson and Churchill 2012; Youngblood et al. 2004; Bonnicksen and Stone 1981). The density of live overstory trees averages 20 per acre whose dbh ranges from approximately 10 to 50 inches (supported by Hagmann et al. 2013). Average composition of ponderosa pine is usually 70 to 100% in mid to late seral conditions. Western juniper and lodgepole pine (rarely) can occupy up to 30% and 25%, respectively (Simpson 2007). Much of the ponderosa pine literature suggests frequent, low intensity fires maintained open stand structures and sparse, light ground fuels by killing understory vegetation such as shrubs, small trees, and seedlings and consuming ground fuels (Hessburg et al. 2005; Fitzgerald 2005; Skinner and Chang 1996; Agee 1993, 1994; Franklin and Dyrness 1988; Morrow 1986). This fire regime would have kept thin barked tree species such as white fir and lodgepole pine in low abundance or limited to microsites where fires occurred less frequently (Simpson 2007; Fitzgerald 2005). The forest structure and fire regime as described would have supported understory species of grass and small shrubs. Society of American Foresters (SAF) cover type 237- Interior ponderosa pine illustrates this composition and structure well (Eyre 1980). FRCC Fire Regimes 2 and 3 Western juniper vegetation types were historically confined to protected microsites; those areas with low fuel loads and/ or rocky barriers that would lack ability to carry intense fires (Miller and Rose 1999; Agee 1994). Western juniper is often found in a savanna state, occupying a transitional moisture zone between ponderosa pine forest and steppe or shrub-steppe (Franklin and Dyrness 1988). Franklin and Dyrness (1988) describe steppe as being hot and dry with an appreciable cover of perennial grasses and shrub- steppe as a subdivision of steppe in which there are conspicuous layers of shrubs (Artemisia spp. in this case) and a high proportion of broad-leaved forbs. Due to the transitional condition of western juniper woodlands and the steppe-associated species being a common dominant understory component, both vegetation types are discussed in this report as an amalgamation. SAF cover type 238 – Western juniper provides a general description of this forest type (Eyre 1980) and one can reference more detailed
65 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
descriptions of specific plant associations within the western juniper series from Hopkins (1979) or Franklin and Dyrness (1988).
Agee (1994) offers an historical fire return interval in the western juniper vegetation type in the range of a minimum of 10 to 25 years to more than 100 years in places where older juniper have no evidence of fire. A pre-settlement mean fire return interval of 10 to 25 years is mentioned by Miller and Rose (1999) for mountain big sagebrush steppe of the Intermountain West. A study of fire history and western juniper on the Fremont National Forest (near Paisley, OR) found a mean fire return interval of 7.7 years before 1871 with 1 to 19 years between fire events and calculated a 100% chance that before 1871 a fire would have occurred somewhere in the 12,350 acre study in a 45 year period (Miller and Rose 1999). Fires moving across these areas at a 10 to 25 year interval would have confined western juniper to protected microsites (Agee 1994). Such fire return intervals will stimulate some associate shrub-steppe species like various bunch grasses and would temporarily eliminate non-sprouting shrubs (Agee 1994). Many rimrock or scabland areas within CMH contain older, fire scarred juniper suggesting a moderate severity fire regime (e.g. Agee 1994). Western juniper associated with those areas of a rocky/ scabby surrounding would have experienced less frequent, moderate intensity (more than 100 year mean fire return interval; Agee 1994) fire events. This frequency and intensity is classified as FRCC Fire Regime 3 (35-200 year frequency and mixed severity; Barrett et al. 2010). Established western juniper associated with grassy- shrubby steppe lands would have experienced more frequent, high severity (≤ 25 year mean fire return interval; Miller and Rose 1999; Agee 1994) fire events. This frequency and intensity is classified as FRCC Fire Regime 2 (0-35 year frequency and high severity (greater than 75% of the dominant overstory vegetation replaced); Barrett et al. 2010). This classification is reinforced further by Franklin and Dyrness (1988) where they state, “Burning can kill Juniperus occidentalis and temporarily produce an herb- or shrub-dominated community which is gradually reinvaded by trees”.
Lodgepole pine often subsists in poorly drained sites with deep ash/ pumice deposits or well drained sites within small basins that trap cold air (Simpson 2007). It frequently co-occurs with whitebark pine at high elevations in the Warner Mountains (Riegel et al. 1990; Major and Taylor 1988). The lodgepole- whitebark pine vegetation type occurs at the highest elevations within the CMH project area, specifically, this vegetation type can be found along the upper ridgeline associated with Drake Peak. Both whitebark pine and lodgepole pine ecosystems were historically of a mixed severity fire regime of widely ranging fire intensities and frequencies. Agee (1994) lists mean fire return intervals of 29 to 300 years in whitebark pine habitats, with moderate severity fire return interval means of 25 to 75 years and stand replacement fire return interval means of 140+ years. Agee (1993) describes a mix of low, moderate and high severity fires in lodgepole pine stands in both space and time. In lodgepole pine stands on the Fremont National Forest, Stuart (1983) found fire-free intervals ranging from 60 to 350 years and Agee (1993) infers the average fire return interval is probably in the range of 60-80 years. Heyerdahl and others (in press) determined a composite fire interval of 58 years in lodgepole pine dominated stands on the neighboring Deschutes National Forest. Fire frequency data is sparse for lodgepole-whitebark pine vegetation types specifically, but due to a lack of understory vegetation and discontinuous fuels associated with these harsh sites, they likely have a somewhat longer fire return interval than adjacent forest types (Simpson 2007). For similar reasons, the fire extent is likely to be small and may only burn one clump of trees (Agee 1993). Because of the widely ranging fire intensities and frequencies noted above, it is difficult to determine if these high elevation sites belong in Fire Regime 3 or Fire Regime 4. Due to proximity to and abundance of FRCC Fire Regime 1 vegetation types in the area (especially downslope), likelihood of having a somewhat longer fire return interval than adjacent forest types, and such a frequency moderating fuel loads and subsequent fire severity, I will deduce that FRCC Fire Regime 3 (35- 200 year frequency and mixed severity; Barrett et al. 2010) best describes the historic fire frequency and severity of the lodgepole-whitebark pine vegetation type in the CMH project area.
66 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Current Conditions FRCC Fire Regime 1 Contemporary fuels conditions differ from that of historical in two primary measures: fuel loading, and fuel type (Brown et al. 1994; Agee 1993). Compared with historical conditions, current fuel loadings are substantially higher (Fitzgerald 2005; Hessburg et al. 2005). Fuel loading is a primary factor contributing to uncharacteristically intense fire behavior and detrimental effects on vegetation. Increased fuel loading significantly increases tree mortality (fire severity) through increased fire intensity and burn duration. Particularly, negative effects of burn duration are observed amongst the large pines whose duff, litter and larger size class fuel loads have increased at the base of individuals due to the absence of frequent fire, allowing prolonged smoldering (Simpson 2007) and lethal heat exposure to the roots and cambium. Current fuel types include an increased amount of small trees and woody vegetation. The increase in density and size of understory plants, especially woody vegetation, has transitioned much of the CMH project area from historical conditions that were best classified as a Fire Behavior Fuel Model 2 (fine herbaceous fuels under an open shrub or timber overstory) or Fire Behavior Fuel Model 8 (needles, leaves and twigs with little understory; Anderson 1982) to currently Fuel Model 165 (Very High Load, Dry Climate Timber-Shrub; Scott and Burgan 2005). This increase in fuel loading and the resulting transition in Fuel Models increases negative effects on the ecosystem caused by wildfire due to an increased probability of torching, crowning and high scorch damage to tree crowns (Simpson 2007). Higher stand densities increase competition for limited resources, reducing individual tree vigor during times of stress, leading to increased susceptibility to biotic and abiotic pressures. Current fuel arrangement also differs from historic conditions because fuel depth and continuity (vertical and horizontal) have increased (Fitzgerald 2005). Dead surface fuels such as needle cast, limbwood and dormant shrubs that were once consumed by frequent, light surface fires have now accumulated to amounts that seldom occurred historically (Agee 1993). The increased loading and connectivity has increased potential fire intensity, duration and spatial extent, thereby increasing complexity of fire management efforts.
The primary cause of the current elevated fuel loading is fire suppression practices (Arno and Brown 1991). Effective fire suppression in the west began between 1910 and 1930 (Agee 1993) and allowed forests to accrete fuels and understory vegetation (Simpson 2007; Skinner and Chang 1996), including an increased proportion of shade tolerant species like white fir on more mesic sites (Hagmann et al. 2013; USDA Forest Service 2006; Fitzgerald 2005). Recent studies have shown that forest structure in similar vegetation types on the Fremont-Winema National Forest has been altered from large diameter, low density, ponderosa pine dominated stands to high density, small diameter, white fir dominated stands (Hagmann et al. 2013; USDA Forest Service 2006).
Other land use practices such as timber management and livestock grazing have also altered fuel structures (Youngblood et al. 2004) and therefore the fire behavior and fire effects in these areas. Previous timber management did occur in the planning area for timber production and forest health management. These treatments removed some large overstory trees through single tree selection, high thinning, group selection and clear cutting. The removal of overstory opened the canopy and understory vegetation responded to the increase in available growing space (Franklin and Dyrness 1988) by increasing in density (ingrowth) and size. Changes in vegetation include elevated stocking levels of fire intolerant species (Hagmann et al. 2013; Fitzgerald 2005) by selectively removing pine and allowing seedling/sapling survival via fire exclusion, decreased ponderosa pine dominance through selective removal and loss of preferred regeneration conditions due to lack of fire (Skinner and Chang 1996), increased abundance of shade tolerant species in the intermediate and lower canopy stratum (Fitzgerald 2005) due to pine removal and fire exclusion, increased shrub component (Simpson 2007) as a result of fire exclusion and harvest-created openings, and fewer horizontal openings and structural heterogeneity associated with historic stands (Larson and Churchill 2012; Skinner and Chang 1996) due to ingrowth.
67 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Grazing inherently alters the herbaceous layer and can exacerbate effects of fire suppression through retardation of fire spread by removing those fuels that carry fire. This allows opportunity for forest expansion into previously open areas and for further ingrowth (USDA Forest Service 2006; Miller and Rose 1999).
FRCC Fire Regime 2 and 3 The western juniper vegetation types (FRCC Fire Regime 3) within CMH mainly consist of expansion into grassland-shrubland communities (FRCC Fire Regime 2) over the past century (USDA Forest Service 2006; Miller and Rose 1999; Agee 1994). Pre-settlement expansions occurred during cool wet periods, but the recent expansion of western juniper woodlands of the Intermountain West is believed to be unparalleled in the last 6,000 years and is occurring during a warmer, drier period (Miller and Rose 1999). The main factors influencing this expansion are the reduced role of fire, introduction and overstocking of domestic livestock in the late 1800s, and mild and wet climate conditions around the turn of the last century (Miller and Rose 1999). The decline in fire has been attributed to the reduction of fine fuels due to grazing (USDA Forest Service 2006; Agee 1994), reduced anthropogenic fires (Miller and Wigland 1994), and fire suppression beginning in 1910-1930 (Agee 1993). Western juniper is particularly susceptible to mortality from fire in its first 50 years (Miller and Rose 1999) as western juniper generally grows slowly and the sapling stage may last 30 to 40 years (Agee 1994). The intensity and extent of fires in this area depend in part on the proportion of grass, sage and juniper. Those areas with significant herbaceous cover are more likely to burn completely over a wide range of conditions than sites with more shrub and tree cover because of the fuel continuity provided by the grasses. Most of these fires are intense enough to kill non-sprouting sage and western juniper as these species are fire sensitive (Agee 1994). However, juniper may create its own fuelbreak as the crown of established juniper in these open areas is likely to be full, reducing herbaceous production through shading, litterfall and soil moisture competition (Miller and Wigland 1994). Juniper woodlands in certain conditions may not be conducive to severe overstory fire effects, but are indeed still flammable, especially under more extreme conditions, and still represent the loss of sage-steppe habitat and subsequent change in historical fire regimes.
The lodgepole-whitebark pine vegetation type within CMH has recently experienced heavy overstory mortality due to mountain pine beetle. This is typical of lodgepole stands on the Fremont-Winema whose average dbh is at least 9” and stocking is at least 100 trees per acre. Regularly recurring disturbances may have reduced the extent of these conditions historically. Agee (1994) states that a typical disturbance scenario in lodgepole-dominated forests includes selective removal of about one third of the stands every 60 years either by insects, fire, or a combination of the two. Mountain pine beetle is the most destructive insect pest of mature whitebark pine. Ponderosa pine and lodgepole pine are often described as the primary hosts of mountain pine beetle; however, mountain pine beetle populations have thrived using whitebark pine as their primary host (Perkins 1995; Parker and Stipe 1993). Periodic mountain pine beetle outbreaks are a natural component of whitebark ecosystems (Perkins 1995). When beetles attack a stand, they generally remove large trees with sufficiently thick phloem to support a brood of larvae (Agee 1994). Grazing and timber harvesting have had little direct effect on these stands due to their relative absence. Fire exclusion may have facilitated fuel accumulation, although the average fire return interval is such that few fires may have been thwarted by suppression and the fuel accumulation has been rendered moot due to major overstory mortality in this forest type within the project area. Fire exclusion may have facilitated the intensity of mountain pine beetle-related mortality by discouraging mosaics of multi-aged stands that are less conducive to beetle epidemics (Hessburg et al. 1994). A lack of high severity patches may be a detriment to the longevity of these beetle killed stands. Whitebark pine establishes from seed on open mineral soil seedbeds created by mixed-severity and stand-replacement fires. Clark's nutcrackers prefer open sites with mineral soil for caching, and readily cache seed in large openings created by stand-replacement fire and in smaller openings created by mixed-severity fire. If
68 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
live, seed-bearing individuals are non-existent and seed has not been cached in the area, then the whitebark pine component of these stands may, at least temporarily, disappear.
Flammability of these bark beetle infested stands is variable depending on the stage of mortality (Jenkins et al. in press). Generally, infested and recently dead (1-3 years post-mortem) trees have dry foliage with high levels of flammable gasses and can ignite more readily than green trees (Jenkins et al. 2008). As the dead needles shed, aerial fuel loading is reduced (horizontal and vertical continuity and canopy bulk density) and surface fuel loading increases (Hansen in press). This represents a temporary reduction in crown fire potential (until seedlings mature and reach the general canopy level) and increased surface fuel hazard. Furthermore, where canopy cover is decreased, wind speed (Meyer 2001) and solar radiation should increase at the ground level, thereby affecting fuel temperature and moisture content (Whitehead et al. 2006). This could be expected to create drier fuel conditions. That, coupled with increased fuel loading from aerial fuels and increased mid-flame wind speed, will proliferate potential fire intensity.
Brief Summary Past management activities have altered stand structure, composition, and fire occurrence patterns in the CMH project area. Current ponderosa pine and dry mixed conifer stands are overstocked, often even- aged and multi-storied, with few examples of the historic open, fire-maintained stand conditions remaining. Current stands contain more small trees, and fewer large trees than existed in the past, increasing the amount of ladder fuels. In each of the vegetation types described, dead forest fuels have accumulated from plant senescence and plant mortality. Relatively drier climatic conditions and slow decomposition rates, combined with the interruption of historical fire return intervals, have resulted in large accumulations of burnable materials. Shrub species have become thick and decadent, with a high proportion of dead stems. Current tree growth rates are commonly slow, and stand vigor is declining as competition for water, nutrients, and growing space has increased as a result of higher tree density. The low level of tree and stand vigor makes trees more susceptible to insect attack and disease mortality, combined with increased density of vegetation and continuity of fuels coalesces in an increased probability of severe effects from wildfire.
Fire Risk Recent fire history of the Fremont-Winema National Forest indicates a high probability of large fire occurrence in the CMH area. The Weekly fire of 1994, Thomas (1999), South Warner (2001), Grassy (2004), and Hickey (2012) fires all occurred within 10 miles of the CMH project area. The Grassy fire was the only of these recent fires to have occurred within the project area boundary and was approximately 4,200 acres. Most of the burn area was of high severity and is now an early seral grass/ shrub/ pole composite of stands. All of the aforementioned fires exhibited high intensity fire behavior and subsequent high severity effects on a large proportion of the acres burned. Almost all of these fires started in July or August within the last 20 years and most were human-caused. Many more recent fires have occurred within 25 miles of the CMH Project area including: Blue (1995), Sugar (1996), Drews (1997), Chewaucan (1997), Johnson (2001), Grizzly (2002), and the Barry Point Fire of 2012. These fires also exhibited high severity fire effects on a large proportion of the acres burned. The roughly 93,000 acre Barry Point Fire was the largest and most recent of the fires in the vicinity of the CMH project. The burned area mainly consisted of dry mixed conifer and ponderosa pine vegetation types. Much of the fire resulted in high severity effects to vegetation and in those areas a majority of the large overstory ponderosa pine was killed. This lightning-caused fire is a prime example of the high intensity and severity, large extent fires that burn under current fuels conditions in the dry season (>50% high severity). The fuels treatments proposed in CMH are targeted at reducing the potential for high intensity wildfire and improving fire management options. Noss et al. (2006) summarized fire risk in the West as “Wildfire is inevitable and ecologically important in forests throughout much of the western United States”. In general, across the western United States, recent studies have found that wildfires are getting more severe
69 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
(Miller et al. 2009), indicating that preparation before a fire occurs may become increasingly valuable. Future climate scenarios suggest a continued increase in fire danger across the United States (Boisvenue and Running 2006; Brown, Hall, and Westerling 2004; McKenzie et al. 2004; Bachelet et al. 2001; Flannigan, Stocks, and Wotton 2000) through increasing fire season length, potential size of fires, and areas vulnerable to fire. Droughts associated with warming climates may accelerate levels of tree mortality (Fettig et al. 2013), which in turn will influence fuel loadings and consequently fire behavior.
Prescribed Fire Activity on Bly Ranger District
70 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 26. Resource indicators and measures for the existing condition within the Crooked Mud Honey Project Resource Resource Existing Condition Measure Element Indicator (Alternative 1) Probability (%) Proportion (%) 1. Conditional <3 16 a. Probability simulated fires Fire Risk Burn 3-5 31 affect a given area 5-8 38 Probability 8-10 10
10-13 5 CH (ft.) Proportion (%) ≤20 13 2. Live Fuel a. Canopy height Fire Hazard 21-40 16 Loading 41-60 12 61-80 36
>80 23 CBH (ft.) Proportion (%) ≤10 64 2. Live Fuel Fire Hazard b. Canopy base height 11-20 25 Loading 21-30 8 31-40 1
>40 2 CC (%) Proportion (%) ≤20 24 2. Live Fuel c. Canopy cover Fire Hazard 21-40 27 Loading 41-60 33 61-80 16
>80 <1 CBD (kg/m3) Proportion (%) ≤0.025 38 2. Live Fuel Fire Hazard d. Canopy bulk density 0.025 - 0.05 12 Loading 0.05 - 0.075 13 0.075 - 0.1 7
>0.1 30 See 2. Live Fuel Fire Hazard e. Fuel model Loading Table 27.: Alt.1 Fuel Model Distribution FL (feet) Proportion (%) ≤5 35 3. Fire Fire Hazard a. Flame length 6-10 18 Behavior 11-20 6 21-40 10
>40 31 ROS (chains/hr.) Proportion (%) ≤10 28 3. Fire b. Rate of spread Fire Hazard 11-20 14 Behavior 21-50 15 51-100 37
>100 6 CFA Proportion (%) 3. Fire No Fire 1 Fire Hazard c. Crown fire activity Behavior Surface Fire 51 Passive Crown Fire 26
Active Crown Fire 22
71 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 27. Alt. 1 Standard Fire Behavior Fuel Model distribution (88%) of the Crooked Mud Honey Project Area Fuel Model Fuel Model Proportion Fuel Model Description Number Code (%) Timber Understory. Fuelbed is high load conifer litter with shrub 165 TU5 41 understory. Spread rate moderate; flame length moderate. Grass-shrub. Shrubs are 1 to 3 feet high, moderate grass load. Spread 122 GS2 29 rate high; flame length moderate.
Timber Understory. Fuelbed is low load of grass and/or shrub with litter. 161 TU1 9 Spread rate low; flame length low.
Shrub. Heavy shrub load, depth 4 to 6 feet. Spread rate very high; flame 145 SH5 4 length very high.
Timber Litter. Moderate load, includes small diameter downed logs. 184 TL4 3 Spread rate low; flame length low. Timber Litter. Moderate load broadleaf litter. Spread rate moderate; 186 TL6 2 flame length low.
Resource Indicator 1a: Probability simulated fires will affect a given area Conditional burn probability is related to the size of fires that occur on a given landscape. Given the same weather and fuel moisture parameters and burning period, larger fires will produce higher probabilities than smaller fires. This can be understood by considering that a larger fire will burn a greater portion of the landscape than a smaller fire. Think of a single stand on a landscape. Odds that any given fire will burn that stand increase with fire size. A large sample size of ignitions (say 1,000’s or 10,000’s) on the treated and pre-treatment landscape gives an indication of the overall effectiveness of the landscape pattern in retarding the growth of large fires.
FlamMap v. 5.0.1.3 was utilized to simulate 10,000 random ignitions on a landscape (the area of interest (AOI) associated with all fuels and fire behavior modeling for the CMH project area). Weather and fuel moisture parameters were held constant at the 90-97th percentile conditions (see Table 25. for values) with a 20-ft. wind speed of 21 MPH from the southwest (225°). Those burn probability values associated with the project area specifically are displayed above in Table 26.. To review an example, consider the last probability and proportion. Five percent of the project area has a 10 to 13% probability of being affected by a (simulated) fire within the AOI. This becomes more meaningful when compared to the same landscape after treatments have occurred. See Table 28. for comparison with Alternative 2 burn probability.
Resource Indicator 2a: Canopy height Canopy height (termed “stand height” in FlamMap) is used in part for determining canopy fuel loading and the starting height for lofting embers for spot fire calculations.
GNN live tree data from 2012 was input into FVS at a 30 m2 scale. Canopy characteristics, including canopy height, were computed for 2014 to approximate current conditions. For those areas where no GNN data were available (mostly non-forest areas), LANDFIRE v.1.20 data were used. Canopy height ranges from 0 to 120 feet, with 16% of the project area having the modal value of 84 feet. Those average canopy height values associated with the project area specifically are displayed above in Table 26.
Resource Indicator 2b: Canopy base height Canopy base height, also known as height to base of live crown, indicates the average height above the ground above which there is sufficient canopy fuel to propagate fire vertically (Scott and Reinhardt 2007). Canopy base height is a property of a plot, stand, or group of trees, not of an individual tree (crown base
72 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
height). Low canopy base height (including ladder fuels) facilitates ignition of the crown fuels by a surface fire and then, transition to some form of crown fire (passive or active).
GNN live tree data from 2012 was input into FVS at a 30 m2 scale. Canopy characteristics, including canopy base height, were computed for 2014 to approximate current conditions. For those areas where no GNN data were available (mostly non-forest areas), LANDFIRE v.1.20 data were used. Average canopy base height ranges from 0 to 80 feet, with 15% of the project area having the modal value of 0 feet. Those average canopy base height values associated with the project area specifically are displayed above in Table 30. See Table 28 for a direct comparison of values between Alternatives.
Resource Indicator 2c: Canopy cover Canopy cover is the fraction of ground area covered by the vertical projection of tree crown perimeters (Scott and Reinhardt 2007). It is a stand-level descriptor. Canopy cover is commonly expressed as a percentage of total ground area; for example, at 50 percent canopy cover, half of the total ground area is covered by the vertical projection of tree crowns (FlamMap; www.firemodels.org). Unless otherwise specified, canopy cover refers to non-overlapping canopy cover. Two overlapping crowns are not counted twice, so the theoretical maximum attainable canopy cover value is 100 percent. Canopy cover is important to fire behavior because it affects computation of wind reduction factors (to determine effective wind speed), its shading determines understory abundance and composition in part and can influence dead fuel moisture (by influencing intensity of solar radiation and wind abundance).
GNN live tree data from 2012 was input into FVS at a 30 m2 scale. Canopy characteristics, including canopy cover, were computed for 2014 to approximate current conditions. For those areas where no GNN data were available (mostly non-forest areas), LANDFIRE v.1.20 data were used. Canopy cover ranges from 0 to 84%, with 13% of the project area having the modal value of 0%. Those canopy cover values associated with the project area specifically are displayed above in Table 26. See Table 28 for a direct comparison of values between Alternatives.
Resource Indicator 2d: Canopy bulk density Canopy bulk density is the mass of available canopy fuel per unit canopy volume. Canopy bulk density is a bulk property of a plot, stand, or group of trees, not of an individual tree (crown bulk density; Scott and Reinhardt 2007). Canopy bulk density is the primary controlling factor of crown fire behavior (Graham et al. 1999). It is used to predict whether an active (sustained, not just torching as in passive crown fire) crown fire is possible. In north-central Washington, Jim Agee (1996) found that crown fire wasn’t sustained in stands where canopy bulk density was less than 0.100 kg/m3. In FlamMap, canopy bulk density is used to determine threshold values for active crown fire, which spreads much faster than a surface fire.
GNN live tree data from 2012 was input into FVS at a 30 m2 scale. Canopy characteristics, including canopy bulk density, were computed for 2014 to approximate current conditions. For those areas where no GNN data were available (mostly non-forest areas), LANDFIRE v.1.20 data were used. Canopy bulk density ranges from 0 to 0.35 kg/m3 with 24% of the project area having the modal value of 0 kg/m3. Those canopy bulk density values associated with the project area specifically are displayed above in Table 26.. See Table 30. for a direct comparison of values between Alternatives.
Resource Indicator 2e: Fuel model Fuel models are simple descriptions of complex fuel conditions that can be used to provide context. They provide inputs needed by the Rothermel (1972) surface rate of spread equation. The set of fuelbed inputs specified in a fire behavior fuel model include: fuel load by size class and category (live or dead), surface- area-to-volume ratio by size class and component, heat content by fuel category, fuelbed depth, and dead
73
Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
fuel moisture of extinction. Weise and Wright (2014) highlight the fact that fuel models do not include a full accounting of all fuel particles present in a fuelbed:
1) Fuel particles not involved in flaming combustion and surface fire spread, such as large woody material, ground fuels, and tree canopies, which can be a substantial fraction of the total fuel loading and fuel consumed during combustion, are not included in fire behavior fuel model descriptions. 2) Fuel models are general representations of fuelbeds based on expected fire behavior and do not necessarily correspond to actual measured fuel characteristics.
GNN live tree data from 2012 was input into FVS at a 30 m2 scale. Standard Fire Behavior Fuel Models (Scott and Burgan 2005) were computed for 2014 to approximate current conditions. Fuel models for much of the area did not seem to reflect current conditions so LANDFIRE v.1.20 data were largely used. These LANDFIRE data represent 2008 conditions so NAIP imagery and field reconnaissance were used to verify conditions. Those areas where LANDFIRE v. 1.20 data did not reflect current conditions (at a broad scale i.e., tens of acres) were manually assigned fuel models. The predominant (about 90% of the project area) fuel model descriptors associated with the project area specifically are displayed above in
74 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 27.
Resource Indicator 3a: Flame length Flame length is an important measure of fire behavior as it is an observable characteristic of fire behavior that can be directly related to fireline intensity (Agee 1996; Andrews and Rothermel 1982), which in turn influences crown fire initiation (Agee 1996). FlamMap computations of crown fire are dependent on surface fire intensity and crown characteristics. Flame length is also important to fire managers as it can be used to determine suppression capabilities (Andrews and Rothermel 1982). Direct suppression from hand crews is generally considered feasible when flame lengths are less than four feet and by equipment when flame lengths are less than eight feet.
FlamMap v. 5.0.1.3 was utilized to simulate flame length in the AOI associated with the CMH project area. Weather and fuel moisture parameters were held constant at the 90-97th percentile conditions (see Table 25 for values). Those flame length values associated with the project area specifically are displayed above in Table 26.. To review an example, consider the last flame length entry. Thirty-one percent of the project area experiences flame lengths >40 ft. during the simulated fire. See Table 30. for a direct comparison of values between Alternatives.
Resource Indicator 3b: Rate of spread Surface rate of spread reflects the forward rate of spread at the head of a surface fire (at the ground surface i.e., not spreading in the overstory canopy nor smoldering in the duff layer). Rate of spread is directly influenced by effective wind speed (that which is physically driving spread, not necessarily the same as the commonly referred to “20-ft.” wind speed or wind speed at 20 feet above the vegetation layer) and abundance and continuity of fine fuels (generally <3” diameter). Under a simulation scenario, rate of spread and burn duration govern fire size.
FlamMap v. 5.0.1.3 was utilized to simulate rate of spread in the AOI associated with the CMH project area. Weather and fuel moisture parameters were held constant at the 90-97th percentile conditions (see Table 25. for values). Those rate of spread values associated with the project area specifically are displayed above in Table 26.. To review an example, consider the last rate of spread entry. Six percent of the project area experiences rate of spread >100 chains per hour (1 chain equals 66 ft., a common unit of measure in forestry and fire disciplines) under the simulated fire. It is evident that low density, open stands with contiguous fine fuels has the highest rate of spread values. See Table 30. for a direct comparison of values between Alternatives.
Resource Indicator 3c: Crown fire activity Model results indicate that given the current fire hazard under 90-97th percentile weather conditions, active crown fire would be expected to occur in approximately 22% of the area, passive crown fire in about 26% of the area, and about 51% of the area would experience a surface fire. Scott and Reinhardt (2007) describe crown fire as follows: Active crown fire indicates one in which the entire fuel complex is involved in flame, but the crowning phase remains dependent on heat released from surface fuel for continued spread. An active crown fire may also be called a running crown fire or continuous crown fire. An active crown fire presents a solid wall of flame from the surface through the canopy fuel layers where flames appear to emanate from the canopy as a whole rather than from individual trees within the canopy. Active crown fire is one of several types of crown fire and is contrasted with passive crown fires which are less vigorous types of crown fire that do not emit continuous, solid flames from the canopy. See Figure 28. below for a diagram of crown fire adapted from FlamMap 5.0.
To reiterate, it is estimated approximately one-quarter of the project area can reasonably be expected to express active crown fire behavior and about one-quarter of the project area can be expected to manifest passive crown fire behavior under summer weather conditions. Active crown fire behavior would result
75 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
in stand replacement in the majority or entire stand. Although these fire behavior estimates show a considerable area is at risk for high intensity fire behavior, they are probably conservative estimates. These estimates of fire behavior are considered conservative because FlamMap fire behavior calculations are independent, that is, calculated fire intensity in one stand does not augment intensity in a neighboring stand. This ignores the momentum of fire behavior where high intensity may carry over from one area to another. These estimates are also considered conservative because the weather conditions are meant to reflect the 20-year average of hot summer days and not the extreme conditions that may occur. One must consider that models simplify reality and will not fully reflect reality. Although this modeled fire behavior may underestimate the potential fire behavior, it helps to identify areas where the relative highest potential for crown fire behavior exists. See Table 30. for a direct comparison of values between Alternatives.
Low wind speed, low Higher wind speed, high Very high wind speed, very high Canopy Bulk Density & Canopy Bulk Density & Canopy Bulk Density & Canopy Cover, low Canopy Base Canopy Cover, low Canopy Cover Height Base Height Figure 28. Types of wind driven crown fire (adapted from FlamMap 5.0)
Desired Condition The desired future condition for the project area is one of a variety of stand structures and composition, including non-forest areas, whose location and abundance benefit a variety of flora and fauna. In a large proportion of forested stands in particular, maintaining vigorous stands with a significant large diameter tree component of fire- and drought-resilient species would be desirable. In many stands, white fir would continue to be represented in all strata, but at much lower proportions. Many stands would be open and park-like, with spatially irregular concentrations of seedlings and saplings. Others would be of a more closed canopy with multiple tree strata. Shrubs may persist in understories and in openings, but their stature and continuity would be checked by frequent low intensity fire throughout much of the project area. Within those open stands described above, a single story of large trees may sound homogeneous, but that structure is the rarest on the Fremont-Winema National Forest, making its existence on the landscape conducive to creating heterogenic conditions on a broad scale. At the stand scale, immediate cultivation of a single story of large trees would not be uniform as it is only immediately possible where those large trees exist and their presence is stochastic by nature. The end state would be such that fire could burn freely with minimal risk of widespread stand replacement. Contiguous patches of high severity fire would still occur, but only on a small fraction of the landscape. The goal of restorative management in the CMH project is not to mimic one condition in time, but to reference conditions that are more resilient to disturbance and relatively rapid changes in climate.
76 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Environmental Consequences
Alternative 1 – No Action Alternative 1 would not prescribe any vegetation manipulation. This serves as a basis for comparison to the action alternative, including anticipated future conditions given the current trajectory. As more seedlings are recruited within and adjacent to forested areas and advance regeneration grows, relative density will continue to increase over time. This increase in growth and number of stems will increase canopy cover and canopy bulk density. The canopy base height will decrease as seedlings and advance regeneration are recruited into the mid-story. This trajectory of changes to the canopy will increase the potential for crown fire initiation and propagation. Broad scale crown fire would be contrary to desired conditions as it would result in widespread stand replacement and homogenize conditions to an early seral state for many decades to centuries. An increase in relative density will intensify competition, thereby reducing stand vigor. Reduced vigor will leave trees more susceptible to mortality from pest and pathogen pressures that currently exist within the project area, especially if coupled with sustained drought conditions as was experienced regionally in the 1990s. Rising mortality rates will amplify accumulation of dead fuels. An increase in fine dead fuels could increase surface fire rate of spread, potentially increasing average fire size. Continued dead fuel accumulation could increase flame length, further promoting crown fire establishment, especially when coupled with the trajectory of changes to the canopy. Each of these conditions, alone or cumulatively, will threaten the longevity of individual trees and reduce potential to maintain a large tree component. Amplified fire behavior will escalate suppression complexity and increase resistance to control, potentially putting more people’s lives in danger for longer periods of time.
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action
Direct and Indirect Effects All resource protection and mitigation measures regarding prescribed fire operations would be adhered to as outlined in Chapter 2. These measures are largely standard practice for prescribed fire operations, address resource protection concerns, and abide by applicable rules and regulations.
Table 28. Resource indicators and measures for Alternative 2 of the Crooked Mud Honey Project Resource Resource Measure Alternative 2 Element Indicator Probability (%) Proportion (%) 1. Conditional <3 53 a. Probability simulated fires Fire Risk Burn 3-5 23 affect a given area 5-8 20 Probability 8-11 2
11-16 2 CH (ft.) Proportion (%) ≤20 14 2. Live Fuel a. Canopy height Fire Hazard 21-40 12 Loading 41-60 24 61-80 31
>80 19 CBH (ft.) Proportion (%) ≤10 36 2. Live Fuel Fire Hazard b. Canopy base height 11-20 16 Loading 21-30 13 31-40 16
>40 19 2. Live Fuel c. Canopy cover CC (%) Proportion (%) Fire Hazard Loading ≤20 59 21-40 29
77 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
41-60 9 61-80 2
>80 <1 CBD (kg/m3) Proportion (%) ≤0.025 67 2. Live Fuel Fire Hazard d. Canopy bulk density 0.025 - 0.05 19 Loading 0.05 - 0.075 5 0.075 - 0.1 4
>0.1 5 2. Live Fuel Fire Hazard e. Fuel model See Table 29: Alt.2 Fuel Model Distribution Loading FL (feet) Proportion (%) ≤5 78 3. Fire Fire Hazard a. Flame length 6-10 12 Behavior 11-20 3 21-40 2
>40 5 ROS (chains/hr.) Proportion (%) ≤10 53 3. Fire b. Rate of spread Fire Hazard 11-20 18 Behavior 21-50 15 51-100 8
>100 6 CFA Proportion (%) 3. Fire No Fire <1 Fire Hazard c. Crown fire activity Behavior Surface Fire 84 Passive Crown Fire 13
Active Crown Fire 3
78 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 29. Alt. 2 Standard Fire Behavior Fuel Model distribution (97%) of the Crooked Mud Honey Project Area Fuel Model Fuel Model Proportion Fuel Model Description Number Code (%) Shrub. Low shrub load, fuelbed depth about 1 foot; some grass may be 141 SH1 50 present. Spread rate very low; flame length very low.
Timber Understory. Fuelbed is low load of grass and/or shrub with litter. 161 TU1 21 Spread rate low; flame length low.
Grass-shrub. Shrubs are 1 to 3 feet high, moderate grass load. Spread 122 GS2 8 rate high; flame length moderate.
Shrub. Moderate fuel load (higher than SH1), depth about 1 foot, no 142 SH2 5 grass fuel present. Spread rate low; flame length low.
Grass. Moderately coarse continuous grass, average depth about 1 102 GR2 5 foot. Spread rate high; flame length moderate.
Grass-shrub. Shrubs are about 1 foot high, low grass load. Spread rate 121 GS1 3 moderate; flame length low.
Timber Understory. Fuelbed is high load conifer litter with shrub 165 TU5 3 understory. Spread rate moderate; flame length moderate. Timber Litter. Moderate load, includes small diameter downed logs. 183-4 TL3-4 <2 Spread rate low; flame length low.
Resource Indicator 1a: Probability simulated fires will affect a given area A landscape file consisting of post-treatment canopy, fuels, and topographic inputs was created as described in the Methodology section. Those burn probability values associated with the project area specifically are displayed above in Table 28.
Direct effects of the proposed action are associated with live and dead fuel load metrics and are discussed under the appropriate Resource Indicator sections. Only indirect effects are discussed regarding burn probability as the proposed action is not meant to prevent wildfire, instead it is designed in part to reduce potential for undesirable effects from wildfire.
Alternative 2 conditions indicate a more than 300% difference in the lowest burn probability category; that is, the proportional area of low burn probability is more than three times greater under Alternative 2. This demonstrates effectiveness of the landscape pattern in retarding the growth of large fires under the Alternative 2 scenario. Desirable effects are reinforced further by a relative reduction in area associated with the higher burn probability categories. Notice those areas of higher burn probability under Alternative 2 are associated with the project boundary and/or largely untreated areas (Drake-McDowell IRA). This is due to contagion from those lands outside of the project area (and/or untreated) having a higher burn probability.
Resource Indicator 2a: Canopy height Canopy characteristics, including canopy height, were computed for post-treatment conditions. Those canopy height values associated with the project area specifically are displayed above in Table 28.
Canopy height is used in part for determining canopy fuel loading and the starting height for lofting embers for spot fire calculations. Canopy height could be directly affected by thinning from below and prescribed fire, leaving fewer short trees and relatively more tall trees. Proportional area of average canopy height is similar between Alternatives. Given the similarity in proportional area of average canopy height, the relative difference is neutral.
79 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Resource Indicator 2b: Canopy base height Canopy characteristics, including canopy base height, were computed for post-treatment conditions. Those average canopy base height values associated with the project area specifically are displayed above in Table 28.
Canopy base height indicates the average height above the ground above which there is sufficient canopy fuel to propagate fire vertically (Scott and Reinhardt 2007). Low canopy base height (including ladder fuels) facilitates ignition of the crown fuels by the surface fire and then, transition to some form of crown fire (passive or active). Direct effects of the proposed action include a shift in proportional area from low canopy base heights under Alternative 1 conditions to high canopy base heights under Alternative 2 post- treatment conditions. The proportional area of the highest canopy base heights is nearly ten times greater under Alternative 2 conditions. An indirect effect of higher canopy base height is a reduction in potential for crown fire initiation (see Resource Indicator 3c). There is an increase in area with 0’ canopy base height as noted above. This is most attributable to removal of encroaching conifers from grass and shrub systems. Even though a shrub canopy could persist, FlamMap considers these conditions (very open canopy or no trees) as having no canopy base (rather than the alternative of average conditions consisting of live crowns down to the ground i.e., 100% live crown ratio).
Resource Indicator 2c: Canopy cover Canopy characteristics, including canopy cover, were computed for post-treatment conditions. Those canopy cover values associated with the project area specifically are displayed above in Table 28.
Canopy cover is the fraction of ground area covered by the vertical projection of tree crown perimeters (Scott and Reinhardt 2007). Direct effects of the proposed action include a shift in proportional area from high canopy cover under Alternative 1 conditions to lower canopy cover under Alternative 2 post- treatment conditions. The proportional area of the lowest canopy cover category is nearly 2.5 times greater under Alternative 2 conditions. One indirect effect of reduced canopy cover is potential for a more robust understory response due to more available light. Another indirect effect of reduced canopy cover is potentially higher eye-level wind speeds and greater solar radiation, thereby reducing dead fuel moisture content. Higher eye-level wind speeds could increase a fire’s surface rate of spread, especially when coupled with more herbaceous vegetation and drier fuels. Although these more open conditions may increase surface rate of spread, they help meet desired future conditions regarding forest structure.
Resource Indicator 2d: Canopy bulk density Canopy characteristics, including canopy bulk density, were computed for post-treatment conditions. The increase in area with 0 kg/m3 of canopy bulk density can be attributed to removal of encroaching conifers into grass and shrub systems as well as to calculation losses due to use of different significant digits. To clarify, some canopy values were likely greater than zero, but so low that the values were truncated after converting values from FVS outputs for use in FlamMap. This is insignificant however, as the area associated with such values was placed in the proper category (<0.025 kg/m3). Those canopy bulk density values associated with the project area specifically are displayed above in Table 28.
Direct effects of the proposed action include a shift in proportional area from high canopy bulk density under Alternative 1 conditions to lower canopy bulk density under Alternative 2 post-treatment conditions. The proportional area of the highest canopy bulk density category is one sixth of Alternative 1 conditions (30% of the area having canopy bulk density >0.100 kg/m3 to a mere 5% of the area in said category). This is very important as that category is directly related to Agee’s (1996) findings of a breakpoint canopy bulk density of 0.100 kg/m3. The most notable indirect effect of canopy bulk density reduction to <0.100 kg/m3 is a shift in active crown fire potential. Given the Alternative 2 canopy bulk density conditions, there should be active crown fire in no more than 5% of the project area under simulated conditions (see Resource Indicator 3c).
80 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Resource Indicator 2e: Fuel model Standard Fire Behavior Fuel Models (Scott and Burgan 2005) were computed for post-treatment conditions. The predominant (about 97% of the project area) fuel model descriptors associated with the project area specifically are displayed above in Table 28.
Direct effects of the proposed action include all the changes in canopy characteristics as described in Resource Indicators 2a-e. An indirect effect is a shift in proportional area from Timber Litter and other fuel models whose associated fire behavior includes moderate to high rates of spread and flame lengths, to fuel models whose associated fire behavior includes rates of spread and flame lengths that are largely low to moderate under Alternative 2 post-treatment conditions.
Resource Indicator 3a: Flame length A landscape file consisting of post-treatment canopy, fuels, and topographic inputs was created as described in the Methodology section. Those flame length values associated with the project area specifically are displayed above in Table 28.
Direct effects of the proposed action include all the changes in canopy characteristics as described in Resource Indicators 2a-e. An indirect effect is a shift in proportional area from higher flame length categories under Alternative 1 conditions to a vast majority (78%) occurring in the lowest (≤5’) flame length category under Alternative 2 post-treatment conditions. This is important to future fire suppression efforts as these flame lengths indicate use of direct attack by hand crews as a potentially viable option. Conversely, the proportional area associated with flame lengths greater than five feet is approximately one-third of Alternative 1 conditions.
Resource Indicator 3b: Rate of spread A landscape file consisting of post-treatment canopy, fuels, and topographic inputs was created as described in the Methodology section. Those rates of spread values associated with the project area specifically are displayed above in Table 28.
Direct effects of the proposed action include all the changes in canopy characteristics as described in Resource Indicators 2a-e. An indirect effect is a major decrease in proportional area in the 51-100 ch/hr. category (37% to 8%) and increase in the lowest (≤10 ch/hr.) category from 28% under Alternative 1 conditions to 53% under Alternative 2 post-treatment conditions. A marked decrease in fire size should be noticed as a result (in part; see Resource Indicator 1a).
Resource Indicator 3c: Crown fire activity A landscape file consisting of post-treatment canopy, fuels, and topographic inputs was created as described in the Methodology section. Crown fire activity associated with the project area specifically is displayed above in Table 28.
Direct effects of the proposed action include all the changes in canopy characteristics as described in Resource Indicators 2a-e. An indirect effect of the proposed action is a marked shift in proportional area from active and passive crown fire under Alternative 1 conditions to surface fire under Alternative 2 post- treatment conditions. The proportional area of active crown fire is a mere ten percent of Alternative 1 conditions. Conversely, proportional area of surface fire under Alternative 2 post-treatment conditions is 25 percent greater than Alternative 1 conditions. To reiterate, it is estimated that over three-quarters of the project area could express surface fire behavior and about three percent of the project area could manifest active crown fire behavior under summer weather conditions.
These fire behavior values are not meant to predict actual fire behavior, rather they are meant to demonstrate relative differences in potential fire behavior for comparative purposes. Each of the
81 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Resource Indicators support attainment of purpose and need under Alternative 2 by reducing stand density and reducing fire hazard.
Cumulative Effects
Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis The spatial boundaries for analyzing the cumulative effects to fuels consist of the entire CMH project area and extend west to Highway 395 and south to Highway 140 because effects to the fuel complex are realized on a relatively broad scale when assessing fire behavior and extent. This boundary essentially defines the forested vegetation in the area, where those lands to the north and east are largely non-forested and the highways provide a logical break in boundary. The short-term temporal boundary of the proposed action is 25 years because it is assumed that the full suite of actions may not be realized for ten years and 15 years is the generally accepted lifetime (regarding effects to fire behavior/ extent) of mechanical and/ or prescribed fire fuel reduction activities in this area (10+15 = 25). The long-term temporal boundary could extend 100 years or more because maintenance treatments, although not explicitly part of the proposed action for this timeline, would ideally extend the lifetime of these initial treatments and high severity effects from wildfire tend to persist on this timescale in dry ecosystems i.e., minimum time until mature forest exists.
Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Activities Relevant to Cumulative Effects Analysis Past, ongoing, and reasonably foreseeable activities relevant to fuels and fire management are those that change quantities or conditions of live and dead vegetation. Past relevant disturbance/ activities include Bull Stewardship Project, the 2004 Grassy Fire and subsequent salvage harvest, North Warner Sage Shrub Project and lodgepole and whitebark pine mortality due to mountain pine beetle infestation. Bull Stewardship consisted of thinning commercial and non-commercial sized timber on approximately 1,369 acres, including some aspen stand improvement. All of these activities occurred within the CMH project area. The Grassy Fire burned approximately 4,202 acres, 1,436 of which were within the CMH project area. The Grassy Salvage activities logged approximately 587 acres and subsequently planted ponderosa pine in 2007 on 762 acres, all within the CMH area. The most recent activities have been the result of the North Warner Sage Shrub Project with thinning and pile burning occurring from 2009 to 2014. In this project about 3,215 acres were treated by cutting juniper and other small conifers. On Abert Rim and Drake Peak, widespread overstory mortality has occurred in whitebark pine due to infestation by the mountain pine beetle over the past decade. On Drake Peak, the mountain pine beetle populations were first detected around 2002 and grew to their highest level around 2008, declining thereafter and practically disappearing in 2012. Whitebark pine on Abert Rim had a similar history. Although the intensity of overstory mortality has been severe, there are some surviving smaller trees and seedlings can be found in some areas. Throughout the planning area, pronounced lodgepole pine mortality has occurred due to mountain pine beetle. Beetle populations grew every year beginning around 2001, and began to drop off in 2010, leaving most of the affected stands with very few surviving trees. Currently, area experts believe that the mountain pine beetle outbreak in lodgepole and whitebark pine hosts has run its course and vulnerable stands have already been affected to their maximum potential.
The direct and indirect effects of these past disturbances/ activities were accounted for and assessed for the existing condition and proposed action. That is, forest structure, density and composition were adjusted to approximately reflect these disturbances for the FlamMap simulations. As a result, there are no changes to Resource Indicator measures for either Alternative.
Ongoing and reasonably foreseeable activities include livestock grazing and recreation (dispersed camping, hunting) more or less throughout project area and road maintenance and firewood removal in designated areas outside of the Drake-McDowell IRA. Aggressive fire suppression efforts are likely to
82 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
continue, especially where high-investment timber areas such as seed orchards, plantations and progeny test sites occur as per the Fremont LRMP.
Direct and indirect effects of road maintenance, livestock grazing, firewood cutting and recreation are not expected to affect fuel levels or fire behavior to any measurable degree beyond a very fine scale and would not combine cumulatively with project effects. Fire suppression is dependent upon a start. As such, anticipating cumulative effects is too speculative for this analysis. There are no changes to Resource Indicator measures for either Alternative based on cumulative effects from present and reasonably foreseeable activities.
Compliance with LRMP and Other Relevant Laws, Regulations, Policies and Plans Alternatives 1 and 2 both comply with relevant laws, regulations, policies and plans. Alternative 2 would require adherence to additional rules and regulations regarding smoke management as disclosed in Chapter 2. Alternative 2 attempts to address hazardous fuels reduction recommendations as per the LRMP, Long-Range Strategy, Lake County CWPP and National Fire Plan where Alternative 1, by default, makes no attempt at addressing these management recommendations.
Summary The passive management approach prescribed by Alternative 1 would comply with Fremont LRMP Standards and Guidelines, Federal, State, and Local law. This management approach would not address management recommendations of the National Fire Plan, Long-Range Strategy or the Lake County CWPP. Purpose and need would not be addressed. The status quo of dense forest and heavy fuel loading will persist until reset by a major disturbance. Relatively high potential for uncharacteristically intense, severe, relatively large wildfires will continue.
The active management approach prescribed by Alternative 2 would comply with Fremont LRMP Standards and Guidelines, Federal, State, and Local law. This management approach would address management recommendations of the LRMP, National Fire Plan, Long-Range Strategy and the Lake County CWPP. Purpose and need would be addressed by reducing fire hazard. Specifically, increasing canopy base height and decreasing canopy cover and canopy bulk density would reduce the potential for crown fire initiation and propagation. Reducing stand density and fuel loading through low thinning and prescribed burning would change fire behavior such that potential for active and passive crown fire is relegated to a small fraction of the landscape. In comparison, passive and active crown fire potential (under simulated conditions) exists on about half of the landscape given current conditions and the same crown fire potential only occurs on one-fifth of the landscape after completion of treatments prescribed by Alternative 2.
83 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Air Quality The purpose of this air quality and smoke management analysis is to assess the impacts the proposed actions would have on air quality in and around the project area. Short and long term effects will be assessed using computer simulations. All activities associated with prescribed burning (understory, jackpot and pile burning) are included in this analysis due to smoke produced by such activities. No other proposed action activities are addressed here due to lack of smoke production. Prescribed fire is directly related to the purpose and need by way of reducing fire hazard by treating the fuel complex and aiding natural functions by reintroducing fire on the landscape.
The CMH Project area is within 4 air miles of the town of Lakeview, Oregon, a smoke sensitive receptor area (SSRA). There is also a Class I Area, the Gearhart Mountain Wilderness on the Bly Ranger District within 30 air miles of the planning area. These areas both require mandatory compliance with the Oregon Smoke Management Plan (477.013). This project would comply with the requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act and be conducted in accordance with the operational guidelines agreed to by the USDA Forest Service and the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. All burning operations will be conducted with coordination from the Oregon Department of Forestry and their smoke management forecaster. Burns must be registered in advance and smoke guidelines followed.
Affected Environment Current regulations require compliance with the Oregon Smoke Management Plan and its objectives to meet National and State air quality standards for particulate matter, PM10 and PM2.5. Particulate matter is of concern for human health during a wildland fire (prescribed or wild). PM10 and PM2.5 refer to two different size classes of particulate matter that include both extremely small particles and liquid droplets found in the air. PM10 refers to particulate matter 10 microns in diameter and smaller, whereas PM2.5 refers to particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter and smaller (DEQ online). According to the Clean Air Act of 1970, the EPA is required to set National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for specific pollutants. The standard for PM10 over a 24 hour period is less than 150µg/m3 and is not to be exceeded more than once per year on average of over 3 years. The standard for PM2.5 is less than 35µg/m3 over a 24 hour period and must be less than the 98th percentile averaged out over 3 years.
Desired Condition For the purpose of maintaining air quality, the State Forester and the Department of Environmental Quality approved the Oregon Smoke Management Plan (477.013). The objectives of the Oregon Smoke Management Plan are to: A. Prevent smoke resulting from prescribed burning on forestlands from being carried to or accumulating in smoke sensitive receptor areas or other areas sensitive to smoke, and to provide maximum opportunity for essential forestland burning while minimizing emissions; B. Coordinate with other state smoke management programs; C. Comply with state and federal air quality and visibility requirements; D. Protect public health; and E. Promote the reduction of emissions by encouraging cost effective utilization of forestland biomass, alternatives to burning, and alternative burning practices.
84 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Environmental Consequences
Methodology Smoke emission estimates (PM10 and PM2.5) were generated using the Fire and Fuels Extension (FFE; Rebain 2013) to the Forest Vegetation Simulator (FVS; Suppose v. 2.02 – Southern Oregon Variant; Dixon 2012). The Fire and Fuels Extension to FVS is a computer based model that, among many things, can estimate particulate matter emissions from a wide range of wildland fire scenarios. All smoke outputs are based on prescribed activities for Alternative 2 and compared to smoke outputs from simulated wildfire under future conditions for each alternative. Burning of landing piles associated with unmerchantable material directly attributable to commercial harvesting (Alternative 2) was not simulated due to this being a tentative action and material abundance being highly variable and dependent upon site specific conditions. See Table 30 for fuel moisture and weather parameters by fire type.
Table 30. Fuel moisture and weather parameters for simulated fires Variable Description Fire Scenario Wildfire Understory Burn 1-hr. Moisture content (%) of dead surface fuel <0.25” diameter 2 12 10-hr. Moisture content (%) of dead surface fuel 0.25-1.00” dia. 2 12 100-hr. Moisture content (%) of dead surface fuel 1.01-3.00” dia. 4 14 1,000-hr. Moisture content (%) of dead surface fuel >3.00” diameter 6 25 Duff Moisture content (%) of duff (decomposed organic matter) 12 125 Live Woody Moisture content (%) of live woody material 60 80 Herb Moisture content (%) of herbaceous material 3 30 20-ft. wind Wind speed (m.p.h.) at 20’ above average vegetation height 21 6 Air temp. Air temperature (°F ) during fire 90 60 FFE does not use fuel moisture and weather inputs for simulating effects of pile burning.
Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis Smoke and emissions from prescribed burning could travel as far as Lakeview, OR, Klamath Falls, OR, or the Class 1 Area of the Gearhart Mountain Wilderness. For the purpose of this project, activities associated with each alternative were modeled over a ten-year period, culminating with a simulated wildfire. The spatial extent consists of those areas within the CMH project where existing live tree data are available. This is due to tree data being required to run FVS. Although a subset of the project area, all outputs are provided in tons per acre and can be extrapolated to an appropriate extent e.g., acres of treatment or wildfire. A ten-year period was chosen as this is a reasonable timeframe for initial activities.
Alternative 1 – No Action Alternative 1 does not include prescribed fire. This serves as a basis for comparison to the action alternative, including anticipated future conditions given the current trajectory. As more seedlings are recruited within and adjacent to forested areas and advance regeneration grows, relative density will continue to increase over time. This increase in growth and number of stems will increase canopy cover and canopy bulk density. The canopy base height will decrease as seedlings and advance regeneration are recruited into the mid-story. This trajectory of changes to the canopy will increase the potential for crown fire initiation and propagation. Broad scale crown fire would be contrary to desired conditions as it would result in widespread stand replacement and homogenize conditions to an early seral state for many decades to centuries. An increase in relative density will intensify competition, thereby reducing stand vigor. Reduced vigor will leave trees more susceptible to mortality from pest and pathogen pressures that currently exist within the project area, especially if coupled with sustained drought conditions as was experienced regionally in the 1990s. Rising mortality rates will amplify accumulation of dead fuels. An increase in fine dead fuels could increase surface fire rate of spread, potentially increasing average fire
85 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
size. Continued dead fuel accumulation could increase flame length, further promoting crown fire establishment, especially when coupled with the trajectory of changes to the canopy. Each of these conditions, alone or cumulatively, will threaten the longevity of individual trees and reduce potential to maintain a large tree component. Amplified fire behavior will escalate suppression complexity and increase resistance to control, potentially putting more people’s lives in danger for longer periods of time.
Air quality would be unaffected under this alternative until the next wildfire. A wildfire would cause an uncontrolled release of smoke emissions. Air quality and visibility could be negatively impacted for nearby communities, including the Lakeview SSRA and the Gearhart Mountain Wilderness Class I Area. The extent of effects on visibility and human health would be dependent upon weather conditions at the time of the fire and fire size. Estimated wildfire particulate matter emissions are listed in Table 31 for Alternative 1 (current conditions plus ten years). Note that PM10 measurements include PM2.5 so values are not combined for a sum of emissions.
Table 31. Alternative 1 particulate matter metrics by wildfire size Wildfire Size (acres) 50,000 25,000 10,000 1,000 PM10 range <0.01 to 0.56 (T/A) PM10 average 0.15 (T/A) 7,500 tons 3,750 tons 1,500 tons 150 tons PM2.5 range <0.01 to 0.47 (T/A) PM2.5 average 0.13 (T/A) 6,500 tons 3,250 tons 1,300 tons 130 tons
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Prescribed fire activities associated with Alternative 2 include pile, jackpot and/or understory burning. Pile and jackpot burning would likely consist of small diameter conifers thinned during non-commercial treatments. This material would be associated with plantation thinning, Riparian Habitat Conservation Area (RHCA) treatments, removal of encroaching conifers from shrub and meadow systems, and small tree thinning within commercial units. Those treatments associated with conifer encroachment removal would include some larger material up to 21” dbh, particularly juniper in sage steppe areas.
Air quality would be directly affected by activities associated with Alternative 2. Prescribed fire activities associated with Alternative 2 could produce approximately 1,620 tons of particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter. Emission estimates are listed by treatment type in Table 32. Smoke particulate matter produced by a simulated wildfire is also displayed in Table 33 for conditions after the full suite of treatments have been completed.
Table 32. Alternative 2 particulate matter metrics by prescribed fire type Pile burn 24,000 acres Understory burn 42,000 acres PM10 range <0.01 to 0.71 (T/A) PM10 range <0.01 to 0.22 (T/A) PM10 average 0.15 (T/A) 360 tons PM10 average 0.05 (T/A) 1,260 PM2.5 range <0.01 to 0.61 (T/A) PM2.5 range <0.01 to 0.18 (T/A) PM2.5 average 0.13 (T/A) 312 tons PM2.5 average 0.04 (T/A) 1,008 Total 1,620 *Pile burning is assumed to affect 10% of the area, so PM outputs for the area were multiplied by 0.1 **Understory burning is assumed to affect 60% of the area, so PM outputs for the area were multiplied by 0.6
86 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 33. Alternative 2 particulate matter metrics by simulated wildfire size Wildfire Size (acres) 50,000 25,000 10,000 1,000 PM10 range <0.01 to 0.48 (T/A) PM10 average 0.10 (T/A) 5,000 tons 2,500 tons 1,000 tons 100 tons PM2.5 range <0.01 to 0.41 (T/A) PM2.5 average 0.09 (T/A) 4,500 tons 2,250 tons 900 tons 90 tons
As discussed in the fuels report for this project, indirect effects of activities associated with Alternative 2 would change fire behavior such that potential for active and passive crown fire is relegated to a small fraction of the landscape, greatly decreasing potential for relatively large wildfire. Particulate matter emissions are displayed in Table 33 for simulated wildfire conditions after the full suite of treatments prescribed by Alternative 2 have been implemented.
Cumulative Effects
Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis The spatial boundaries for analyzing the cumulative effects to air quality consist are the entire Lakeview Ranger District because smoke travels far and wide and future activities planned by the district are reasonably foreseeable, whereas burning activities associated with other landowners, Regions and Forests would be far too speculative. The temporal boundary of the cumulative effects analysis is 10 years because that is a reasonably foreseeable timeframe for future prescribed fire activities that may be coincident with the proposed activities in time and/ or space.
Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Activities Relevant to Cumulative Effects Analysis Past, ongoing, and reasonably foreseeable activities relevant to air quality are those that produce smoke, dust, or other pollutants in excess of established standards. There are no past activities that would be coincident with the proposed activities in time and space. Ongoing and reasonably foreseeable activities include recreation (dispersed camping, hunting) more or less throughout project area and road maintenance and firewood removal in designated areas outside of the Drake-McDowell IRA. Aggressive fire suppression efforts are likely to continue, especially where high-investment timber areas such as seed orchards, plantations and progeny test sites occur as per the Fremont LRMP.
Direct and indirect effects of road maintenance, firewood cutting and recreation are not expected to affect air quality to a meaningful degree and would not combine cumulatively with project effects. Fire suppression is dependent upon a start. Albeit highly speculative, suppression efforts would likely reduce fire size, thereby reducing particulate matter emitted by said wildfire. Anticipating cumulative effects is too speculative for this analysis. Cumulative effects to air quality would be nominal or too speculative, and temporary in nature.
Reasonably foreseeable prescribed fire activities within Lakeview Ranger District include understory, jackpot and pile burning. Understory burning would include 27,000 acres on West Drews, 10,000 acres on Burnt Willow, 700 acres on Strawberry, and 27,000 acres of maintenance burning on a variety of previously implemented understory burn projects. Jackpot burning would include 1,000 acres on South Warner Aspen and 1,000 acres on North Warner Juniper. Pile burning would include landing piles from 28,500 acres associated with a variety of past commercial harvests. Table 34 displays estimates of particulate matter associated with each prescribed fire activity. Averaged FFE simulated outputs of PM10 and PM2.5 associated with the CMH project area were used for this estimate.
87 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 34. Foreseeable future prescribed fire particulate matter metrics by fire type Activity Area (acres) PM10 (tons/acre) PM2.5 (tons/acre) Understory 64,700 1,941 1,553 Jackpot 2,000 90 78 Pile 28,500 428 371 Total 2,459 2002 *Understory burning is assumed to affect 60% of the area, so PM outputs for the area were multiplied by 0.6 **Jackpot burning is assumed to affect 30% of the area. Pile burn PM estimates were used and multiplied by 0.3 for the area ***Pile burning is assumed to affect 10% of the area, so PM outputs for the area were multiplied by 0.1
In consideration of cumulative effects, only 50% of estimated emissions from pile burning and 25% of estimated emissions from understory burning associated with the CMH project are added to those emissions from reasonably foreseeable activities. This is because prescribed burning is last in the order of treatments and it is assumed that only a portion of the area could be treated within the cumulative effects temporal boundary. See Table 35 for combined emissions estimates. Cumulative emissions from the proposed action and reasonably foreseeable activities would be similar to a wildfire of approximately 20,000 acres under the no action conditions, or 2,000 acres per year for 10 years (compare Tables 31 and 35). Should a wildfire occur after proposed treatments have been implemented, potential for a large wildfire would be relatively low and wildfire emissions from a post-treatment landscape could be expected to be 33% less than wildfire emissions from an untreated landscape (Table 36). Considering a smaller fire with fewer emissions per acre, the extent of effects on visibility and human health would likely be far less under the Alternative 2 scenario.
Table 35. Cumulative prescribed fire metrics for Alternative 2 and foreseeable activities Activity Area (acres) PM10 (tons/acre) PM2.5 (tons/acre) Understory 75,200 2,256 1,805 Jackpot 2,000 90 78 Pile 40,500 608 527 Total 2,954 2,410
Table 36. Comparison of wildfire particulate matter emissions by Alternative Emissions 50,000 25,000 10,000 1,000 Wildfire Scenario (average tons/acre) (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) Untreated Landscape (Alt. 1) PM10 7,500 tons 3,750 tons 1,500 tons 150 tons Treated Landscape (Alt. 2) PM10 5,000 tons 2,500 tons 1,000 tons 100 tons Difference 33%
Summary The passive management approach prescribed by Alternative 1 would comply with Fremont LRMP Standards and Guidelines, Federal, State, and Local law. This management approach would not address management recommendations of the National Fire Plan nor the LFSU Long-Range Strategy. Purpose and need would not be addressed. The status quo of dense forest and heavy fuel loading will persist until reset by a major disturbance. High potential for uncharacteristically intense, severe, relatively large wildfires will continue. When reviewing potential wildfire emissions from Alternative 1, one should consider the relatively higher potential for a large wildfire. The extent of effects on visibility and human health would likely be greater than effects from prescribed fire, which is inherently managed to minimize effects to air quality and comply with the Oregon Smoke Management Plan. The active management approach prescribed by Alternative 2 would comply with Fremont LRMP Standards and Guidelines, Federal, State, and Local law. This management approach would address
88 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project management recommendations of the National Fire Plan and the LFSU Long-Range Strategy. Purpose and need would be addressed by reducing fire hazard. Specifically, increasing canopy base height and decreasing canopy cover and canopy bulk density would reduce the potential for crown fire initiation and propagation. Reducing stand density and fuel loading through low thinning and prescribed burning would change fire behavior such that potential for active and passive crown fire is relegated to a small fraction of the landscape. In comparison, passive and active crown fire potential (under simulated conditions) exists on about half of the landscape given current conditions and the same crown fire potential only occurs on one-fifth of the landscape after completion of treatments prescribed by Alternative 2 (see Table 7 in the Fuels Report).
One must give consideration to the nature of prescribed burning. Emissions can be controlled by cessation of burning or avoiding certain areas when desirable and prescribed burning would be implemented over a period of fifteen to twenty years (additional five to ten years beyond the cumulative effects temporal boundary). Prescribed fire activities would be coordinated with smoke management specialists in compliance with the Oregon Smoke Management Plan and have clearance from the Oregon Department of Forestry to minimize emissions and impact to the surrounding communities and Class 1 Area. Before any prescribed fire implementation, site specific burn plans are created by fuels specialists and given rigorous review by several personnel including a fire management specialist, line officer and certified silviculturist. The Fremont-Winema National Forest makes every effort to conduct prescribed burning under conditions that create effective mixing and dispersion of smoke to the greatest extent possible. The effects on air quality are experienced over a few days to few weeks while conditions are favorable and would be dispersed over a period of years. Wildfire effects to air quality are realized over a few days to months and only comparable when comparing a single (or few small) wildfire(s) to effects from years of prescribed fire. Consider a hypothetical ten-year scenario where a 10,000 acre wildfire occurs each 5 years and understory burning of 4,000 acres occurs each year (Figure 29). The differences in cumulative emissions are staggering.
10000 Hypothetical 10-year Cumulative Emissions by Fire 9000 Type 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000
PM10 Emissions acre) per (tons Emissions PM10 1000 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 5 Year 10
Wildfire Prescribed Fire
Figure 29. Hypothetical 10-year Cumulative Emissions by Fire Type
89 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Wildlife This analysis will focus on wildlife and key habitat requirements and potential effects of the proposed action for those species found within the project area. Primary concerns with regards to effects from integrated restoration activities on wildlife habitat are retention of snags and decadent trees, mosaic of seral stages, and potential disturbance to wildlife during harvesting and prescribed burning activities. Specific design features and limited operating periods (LOPs) have been incorporated in the proposed action to minimize impacts to species and their habitat.
Methodology The quantity and quality of wildlife habitat was assessed using a Geographic Information System (GIS), district records, and field reviews. The best available information on species and habitats was used to assess potential impacts of proposed actions to potential habitats. Vegetation information used in habitat evaluation was obtained from the project silviculturist, GIS databases, Management Indicator Species (MIS) Analysis and field visits. The best available science was used to determine effects to wildlife species and their habitats.
The MIS analysis was conducted using the Viable Ecosystems Model (VEM). This is a coarse scale habitat analysis that examines vegetation within the parameters of species requirements. VEM was used to determine the green tree component of habitat and formed the basis of acres of suitable habitat for Forest Sensitive and Management Indicator Species. VEM was developed to classify vegetation on a landscape basis. The model provides a process to apply ecosystem management concepts to project level planning. This system compares existing vegetation with site potential. VEM focuses on relationships between combinations of vegetation structure and species composition, and habitat requirements for wildlife. VEM is a useful tool for cumulative effects analysis of broad scale changes in vegetation at a project scale to Forest-wide scale and subsequent changes in habitat available for wildlife.
The scale of analysis for direct, indirect, and cumulative effects to wildlife is the CMH Project Area (approximately 51,525 acres) identified on the project planning area map, with one exception. Snags and down wood are assessed at the broader watershed scale using data collected on National Forest system land. Three time frames were considered for direct, indirect, and cumulative effects to wildlife within the CMH project area and are short-term (within 10 years), and long-term (more than 50 years). These spatial and temporal scales are appropriate given the parameters of the proposed activities and the duration of potential effects to all wildlife species addressed in this report.
The geographic boundary for analyzing cumulative effects is the CMH project area, including all National Forest System lands and private lands. Potential cumulative effects will be analyzed for a 25 year timeframe because the effect of dry forest restoration treatments is expected to last about 25 years. After 25 years, stand structure is expected to change due to tree growth which would lead to changed habitat conditions.
Goshawk Habitat/Habitat Models Local and Regional habitat models both indicate the CMH project area contains suitable habitat for northern goshawk. Natural Resource Information System (NRIS) data indicated the planning area did not have good historical survey effort.
• Regional modeled northern goshawk habitat identified 31,000 acres. • Local modeled northern goshawk habitat identified 24,000 acres. Local habitat modeling parameters for northern goswawk habitat included: -Conifer stands with mature decadent trees. Stand structure was determined using - GNN data/ PAG PAS Pine associated guide (Veg type)/condition class data.
90 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
-Conifer stands with less than 30% slope. -Conifer stands within 0.25 miles of water. Approximately half of the planning area is suitable northern goshawk habitat based on modeling.
Survey Work in 2013 with limited resources: • CMH field survey effort was completed in one year (2013). • Did not complete a two-year goshawk protocol survey effort. • Did not complete a 100% survey effort across the entire planning area.
Information Sources Northern goshawk surveys were conducted during the 2013 field season. These surveys helped determine occupancy of northern goshawk within the project area. It also enabled the crew to check on occupancy of the bald eagle nest site, aspen stands, meadows, snag densities and other habitat types within the CMH project area. Field reconnaissance within the Drake-McDowell IRA was done during the summer of 2013 and 2014. Within the IRA, informal stand exams were implemented in areas identified for treatment to gather current conifer density in what were historically meadow plant associations.
Other Agencies and Individuals Consulted ODFW Wildlife Biologist The Crooked Mud Honey Project Area falls entirely within the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Warner Wildlife Management Unit (WWMU) for Mule Deer. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife’s current deer management population objective for the WWMU for Mule deer is 5,500 deer. The current estimate of the deer herd as of April 2013 is 3,800 individuals, approximately 70% of management objectives. The buck/doe ratio objective is 25/100 for the North Warner Subunit of the WWMU. As of December 2013, post hunting season, the buck/doe ratio was 29/100. The population has been holding steady to slightly increasing during the last several years (Foster, pers. Comm. 2014).
Incomplete and Unavailable Information The CMH project area was not completely surveyed for wildlife occupancy. The best habitats were selected for survey efforts with limited resources.
Affected Environment The 51,525 acre CMH project area is bounded by HWY 395 to the West, Abert Rim to the north, HWY 140 to the south and Drakes Peak/Warner Valley to the east. The project area is located within four subwatersheds, Lower Crooked Creek, Upper Honey Creek, Upper Crooked Creek, and Mud Creek.
Most of the project area is eastside mixed conifer forest with ponderosa pine, lodgepole pine, juniper and white fir. Elevations range from 5100 - 8335 feet. The CMH project area consists of a range of habitat types including sage steppe, ponderosa pine plantations, large diameter remnant ponderosa pine stands, lodgepole pine stands, white fir and white bark pine stands, meadows, aspen and willow in riparian areas. The majority of these habitat types are in poor condition and restoration is needed. Past timber harvest, bug kill and decades of fire suppression is apparent on the landscape.
Small conifer and juniper encroachment is a primary concern due to fire suppression. Historical fire regimes would reduce this encroachment. Ultimately this would reduce competition and create a mosaic of succession across the landscape. Removing these regimes through fire suppression activities has increased competition and reduced survivability of large conifers, shrubs, forbs and perennial grasses across the landscape.
91 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Many of the roads are in poor condition and will require maintenance prior to logging, hauling, thinning or restoration activities. This unique area provides important wintering/summering habitat for mule deer, sage grouse brooding habitat and numerous species associated with the dry forest ecosystem.
During the 1920’s, large quantities of lumber were removed from the Warner Mountains. With increased human activities and interests, fire suppression also became a common practice. From the 1840’s to 2014, the CMH project area has been shaped by logging, grazing and fire suppression activities.
Federally Listed Species An endangered species is an animal or plant in danger of extinction within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. A threatened species is any species which is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range as defined in the Endangered Species Act. Proposed species are any species of fish, wildlife, or plant that is proposed in the Federal Register to be listed under Section 4 of the Endangered Species Act. Candidate species are those for which sufficient information on biological vulnerability and threats is on file, but issuance of a proposed rule is precluded by higher priority listing actions. As per Forest Service policy, proposed and candidate species are included on the Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species List.
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service January 5, 2015, list of threatened, endangered proposed, and candidate species was reviewed for species that may be present on the Fremont-Winema National Forests and found within or immediately adjacent to the project area.
Species that could potentially be affected by the project (“yes” in Table 37) are addressed in detail in this report. For those species that will not be addressed in detail (“no” in Table 37), Appendix A of the Wildlife Report provides a brief habitat description and an assessment of habitat within the project area. After a review of habitat requirements and existing habitat components, it was determined that there is no habitat within or near the project area for Northern spotted owl, Oregon spotted frog, Columbia spotted frog, or fisher (West Coast DPS) (see Appendix A of the Wildlife Report). Greater sage grouse is included on the R6 Sensitive Species List and is addressed below in the Biological Evaluation for sensitive species.
Table 37: Federally Listed and Candidate Species Species and/or Habitat Common Name Scientific Name Status Present No, Not present on Northern spotted owl Strix occidentalis caurina Threatened Fremont National Forest Yes, See analysis in R6 Greater sage grouse Centrocercus urophasianus Candidate sensitive species section Oregon Spotted Frog Rana pretiosa Threatened No Columbia spotted frog Rana luteiventris Candidate No Fisher - West Coast Distinct Population Segment (DPS) Martes pennanti Proposed No Gray wolf Canus lupus Endangered Yes
Gray Wolf Canus lupus
Existing Condition The federally endangered gray wolf is proposed for delisting in the Eastern part of Oregon. The western distinct population segment (DPS) of the gray wolf population of which Lake County, Oregon is a part is listed under both State and Federal protection. Critical habitat has not been designated for this DPS and no recovery plan for it has been published. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service delisted the Northern
92 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Rocky Mountain DPS, which includes eastern Oregon but not Lake County in 2011 (76 FR 25590 25592). NatureServe (2013) ranks the gray wolf as apparently globally secure to secure (G4/G5) but state critically imperiled to vulnerable (S1/S2). Threats include direct human-caused mortality and possibly habitat loss due to development.
Figure 30 – Location of listed and delisted wolves are delisted under the Endangered Species Act and the Oregon Department of Wildlife endangered species list.
Wolves are habitat generalists, meaning they are able to thrive in a wide variety of environmental conditions and can make use of a variety of different resources. Wolves also live throughout the northern hemisphere. They only require ungulate prey and human-caused mortality rates that are not excessive. Ungulates are the typical prey of wolves, but wolves also readily scavenge. Beaver are among the smallest important prey but wolves can utilize smaller mammals, birds, and fish. Wolf packs defend their territories from other wolves. Territory size is a function of prey density and can range from 25-1,500 square miles. Both male and female wolves disperse at equal rates and equal distances, sometimes >600 miles. Wolves normally breed as yearlings and once a year in February. One to 10 pups [normally ~5] are born 63 days later. Pups normally stay with pack until > 1 year old.
Project Area Current Conditions The nearest known area of known wolf activity is approximately 100-140 miles to the west. See map below of the known wolf activity area identified by Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. The denning area for this known wolf activity area is further west on the Rogue-River Siskiyou National Forest. It is probable that individual wolves may disperse through the project area. The CMH Project Area provides deer and elk, as well as other prey species for wolves year-round.
93 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Figure 31 Area of Known Wolf Activity OR-7 (photo USF&W Service)
Environmental Consequences
Alternative 1 – No Action There would be no direct or indirect effects to wolves if proposed actions were not implemented. Existing habitat conditions, prey base, and potential for wolf/human conflict would not change. Natural processes over the long term such as growth in vegetation would not affect wolf behavior or ability to survive. Therefore, taking no action would have no effect to gray wolf.
94 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Key things to consider when evaluating effects to wolves include direct disturbance, prey availability, and the potential for wolf/human interactions. No den or rendezvous sites have been identified to date within or near the project area; therefore there would be no direct disturbance to wolves. Although the proposed activities would modify deer and elk habitat, this project would not affect deer or elk habitat substantial enough to influence changes in prey populations. Therefore, prey availability in the area is not expected to change as a result of the proposed activities. Public access would not increase as a result of this project area. The proposed vegetation management activities would not affect potential denning or other habitat because wolves are considered a generalist habitat species.
Cumulative Effects Ongoing activities in the area include grazing, recreation and firewood gathering. Public recreation uses generally stem from roads and include hunting, hiking, sightseeing, and camping. As a habitat generalist species, these projects would not impact wolf habitat or prey populations. There would be no direct affect to wolves because they are not known to breed within the project area. Cumulatively the effects of the proposed activities in combination with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions are not expected to have negative impacts to gray wolves or their prey species.
Impact Determination Effects are not expected because the proposed activities would not disturb key wolf areas such as den or rendezvous sites, would not change prey availability, and would not increase public access in the area. In addition, there are no known wolf activity areas identified within the CMH project area. Therefore, this project in combination with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions will have no effect to gray wolf.
Region 6 Sensitive Wildlife Species – Biological Evaluation The Forest Service’s Special Status/Sensitive Species Program (ISSSP) and the Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species List are proactive approaches for meeting the Agency’s obligations under the Endangered Species Act, the National Forest Management Act (NFMA), and National Policy direction as stated in the 2670 section of the Forest Service Manual. The primary objectives of the Sensitive Species program are to ensure species viability and to preclude trends toward endangerment that would result in a need for federal listing. Species identified by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) as proposed or candidate for listing under the ESA are included on the Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species Lists. All terrestrial species on the December 2011 Region 6 Sensitive Species list are addressed below.
Species that could potentially be affected by the project (“yes” in Table 38) will be addressed in full detail in this report. For those species that will not be addressed in full detail (“no” in Table 38), Appendix A of the Wildlife Report provides a brief habitat description and an assessment of habitat within the project area.
95 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 38: R6 Sensitive Wildlife Species List for the Fremont-Winema National Forests Common Name Scientific Name Species and/or Habitat Present Mammals Fisher inside West Coast DPS Martes pennanti No North American Wolverine Gulo gulo luscus Yes, potential dispersal habitat Pygmy rabbit Brachylagus idahoensis No Pallid bat Antrozous pallidus Yes Fringed myotis Myotis thysanodes Yes Townsend’s big-eared bat Corynorhinus townsendii Yes Birds Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Yes, See analysis in MIS species section American peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus No Greater sage grouse Centrocercus urophasianus Yes Horned grebe Podiceps auritus No Red-necked grebe Podiceps grisegena No Bufflehead Bucephala albeola Yes Yellow rail Coturnicops noveboracensis No Upland sandpiper Bartramia longicauda No Tricolored blackbird Agelaius tricolor No Lewis’ woodpecker Melanerpes lewis Yes White-headed woodpecker Picoides albolarvatus Yes Purple martin Progne subis No America white pelican Pelecanus erythrorhynchos No Amphibians and Reptiles Oregon Spotted frog Rana pretiosa No Columbia spotted frog Rana luteiventris No Northern leopard frog Rana boylii No Northwestern pond turtle Clemmys marmorata marmorata No Invertebrates Johnson’s hairstreak Callophrys johnsoni Yes Mardon skipper Polites mardon No Leona’s little blue butterfly Philotiella leona No Gray blue butterfly Plebejus podarce klamathensis No Western bumblebee Bombus occidentalis Yes Chase sideband Monadenia Chaceana No Modoc Rim sideband Monadenia fidelis ssp. nov. No Crater Lake tightcoil Pristiloma arcticum crateris No Siskiyou hesperian Vespericola sierranus No
Mammals North American Wolverine Gulo gulo luscus
Existing Condition The North American wolverine is a threatened species in the State of Oregon. NatureServe (2013) ranks this species as apparently secure globally (G4) but critically imperiled within the state of Oregon (S1). Declines are attributed to fur trapping and habitat loss, fragmentation and degradation.
The North American wolverine is a Holarctic species occupying a wide range of elevations. Historically within North America, this species ranged from the artic islands south through the mountains of California and east to Colorado (NatureServe 2013). Recent surveys indicate wolverines in the continental United States are limited to Idaho, Montana, Wyoming and Washington but there have been several confirmed observations of wolverine in California in the last decade (CDFG 2013, Johnson 2005). The current distribution of wolverine in Oregon is unknown. There were two verified historical (1860-1960)
96 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
records in the central cascades and six records (5 verifiable) between 1961 and 1964 with three sightings in eastern Oregon (Aubry et al. 2007). Local sightings in Oregon have been unconfirmed with varied levels of observer experience. These local detections are recorded in the NRIS database with one such detection in the CMH project area.
Wolverines utilize a variety of habitats, ranging from tundra, taiga, and boreal forest in the northern portion of their range to high elevation mixed conifer forest in the southern portion. In central Idaho, wolverines moved from high-elevation whitebark pine communities in summer to mid-elevation Douglas- fir and lodgepole pine in winter (Copeland et al. 2007). In the Pacific Coast Mountains, wolverines are associated with large expanses of alpine habitat conditions and snow cover that persists through the spring denning season (Schwartz et al. 2007). Deep persistent snow cover in late winter (mid-April to mid-May) may be critical for successful natal dens (Magoun and Copeland 1998; Aubry et al. 2007; Ruggiero et al. 2007). Distribution appears to be closely tied to the availability of food, usually large animals such as elk that are primarily taken as carrion (Banci 1994). Although they are generally considered a high-elevation species they may follow ungulates to lower elevation during winter, when other sources of prey (i.e. marmots, hares, and various rodents) are inactive and largely unavailable (Marshal et al. 1996). Wolverines are known to utilize remote roadless areas and are found almost entirely in areas that have not been developed, extensively modified, or accessed by humans. Wolverines appear not to tolerate land use activities that permanently altered or fragmented the landscape and thus provide human access to habitat (Banci 1994).
Project Area Current Conditions Potential suitable foraging and dispersal habitat is present within the CMH project Area. There are fourteen reported sightings of wolverine in the Fremont-Winema National Forest with one historic sighting within the CMH project Area. This detection occurred in 1998 by a BLM field crew. The wolverine as a habitat generalist is capable of utilizing habitat types in this area. It is possible that wolverines could occur within the proposed project area even though the area does not provide the isolation required for home ranges as identified in the literature (Breen 2000, Buecking 1998). This is due to the habitat modifications range wide, which may cause them to use areas even though they are easily assessable by humans. Although habitat is available, we have not surveyed for and thus do not know if wolverines exist in the CMH project area.
Environmental Consequences
Alternative 1 – No Action This alternative would not have any direct effect on wolverine. In the short term, increased tree mortality due to overstocked stands would provide additional down material potentially increasing foraging habitat. In the long term, loss of the large tree structure and slowed development of future large tree structure will negatively impact desirable wolverine habitat. Most of the project area is fire regime condition class III, indicating the potential for wildfire is high. The potential for loss of large tracts of habitat due to stand replacement wildfire or other disturbance factors increases with the no action alternative.
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action The commercial thinning, non-commercial thinning and fuel reduction treatments would increase human disturbance in the area, and it would modify and remove vegetation that contributes to potential habitat for wolverines. Although this would be moving the vegetation toward historical conditions that are more sustainable, it may negatively affect wolverines and their habitat (Buecking, 1998). Wolverines seem to be most affected by activities that fragment and replace habitat, among other activities, extensive logging and the accompanying access is one such activity (Ruggiero et al 1994).
97 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Prescribed fire treatment would reduce the potential for a stand replacing fire, while at the same time it could reduce existing down wood and stand densities that contribute habitat components. Long term benefits of this type of fire would be the creation of more snags and eventually more downed wood which would benefit wolverine by providing habitat for prey species. Researchers have generally agreed that wolverine “habitat is probably best defined in terms of adequate food supplies in large, sparsely inhabited wilderness areas, rather than in terms of particular types of topography or plant associations” (Kelsall 1981).
Routine maintenance of roads, stream restoration projects (culvert replacements, headcut repairs and streambank stabilization), and spring enhancement would have a short term disturbance impact to wolverine. Temporary roads, landings, and skid trails will be rehabilitated in accordance with BMP’s. Non-forested vegetation restoration treatments removing small conifer and juniper encroachment would also have no impact to wolverine.
Road closures and decommissioning would reduce overall road density in the project area of the North Warners, which would be beneficial to wolverine habitat by reducing the potential for human disturbance and snag loss. This would decrease the potential for localized disturbance to wolverine. The changes to the Motor Vehicle Use Map (MVUM) would have minimal effects to wolverine.
Cumulative Effects The residual impacts of actions that occurred during the past 50 years such as timber harvests, fire suppression, livestock grazing, firewood gathering, road development, wildfires and prescribed fire in the project area have resulted in the distribution of wolverine habitat described in the existing condition. On- going and foreseeable future activities that may impact potential wolverine habitat include livestock grazing, recreation and firewood gathering. These activities are all associated with increased human presence having the potential for disturbance to wolverines. Cumulatively, there would be some short term increase in human presence over what has been the norm for the area, which may lead to different habitat use patterns, but is not likely to have any measurable impact to wolverines or their potential habitat.
Impact Determination Considering all direct, indirect and cumulative effects to wolverine for Alternative 2, this project would not contribute to a negative trend in viability on the Fremont National Forest. The effects of Alternative 2 would not impact any reproductive habitat on the Fremont National Forest. Alternative 2 would reduce road densities, reduce fire risk and promote large conifer retention, all beneficial to wolverine habitat. Therefore, the incremental effects of Alternative 2 to wolverine and wolverine habitat, when added to all of the past, present and reasonably foreseeable actions would be minimal. The CMH Project is consistent with the Forest Plan and continued viability of wolverine is expected on the Fremont National Forest.
Pallid Bat Antrozous pallidus, Fringed Myotis Myotis thysanodes, and Townsend’s Big-eared Bat Corynorhinus townsendii
Existing Condition Pallid bats are found throughout southern and eastern Oregon but are absent from coastal Oregon and higher elevations in the Cascades. This large species roosts in colonies and may use multiple day roosts (Cross and Waldein 1995). Pallid bats use various arid habitat types including open forests, sagebrush, juniper and salt-desert scrub, as well as open, large-diameter ponderosa pine stands (Csuti et al. 2001, Cross and Waldein 1995). More specifically, pallid bats use rock crevices, live trees with deep furrowed bark, cliffs, large diameter snags, abandoned mines, buildings, and bridges for roosting and/or nesting. They hibernate in the winter but little is known about winter locations. Pallid bats are among the few bats
98 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
typically bearing multiple young (two), which are born in May or June. Pallid bats forage on the ground, which is unusual for a bat, and feed on Jerusalem crickets, beetles, grasshoppers, and scorpions, and have even been known to eat lizards and pocket mice. Pallid bats will readily abandon a roost site if disturbed.
Fringed myotis is found throughout western North America. In Oregon it occurs along the coast range, Willamette Valley, southern Cascades, and Blue Mountains. Found in a variety of habitats, the fringe- tailed bat seems to prefer forested or riparian areas (Csuti et al. 2001). It is considered to have a patchy distribution and is rare in the Pacific Northwest. One young is born in late June to mid-July. Maternity colonies may number several hundred individuals. Roosts include caves, mines, rock crevices, tree cavities, conifer snags, bridges, and buildings (Cross and Waldien 1995). Fringe-tailed myotis migrate between summer and winter roosts, but little is known about the type or locations of winter roosts. They eat beetles, moths, crickets, and other insects captured in flight or by gleaning from a surface.
The Townsend’s big-eared bat occurs from southern British Columbia and the western U.S. to southeastern U.S. and southern Mexico. Townsend’s big-eared bats inhabit a wide variety of habitats from old-growth forests to extreme desert. It roosts in buildings, caves, mines, rock crevices, and bridges. One young is born from April to July (Maser et al. 1981). This bat feeds primarily on moths, but will also eat beetles, true bugs, and flies. It captures prey in flight or by gleaning from foliage (Csuti et al. 1997). Big-eared bats hibernate in winter and are not known to migrate long distances. These bats are very intolerant of human disturbance at either winter hibernacula or summer roosts (Csuti et al. 1997). Significant declines in total number of animals and average colony size have been documented.
Project Area Current Conditions Bats have been surveyed at 110 locations throughout the Fremont-Winema with two sample areas within the Crooked Mud Honey Project Area. None of these species were captured during this survey effort within the CMH project area. Potential habitat within the project area includes ponderosa pine, dry mixed conifer, and riparian habitat, particularly those stands that are open with large trees. No cave habitat is known within the project area. Conifer stands are overstocked due to fire suppression in the last decade. Reducing conifer densities and promoting large conifer would provide habitat for these species. The pallid bat, fringe myotis, and Townsend’s big-eared bat has been documented on the Forest (P. Ormsbee, pers. com., 2013). Cross and Kerwin, with Southern Oregon State College, surveyed for bats on the Fremont-Winema National Forest in 1994 and detected these species of bats (1995). There are no observations of pallid bat, fringe myotis, and Townsend’s big-eared bat in the NRIS wildlife database within the CMH project area. There is ample habitat for these bat species in the CMH Project Area and their presence is suspected but unknown.
Environmental Consequences
Alternative 1 – No Action This alternative would not have any direct effect on pallid bat, fringed myotis, and Townsend’s big-eared bats. In the short term, increased tree mortality due to overstocked stands improves pallid bat, fringed myotis, and Townsend’s big-eared bat habitat. In the long term, loss of the large tree structure and slowed development of future large tree structure will negatively impact desirable pallid bat, fringed myotis, and Townsend’s big-eared bat habitat. Most of the project area is fire regime condition class III, indicating the potential for wildfire is high. The potential for loss of large tracts of habitat due to stand replacement wildfire or other disturbance factors increases with the no action alternative.
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Vegetation management treatments within ponderosa pine, dry mixed conifer, and riparian areas would transition dense multi-story stands to open stands with large tree structure which is desirable for these bat
99 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
species. Old trees and large snags would be maintained that provide the highest quality roosting structure, with the exception of incidental snag removal due to safety concerns. Restoration treatments are designed to maintain old trees and to promote large tree development. This would result in an increase in large ponderosa pine, older decadent white fir, and future large snag habitat. Riparian, meadow, and other hardwood restoration would result in an increase in the abundance and diversity of riparian vegetation which provides good foraging habitat for these species. Although some loss of snags and down wood is expected with prescribed burning, small scale torching would result in snag recruitment.
Routine maintenance of roads, stream restoration projects (culvert replacements, headcut repairs and streambank stabilization), and spring enhancement would have no impact to pallid bats, fringed myotis, and Townsend’s big-eared bats. Non-forested vegetation restoration treatments removing small conifer and juniper encroachment would also have no impact to these bat species.
Road closures and decommissioning would reduce overall road density providing an improvement to pallid bat, fringed myotis, and Townsend’s big-eared bat habitat by reducing the potential for human disturbance and snag loss. This would decrease the potential for localized disturbance to pallid bats, fringed myotis, and Townsend’s big-eared bats. The changes to MVUM would have minimal effects to pallid bats, fringed myotis, and Townsend’s big-eared bats.
Cumulative Effects The residual impacts of actions that occurred during the past 50 years such as timber harvests, fire suppression, livestock grazing, firewood gathering, road development, wildfires and prescribed fire in the project area have resulted in the distribution of bat habitat described in the existing condition. On-going and foreseeable future activities that may impact potential bat habitat include livestock grazing, recreation and firewood gathering. These activities are all associated with increased human presence having the potential for disturbance to bats. Cumulatively, there would be some short term increase in human presence over what has been the norm for the area, which may lead to different habitat use patterns, but is not likely to have any measurable impact to bats or their habitat.
Impact Determination Considering all direct, indirect and cumulative effects to pallid bat, fringed myotis, and Townsend’s big- eared bat for Alternative 2, this project would not contribute to a negative trend in viability on the Fremont National Forest. The effects of Alternative 2 would be minimal because snags and large trees would be retained on the landscape. Therefore, the incremental effects of Alternative 2 to pallid bat, fringed myotis, and Townsend’s big-eared bat and their habitat, when added to all of the past, present and reasonably foreseeable actions would be minimal. The CMH Project is consistent with the Forest Plan and continued viability of pallid bat, fringed myotis, and Townsend’s big-eared bat is expected on the Fremont National Forest.
Birds Greater Sage-grouse Centrocercus urophasianus
Existing Condition The Greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) is a candidate for listing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. It is an Oregon Sensitive Species ranked as vulnerable (V) (facing one or more threats to its population. NatureServe (2013) ranks this species as vulnerable globally (G3) and within the state of Oregon (S3). Although the greater sage-grouse is widely distributed and relatively common in the core of its range, that range has contracted significantly and now encompasses about half of the potential pre- settlement distribution. Declines are attributed to loss, fragmentation and degradation of sagebrush
100 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
habitat. Energy development, invasive species, wildfire, grazing management, urbanization, West Nile virus, and infrastructure pose the greatest risk to long-term conservation of sage-grouse (Connelly et al. 2011).
The range of the greater sage-grouse extends from southeast Alberta, Canada south through east-central California and east to western South Dakota. This species is found in eight eastern Oregon Counties including Lake County, Klamath County and Harney County (NatureServe 2013).
Greater sage-grouse are either resident, have separate summer and winter ranges; or have separate breeding (spring), summer, and winter ranges. Migration between these ranges can exceed thirty to forty square miles (Schroeder et al.1999, Connelly et al. 2000). This species requires an extensive mosaic of sagebrush of varying densities and heights throughout the year for security, shade, and forage (Gregg, et al. 1994, Remington and Braun, 1985). In summer, high levels of native grass cover provide areas for nesting and high-protein forbs and insect foods (Barnett and Crawford 1994). Open sites surrounded by sagebrush but adjacent to quality nesting and brood-rearing habitat serve as leks, breeding display grounds for males (Schroeder et al 1999). These leks and nesting sites are typically in the same specific areas in successive years (Fischer et al. 1993). Hens with broods tend to use sagebrush uplands adjacent to nest sites and will move to wetter sites in June and July as spring habitats dry (Connelly et al. 1988; Drut et al, 1994; Dunn, and Braun 1986). This upland habitat for brood-rearing in early spring is critical to brood survival.
Project Area Current Conditions Decades of fire suppression has enabled encroachment of conifers including juniper in sage steppe and non-forested ecosystems. Habitats occupied by sagebrush are declining and becoming increasingly fragmented at an alarming rate because of conifer encroachment, exotic annual grass invasion, and anthropogenic development. This is causing range-wide declines and localized extirpations of sagebrush associated fauna and flora (Davies et al 2011). Within the CMH project boundary, the invasion of post- settlement western juniper is adversely impacting watershed function, wildlife habitat, health of sage steppe habitat, and downstream lands. The east side of the project area provides nesting and brood rearing habitat and the west side of the project area has historical use by greater sage grouse.
On the east side, there have been forty observations of greater sage-grouse and the discovery of twelve leks on or near the vicinity of the Fremont National Forest. Of these twelve leks, only one is near the CMH project area on Bureau of Land Management (BLM) lands approximately one mile north of Vee Lake. During telemetry work a BLM biologist jumped 60-80 greater sage-grouse on the northeast boundary of the CMH project area. This is the only documented sighting of use in the NRIS database. Sage steppe habitat is found within sections of the CMH project area. These areas provide suitable upland habitat for early and late-season brood rearing and possible nesting.
Environmental Consequences
Alternative 1 – No Action This alternative would not have any direct effect on greater sage grouse. Greater sage grouse numbers and historic range are expected to decline due to habitat loss. Nesting, brooding and foraging habitat would continue to decline in the short term (<20 years). Juniper and small conifer encroachment would continue to increase due to fire suppression. As small conifer trees and juniper continue to grow and canopy cover increases, the quality and quantity of available sage steppe habitat would continue to decline. This would continue to reduce foraging and brood rearing success in the short term (< 20 years). In the long term (20 + years) sage steppe habitats would continue to decline. The remaining sage steppe habitat could become annual grass and juniper woodlands which does not support a vast array of wildlife species. Most of the
101 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
project area is fire regime condition class III, indicating the potential for wildfire is high. Wildfire would result in an increase in early successional vegetation but this might include invasive plants and annual grasses. It would take sage steppe habitat many years to recover after a disturbance event. The risk of uncharacteristic wildfire and resultant loss of habitat increases with no restoration treatments.
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Vegetation management treatments within ponderosa pine, dry mixed conifer, lodgepole pine, and riparian areas would not impact or improve habitat for greater sage grouse. All of these treatments would occur in areas not occupied by greater sage grouse.
Non-forested vegetation management treatments and prescribed fire would have a beneficial impact to greater sage grouse by increasing the production and quality of early successional plants, which are generally more palatable. Removing non-old growth juniper less then 21” dbh and other conifers less than 9” dbh would improve habitat for greater sage grouse. Removing juniper within sage steppe habitat in the IRA and within juniper, meadow and sage steppe habitats throughout the CMH area would help reverse the trend of habitat loss on the landscape.
Routine maintenance of roads, stream restoration projects (culvert replacements, headcut repairs and streambank stabilization), and spring enhancement would have no impact to greater sage grouse. Temporary roads, landings, and skid trails would be rehabilitated in accordance with BMP’s and would have no impact to greater sage grouse.
Road closures and decommissioning would have a beneficial impact to greater sage grouse where they occur in sage steppe habitat. Reduced road density would have a beneficial effect to sage grouse habitat especially in the Little Honey Creek watershed, which includes the northeast portion of the CMH project area. This would decrease the potential for localized disturbance to greater sage grouse. The changes to MVUM would have minimal effects to greater sage grouse.
Cumulative Effects The residual impacts of actions that occurred during the past 50 years such as fire suppression, livestock grazing, road development, wildfires and prescribed fire in the project area have resulted in the distribution of greater sage grouse habitat described in the existing condition. On-going activities that may impact sage grouse habitat include livestock grazing and fire suppression. These activities will likely allow juniper and other small conifers to encroach on sage steppe plant communities which reduces desired habitat for sage grouse. Cumulatively, the proposed actions of Alternative 2 should lead to habitat improvements on approximately 3,500 acres in the short - to long-term.
Impact Determination Considering all direct, indirect and cumulative effects to greater sage grouse for Alternative 2, this project would not contribute to a negative trend in viability on the Fremont National Forest. Alternative 2 would result in improved brood rearing and foraging habitat, a reduction in predator perch trees, and increased security with a reduction in road densities. Restoration activities would be short term and should provide a long term benefit to greater sage grouse. Therefore, the incremental effects of Alternative 2 to greater sage grouse and greater sage grouse habitat, when added to all of the past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions would be minimal. The CMH Project is consistent with the Forest Plan and continued viability of sage grouse is expected on the Fremont National Forest.
102 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Bufflehead Bucephala albeola
Existing Condition The bufflehead is a tree-nesting, diving duck whose population has declined throughout some of its range due to clear cutting, over harvest of habitat, and in some locations throughout its range, over-hunting (Scheuering 2003). For nesting, it uses mountain lakes surrounded by woodlands with snags (mostly aspen, but it will use ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir). Buffleheads are common in Oregon and Washington during winter, but are rare during the breeding season. Most breeding occurs in Alaska and Canada. In Oregon, buffleheads use a high preponderance of artificial nest boxes. Buffleheads eat animal matter, with common diet items including aquatic insects and larvae, snails, fish, and sometimes herring eggs or salmon carrion. They also eat seeds of aquatic plants such as smartweed, alkali bulrush, and sago pondweed (Scheuering 2003).
Project Area Current Conditions No buffleheads have been detected within the CMH Project area. The only suitable habitat is along Vee Lake in the Honey Creek watershed. There have been no surveys for this species and the status of these birds on the Forest or in the project area is unknown. Vee Lake could provide suitable nesting/brood rearing habitat for the species. There have been no observations of bufflehead reported in the NRIS wildlife database within the project area.
Environmental Consequences
Alternative 1 – No Action This alternative would not have any direct effect on bufflehead or bufflehead habitat. Alternative 1 would provide for the greatest amount of bufflehead nesting habitat in the short term. All snags and down wood would remain on site. Nesting habitat may improve with increased stand densities resulting in mortality due to bark beetle mortality or wildfire.
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Vegetation management treatments within ponderosa pine, dry mixed conifer, lodgepole pine, and riparian areas located adjacent to small lakes within the project area would have little impact because snags/aspen trees would not be removed, with the exception of incidental snags for safety. Restoration treatments are designed to maintain old trees and to promote large tree development. This would result in an increase in large ponderosa pine and white fir structure and future large snag habitat. Although a loss of snags and down wood is expected with prescribed burning, small scale torching would result in snag recruitment.
Routine maintenance of roads, stream restoration projects (culvert replacement, headcut repair, and streambank stabilization), and spring enhancement would have no impact to bufflehead because they are not located within or adjacent to potential habitat. Restoration treatments with chainsaws would also have no impact because snags and aspen would not be cut.
In addition, temporary roads, road closures and decommissioning, and changes to MVUM, including changes in maintenance levels, would have no impact to bufflehead because they would not be located in areas adjacent to suitable habitat.
Cumulative Effects The residual impacts of actions that occurred during the past 50 years such as timber harvest, fire suppression, livestock grazing, firewood gathering, road development, wildfires and prescribed fire in the project area have resulted in the distribution of potential bufflehead habitat described in the existing condition. An on-going and foreseeable future activity that may impact bufflehead potential habitat is
103 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
firewood gathering because it could mean the loss of some snags. Firewood is generally gathered along main travel routes, so there is not expected to be any measurable cumulative impact to available snags adjacent to waterbodies for bufflehead.
Impact Determination Considering all direct, indirect and cumulative effects to bufflehead, this project would not contribute to a negative trend in viability on the Fremont National Forest. The effects of Alternative 2 would be minimal because snags and large trees would be retained on the landscape. In addition large trees and snags around reservoirs would not be removed. Therefore, the incremental effects of Alternative 2 to bufflehead and bufflehead habitat, when added to all of the past, present and reasonably foreseeable actions would be minimal. The CMH Project is consistent with the Forest Plan and continued viability of bufflehead is expected on the Fremont National Forest.
Lewis’ Woodpecker Melanerpes lewis and White-headed Woodpeckers Picoides albolarvatus
Existing Condition Lewis’ woodpeckers are distributed from southern British Columbia and Alberta to central California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas. They nest in open woodland habitat and require large snags in advanced state of decay to excavate cavities. Burned ponderosa pine forests provide highly productive habitat. Lewis’ woodpeckers seldom excavate their own cavity. Nests are often in ponderosa pine, oak, or cottonwood. Lewis’ woodpeckers are opportunistic feeders, eating insects in spring and summer and fruits and acorns in fall and winter. They also flycatch or glean insects and forage on carpenter ants, bees, wasps, mayflies, beetles and grasshoppers.
White-headed woodpeckers are distributed from British Columbia to southern California, east to Idaho and Nevada. They occur mainly in open ponderosa pine or mixed-conifer forests dominated by ponderosa pine, usually in old-growth or in stands with old-growth components. White-headed woodpeckers excavate cavities in snags and also stumps, logs, and dead tops of live trees. Their diet varies seasonally, includes pine seeds, invertebrates, and sap, and they forage primarily on branches, trunks, cones and occasionally on the ground. A long-term study of white-headed woodpeckers found they were associated with higher densities of large trees. Hollenbeck et al. (2011) suggests a juxtaposition of low and high canopy cover ponderosa pine patches was selected for nest-site suitability, which suggest a preference for heterogeneity in stand structure.
Project Area Current Conditions Lewis’ and white-headed woodpecker habitat exists within the large open ponderosa pine and dry mixed conifer stands. Decades of fire suppression has enabled conifer encroachment within this suitable habitat. White fir and conifer encroachment has reduced the open habitat favored by the Lewis’ woodpecker. This encroachment also creates conditions favorable to stand replacement wildfire which would remove suitable habitat for white-headed woodpecker. VEM mapped habitat for both species. Based on this model, there are approximately 2,704 acres of suitable habitat for white-headed woodpeckers and 4,597 for Lewis’ woodpecker. On the Fremont National Forest 105,037 acres for white-headed woodpecker and 65,975 acres for Lewis’ woodpecker. There is one observation of Lewis’ woodpecker and three observations of white-headed woodpecker in the NRIS wildlife database within the project area. There are no documented Lewis’ woodpecker nest sites in the NRIS wildlife database within the project area and no documented white-headed woodpecker nest sites within the project area.
104 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Environmental Consequences
Alternative 1 – No Action This alternative would not have any direct effect on Lewis’ or white-headed woodpeckers. In the short term, increased tree mortality due to overstocked stands improves Lewis’ or white-headed woodpecker habitat. In the long term, loss of the large tree structure and slowed development of future large tree structure would negatively impact desirable Lewis’ or white-headed woodpecker habitat. Most of the project area is fire regime condition class III, indicating the potential for wildfire is high. Both Lewis’ and white-headed woodpeckers nest in post-fire habitats, so wildfire would be a benefit to these species.
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Vegetation management treatments within ponderosa pine, dry mixed conifer, and riparian areas would transitions dense multi-story stands to open stands with large tree structure which is desirable for these woodpecker species. Restoration treatments are designed to maintain old trees and to promote large tree development. This would result in an increase in large ponderosa pine nesting structure and the development of future large snag habitat. Snags that provide the highest quality nesting structure would be retained; with the exception of incidental snags removed for safety reasons. These species are not likely to use lodgepole pine habitats, so lodgepole pine treatments would have no impact. Although a loss of snags and down wood is expected with prescribed burning, small scale torching would result in snag recruitment.
This alternative would improve landscape heterogeneity with a mix of restoration treatments and no treatment areas. Variability in the form of individual trees, clumps of trees, openings, and small scale torching from prescribed fire would create a fine-scale mosaic of open and closed canopy conditions which would improve habitat for these species. Hollenbeck (2011) suggests that a juxtaposition of low and high canopy cover was selected for nest-site suitability for white-headed woodpeckers, which suggests a preference for heterogeneity in stand structure.
Routine maintenance of roads, stream restoration projects (culvert replacement, headcut repair, and streambank stabilization), and spring enhancement would have no impact to Lewis’ or white-headed woodpeckers. Restoration treatments with chainsaws would also have no impact because large trees, snags and aspen would not be cut.
Road closures and decommissioning would benefit Lewis’ or white-headed woodpecker habitat by reducing the potential for human disturbance and snag loss. Reduced road densities would decrease the potential for localized disturbance to Lewis’ or white-headed woodpeckers. The changes to MVUM would have minimal effects to Lewis’ or white-headed woodpeckers.
Table 39. Measureable Indicator for woodpecker species (Acres suitable habitat) Indicator Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Acres of suitable Lewis’ woodpecker habitat affected by proposed treatments 0 acres 4,597 acres Approximate percent of Lewis’ woodpecker habitat affected across the Fremont National Forest (~65,975 acres total) 0% 7% Acres of suitable white-headed woodpecker habitat affected by proposed treatments 0 acres 2,704 acres Approximate percent of white-headed woodpecker habitat affected across the Fremont National Forest (~105,037 acres total) 0% 3%
105 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Cumulative Effects The residual impacts of actions that occurred during the past 50 years such as timber harvests, fire suppression, livestock grazing, firewood gathering, road development, wildfires and prescribed fire in the project area have resulted in the distribution of Lewis’ and white-headed woodpecker habitat described in the existing condition. On-going activities that may impact woodpecker habitat include firewood gathering. This activity would lead to loss of snags in the project area. Cumulatively, the impacts would be minimal because the project would retain existing snags and large trees that have the potential to become snags in the long-term.
Impact Determination Considering all direct, indirect and cumulative effects to Lewis’ and white-headed woodpecker, this project would not contribute to a negative trend in viability on the Fremont National Forest. The effects of Alternative 2 would be minimal because snags and large trees would be retained on the landscape. Post-treatment landscape prescribed fire would benefit both species. Therefore, the incremental effects of Alternative 2 on Lewis’ and white-headed woodpecker and Lewis’ and white-headed woodpecker habitat, when added to all of the past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions would be minimal. The CMH Project is consistent with the Forest Plan and continued viability of Lewis’ and white-headed woodpecker is expected on the Fremont National Forest. Invertebrates Johnson’s Hairstreak Callophrys johnsoni
Existing Condition Johnson’s hairstreak ranges from central California to southwest BC, in the Cascade, Blue/Wallowa, Coast and Siskiyou mountain ranges. The Johnson’s hairstreak is linked to old-growth and mature forest habitat. Threats to this species include loss of habitat from logging, and spraying to kill tussock moths and budworms (Pyle 2002). Females lay pale eggs directly on dwarf mistletoe on a variety of conifers, especially on ponderosa pine and lodgepole pine (Pyle 2002). Habitat includes low to high altitude clearings among conifer forests, especially mature ponderosa pine, but also lodgepole, true fir, Douglas- fir, and western larch (Pyle 2002).
Project Area Current Conditions There are no known occurrences of this species within the project area. In the Atlas of Oregon Butterflies, Hinchliff indicates there is one documented sighting of Johnson’s hairstreak butterfly west of Sycan Marsh on the Silver Lake Ranger District (1994). The other closest record is located west of Crater Lake in Jackson County where a larva was discovered in 1972. Potential habitat exists within the project area in ponderosa pine and dry mixed conifer that contains dwarf mistletoe.
Environmental Consequences
Alternative 1 – No Action This alternative would not have any direct effect on Johnson’s hairstreak butterfly. With the no action alternative, tree canopy cover would continue to increase and flowering species that provide flower foraging habitat, would continue to decrease in the understory. Mistletoe would be maintained in the overstory and continue to spread through the developing understory benefiting habitat for Johnson’s hairstreak butterfly. Most of the project area is fire regime condition class III, indicating the potential for wildfire is high. The potential for loss of large tracts of habitat due to wildfire or other disturbance factors increases with the no action alternative.
106 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Vegetation management treatments within ponderosa pine, dry mixed conifer, lodgepole pine, and riparian areas would result in both positive and negative impacts to Johnson’s hairstreak butterfly. Although current amounts of mistletoe within the project would be reduced post-treatment, large trees (> 21” dbh) with mistletoe would be retained, and pockets of mistletoe would occur in some of the small scale retention patches, maintaining fine scale wildlife habitat features across the project area. Some trees with mistletoe would be harvested or thinned, which would reduce existing habitat and may have direct effects from crushing larvae or adults. However, mistletoe is expected to remain common through the area after restoration treatments are completed.
Restoration treatments would open stands which would improve growing conditions in the understory for flowers used for foraging. Prescribed fire would result in a diversity of understory vegetation that includes more grass and forbs that would favor Johnson’s hairstreak butterfly habitat.
Old tree retention, individual trees, clumps of trees, openings, retention patches, and no treatment areas would contribute to maintenance of habitat. Old trees with mistletoe would be retained. Clumps, retention patches, and no treatment areas would retain patches of trees that remain in competition which can result in localized disease such as mistletoe. This would contribute to the long-term maintenance of Johnson’s hairstreak butterfly habitat and an overall increase in landscape and fine-scale heterogeneity resulting in a mosaic of shrub/grass vegetation, open/dense structure, and open/closed canopy.
Routine maintenance of roads, stream restoration projects (culvert replacement, headcut repair, and streambank stabilization), and spring enhancement would have no impact to Johnson’s hairstreak butterfly.
Road closures and decommissioning would benefit Johnson’s hairstreak butterfly habitat by reducing the potential for human disturbance and increasing the area of vegetation on the landscape. This would decrease the potential for localized disturbance to the Johnson’s hairstreak butterfly. The changes to MVUM would have minimal effects to Johnson’s hairstreak butterfly habitat.
Cumulative Effects The residual impacts of actions that occurred during the past 50 years such as timber harvests, fire suppression, livestock grazing, firewood gathering, road development, wildfires and prescribed fire in the project area have resulted in the distribution of Johnson’s hairstreak butterfly habitat described in the existing condition. Cumulative impacts are expected to be minimal as a diversity of vegetative conditions would be maintained providing habitat throughout the project area for Johnson’s hairstreak butterfly.
Impact Determination Considering all direct, indirect and cumulative effects to Johnson’s hairstreak butterfly and its habitat, this project would not contribute to a negative trend in viability on the Fremont National Forest. The incremental effects of Alternative 2 to Johnson’s hairstreak butterfly and Johnson’s hairstreak butterfly habitat, when added to all of the past, present and reasonably foreseeable actions would be minimal. The CMH Project is consistent with the Forest Plan and continued viability of Johnson’s hairstreak butterfly is expected on the Fremont National Forest.
Western Bumblebee Bombus occidentalis
Existing Condition Western bumblebees form annual colonies initiated by single queens. After mating, new queens dig a hole and hibernate over winter, while the rest of the colony dies out. In the late winter or early spring, each
107 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
queen emerges from hibernation and selects a nest site, which is often a pre-existing hole, such as an abandoned rodent hole (Andrews, 2010). Bumblebees are generalist species that gather pollen and nectar from a wide variety of flowering plants and forage relatively long distances from the nest (e.g. 70-631 m in Osborne et al., 1999). They need a constant supply of flowers in bloom (Evans et al., 2008). During later stages of colony development, production of new queens is dependent on access to sufficient quantities of pollen (Evans et al., 2008). Western bumblebee was widespread and common throughout the western United States before 1998 (Evans et al., 2008). Rapid declines have been noted since that time, possibly a result of introduced diseases and pathogens, or a combination of factors. Non-forested upland habitats and riparian areas are likely to provide the most suitable foraging habitat in the project area, since they contain the greatest abundance and diversity of forbs.
Project Area Current Conditions Suitable habitat is available, mainly in non-forested upland and riparian habitat. Western bumblebees have been found on the Fremont-Winema near Lake of the Woods and near the town of Lakeview. There are three observations of Western bumblebee in the NRIS wildlife database within the CMH project area. All three detections were located adjacent to Drake Peak lookout circa 1930.
Environmental Consequences
Alternative 1 – No Action This alternative would not have any direct effect on Western bumblebee. With the no action alternative, tree canopy cover would continue to increase and flowering species that provide flower foraging habitat, would continue to decrease in the understory. Overall, flower species used for forage would continue to decline until an environmental disturbance such as a large scale bug-kill or fire occurs in the area. In the event of a fire or other disturbance, habitat for the Western bumblebee would increase.
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Vegetation management treatments within ponderosa pine, dry mixed conifer, lodgepole pine, and riparian areas would result in both positive and negative impacts to Western bumblebee. Restoration treatments would maintain coarse wood cover that provides sites for rodent burrows and tree structure for bird nests used by nesting and overwintering Western bumblebees. Restoration treatments, especially riparian restoration treatments in meadows, would open stands which would improve growing conditions in the understory for flowers used for foraging. Small scale torching from prescribed fire and openings created by variable density prescriptions would improve habitat because fine-scale openings would result in an increase in the abundance and diversity of understory vegetation.
Direct effects by ground based harvest activities, temporary roads, and prescribed fire would potentially destroy, fragment, alter, degrade or reduce the food supply produced by flowers, as well as potential destruction of abandoned rodent burrows and bird nests which provide nest and hibernation sites for overwintering queens. This would be expected to occur on a site specific basis, as activities would be implemented over a number of years on various portions of the project area.
Routine maintenance of roads, stream restoration projects (culvert replacement, headcut repair, and streambank stabilization), and spring enhancement may impact individuals during soil disturbance. This would be short term and localized. In the long-term, the stream restoration projects would provide additional flowering plants, forbs and shrubs within or adjacent to the project.
Road closures and decommissioning would benefit Western bumblebee habitat by reducing the potential for human disturbance. This would decrease the potential for localized disturbance to the Western
108 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project bumblebee in the project area. The changes to MVUM would have minimal effects to Western bumblebee habitat.
Cumulative Effects The residual impacts of actions that occurred during the past 50 years such as fire suppression, livestock grazing, road development, wildfires and prescribed fire in the project area have resulted in the distribution of Western bumblebee habitat described in the existing condition. The on-going activity of livestock grazing could impact potential Western bumblebee habitat but is not expected to lead to measureable cumulative impacts.
Impact Determination Considering all direct, indirect and cumulative effects to Western bumblebee, this project would not contribute to a negative trend in viability on the Fremont National Forest. The effects of Alternative 2 would be minimal because opening the forest canopy would contribute to shrub, forb and flowering plant production. In addition, prescribed fire would contribute to early seral succession creating additional forage opportunities. Therefore, the incremental effects of Alternative 2 to Western bumblebee and Western bumblebee habitat, when added to all of the past, present and reasonably foreseeable actions would be minimal. The CMH Project is consistent with the Forest Plan and continued viability of Western bumblebee is expected on the Fremont National Forest.
Summary of Impact Determinations for R6 Sensitive Species
Table 40. R6 Sensitive Wildlife Species Summary of Impact Determinations T, E, or SS Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Common Name Scientific Name No Action Proposed Action Mammals Fisher inside West Coast DPS Martes pennanti P & SS NE NE North American wolverine Gulo guloluscus SS NI MIIH Gray wolf Canus lupus E NE NE Pygmy rabbit Brachylagus SS NI NI idahoensis Pallid bat Antrozous pallidus SS NI MIIH Fringed myotis Myotis thysanodes SS NI MIIH Townsend’s big-eared bat Corynorhinus SS NI MIIH townsendii Birds Bald eagle Haliaeetus SS NI MIIH leucocephalus American peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus SS NI NI Greater sage grouse Centrocercus C & SS NI MIIH urophasianus Horned grebe Podiceps auritus SS NI NI Red-necked grebe Podiceps grisegena SS NI NI Bufflehead Bucephala albeola SS NI MIIH Yellow rail Coturnicops SS NI NI noveboracensis Upland sandpiper Bartramia longicauda SS NI NI Tricolored blackbird Agelaius tricolor SS NI NI Lewis’ Woodpecker Melanerpes lewis SS NI MIIH White-headed woodpecker Picoides albolarvatus SS NI MIIH Purple martin Progne subis SS NI NI America white pelican Pelecanus SS NI NI erythrorhynchos
109 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
T, E, or SS Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Common Name Scientific Name No Action Proposed Action Amphibians and Reptiles Oregon Spotted Frog Rana pretiosa P & SS NI NI Columbia spotted frog Rana luteiventris C & SS NI NI Northern leopard frog Rana boylii SS NI NI Northwestern pond turtle Clemmys marmorata SS NI NI marmorata Invertebrates Johnson’s hairstreak Callophrys johnsoni SS NI MIIH Mardon skipper Polites mardon SS NI NI Leona’s little blue butterfly Philotiella leona SS NI NI Gray blue butterfly Plebejus podarce SS NI NI klamathensis Western bumblebee Bombus occidentalis SS NI MIIH Chase sideband Monadenia Chaceana SS NI NI Modoc Rim sideband Monadenia fidelis ssp. SS NI NI nov. Crater Lake tightcoil Pristiloma arcticum SS NI NI crateris Siskiyou hesperian Vespericola sierranus SS NI NI T – Federally listed as Threatened P – Federally listed as Proposed C- Federally identifies as Candidate SS – Region 6 Sensitive Species List NE – Federally Listed Threatened or Endangered Species Effect Determination “No Effect.” NI – R6 Sensitive Species Impact Determination “No Impact.” MIIH - R6 Sensitive Species Impact Determination “May impact individuals or habitat, but would not likely contribute to a trend towards federal listing or cause a loss of viability to the population or species.”
Management Indicator Species (MIS) Management Indicator Species (MIS) are selected species whose welfare is believed to be an indicator of the welfare of other species using the same habitat, or a species whose condition can be used to assess the impacts of management actions on a particular area. Table 46 includes those species that were identified as wildlife MIS for the Fremont National Forest in the respective Forest Plan.
Those species that will not be addressed in full detail (“no” in Table 41), Appendix A of the Wildlife Report provides a brief habitat description and an assessment of habitat within the project area.
Table 41. Fremont National Forest Management Indicator Species (MIS) Habitat and/or Common Name Scientific Name Indicator for: Species Present Odocoileus Hunted Species Yes Mule deer hemionus High Elevation Forests; Lodgepole Martes martes Yes American marten Pine and Mixed Conifer Forests Overmature/Mature Ponderosa Accipiter gentilis Yes Goshawk Pine; Mixed Conifer Pileated woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus Overmature/Mature Mixed Conifer Yes Sphyrapicus Aspen and Deciduous Ecosystems Yes Red-naped sapsucker nuchalis Black-backed woodpecker Picoides arcticus Overmature/Mature Lodgepole Pine Yes Peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus Endangered Species No Haliaeetus Threatened Species Yes Bald eagle leucocephalus Primary Excavators see below Snag and Down Wood Yes
110 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Mule Deer Odocoileus hemionus
Existing Condition Optimal mule deer habitat is generally described as a mix of hiding, thermal and fawning cover, and foraging habitat. A number of factors including road density, distance between sources of water, forage utilization by cattle, and the amount and arrangement of cover and forage patches would impact habitat use by mule deer.
Mule deer in Central Oregon are a migratory group of animals that roam a vast mountainous summer range and crowd into relatively small winter ranges (Dealy, 1971). Mule deer are not believed to have been abundant prior to 1850 in this region and remained at low numbers through the early 1900s (Peek et al., 1999). Mule deer began to increase around 1915, probably because of increased shrublands due to improved rangeland on summer ranges as a response to fire and logging on summer ranges (Salwasser, 1979, Peek et al., 1999). Shrublands have since continued to mature across the western ranges because of fire suppression and improved grazing practices (Urness, 1990, Peek et al., 1999) and this is the case throughout much of the planning area. Public interest and use have initiated management of mule deer populations that are higher than historical numbers.
COVER AND FORAGING HABITAT Cover Summer thermal cover minimizes metabolic and time costs associated with heat dissipation (Demarchi and Bunnel, 1993). Lost foraging time or the energetic costs of increasing metabolism can translate into decreased summer weight gains (Demarchi and Bunnell, 1993). Thermal cover can also be provided by shrubs, juniper woodlands, or physical objects such as boulders and ledges (Peek et al., 1999). Gay also found that animals are as likely to bed in the shade of a single conifer, rock outcrop, or cut-bank in the midday, as in high canopy closures (1998).
Hiding cover habitat is used for escape and protection from predators and humans (Peek et al., 1982). Black et al. (1976) has suggested security or hiding cover is required even in the absence of humans and predators, implying a psychological need. A long standing definition of cover that we try to manage for is defined as: a stand in which greater than or equal to 60 percent of the area can hide 90 percent of a deer at 200 feet, this omits less dense vegetation types which deer also recognize as cover (Gay, 1998).
Well planned reductions in forest cover are expected to increase carrying capacity and increase herd size; however, road closures would need to accompany reductions in cover to avoid overexploitation during hunting season (Gay, 1998). Due to fire suppression and past harvest regimes, there are extensive acres of overstocked ponderosa pine stands in the Pacific Northwest (McConnell and Smith, 1970). Leaving less dense vegetation as deer cover would result in forests more resistant to stand replacement fire, and large-scale insect and pathogen induced tree mortality (Agee, 1994, Gay, 1998). Studies have shown that pine thinning produces significant increases in understory vegetation (McConnell and Smith, 1970). Thinning overstocked ponderosa pine stands would promote forage growth and would reduce the risk of stand replacing wildfire events by eliminating the mid-level ladder fuels.
Bitterbrush, Purshia tridentata Antelope bitterbrush has an extensive range in Central Oregon, both in open sagebrush lands and as a component of forest communities on the east slope of the Cascade Mountains (Sherman and Chilcote, 1972). It is a very valuable browse species for the diets of mule deer because the twigs and leaves contain high levels of protein (Clark and Britton, unk.). Bitterbrush is an important component of summer range habitat as Gay (1998) found that bitterbrush along with other non-sprouting shrubs dominate summer deer diets in pumice influenced zones, like those found in Central Oregon.
111 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Several factors are important in bitterbrush sprouting following a fire, including geographic location, soil types, season of burning, soil moisture and plant phenology at the time of burning, fire intensity, rodent populations, growth form, and the age of the plant. Antelope bitterbrush in the pumice soils of central Oregon have reported infrequent sprouting following fires (Driscoll, 1963, Nord, 1965, Martin and Driver, 1983, Busse et al., 1999) and underburn monitoring on this district supports this theory. Burning early in the growing season provides greater recovery time for plants with sufficient carbohydrate reserves to sprout and resume photosynthesis (Agee, 1993, Busse et al., 1999). Studies by Clark and Britton (unk. date) discovered better sprouting by plants burned in the spring versus plants burned in the fall. Recovery of bitterbrush following fire also relies on the recruitment of seedlings from rodent seed caching (West 1968, Busse et al 1999). West (1968) found that 90 percent of the bitterbrush seedlings that germinate develop in clusters and fire can play an important role in this by reducing the needle cast and duff layer making rodent caching more accessible (Nord, 1965, Sherman and Chilcote, 1972, Gay, 1998). Busse et al. (1999) agrees with earlier studies (Martin and Driver, 1983, Simon, 1990), that plant age influenced the sprouting success of bitterbrush and that plants between 5 and 20 to 40 years of age are most successful at sprouting.
Although fire intervals in the ponderosa pine series in eastern Oregon were as frequent as seven years (Agee, 1994), fire frequencies of less than 20 years would likely result in sparse distribution and low densities of bitterbrush (Gay, 1998). Implementing prescribed burns that mimic these historical fire intervals would result in substantial reductions in deer forage on forested portions of the winter range in the pumice soil zone (Gay, 1998). Busse and Riegel (2009) suggest that balancing the need to limit fire risk yet provide adequate bitterbrush habitat for wildlife browse will likely require a mosaic pattern of burning at the landscape scale or a burning frequency well beyond 11 years to allow a bitterbrush seed crop to develop.
Grass and Forbs Actual usage of grass and forbs by mule deer is difficult to determine because microhistological analysis, examination of stomach contents under the microscope, is not credible due to near complete digestion of new and rapidly growing grasses and forbs (Zyzner and Urness, 1969, Gay, 1998). Grasses and forbs compose the bulk of spring diets. Gay’s (1998) studies found that in April and May of 1995, when there was no snow cover and an abundance of new grasses and forbs, deer were seldom seen feeding on anything other than new herbaceous growth. Forbs especially showed high use with 25 to 44 percent in June and July and 15 to 57 percent in August and September (Gay, 1998).
Fire may affect the forage resource by changing both forage quality and quantity (Bunting, 1998). Forage characteristics that may be affected by fire include: protein, phosphorus and fiber content, and subsequent changes in digestibility (Bunting, 1998). Cook found substantial increases in crude protein of herbs after burning (1994). Fire-stimulated flowering is another phenomenon that increases seedling abundance in burned areas, as Walstad (1990) found increased flowering and seed vigor following fire for grasses in the pine forests and high desert regions east of the Cascades. Small burned areas may also be more heavily utilized by herbivores than large areas because of the concentration of palatable re-growing forage (Bunting, 1998).
Season of Burning Season of burning can be very important in determining fire impacts and vegetative responses as they relate to mule deer forage. Spring burning occurs at a time when buds are flushing and can be very susceptible to fire, while, later in the season, buds have hardened and are much more capable of withstanding heat (Agee, 1993). Burning in the spring before the growing season would weaken and can kill sprouting shrubs because they are often at yearly lows in terms of carbohydrate reserves in the roots because of the demand to produce new shoots, roots, and flowers (Agee, 1993). Spring burning can also
112 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project kill fine conifer roots which may predispose trees to moisture stress during the coming dry season (Agee, 1993). Higher densities of species of ceanothus and manzanita seedlings have been reported following fall burns compared to spring burns (Walstad, 1990). While fall burning is performed under dryer conditions, burns tend to be more intense and there may be a higher risk of not meeting burn objectives. This is most likely due to the greater abundance of ungrazed forage in the deferred units during the grazing season (Skovlin et al 1968).
Threats (per ODFW Mule Deer Initiative):
• Invasive plants like cheatgrass and medusahead rye have replaced perennial grasses, forbs, bitterbrush, sagebrush and other forage. • Less fire and less logging have led to fewer early succession forests and rangelands, which provide important browse, forbs, and grasses for deer. • Junipers have encroached on shrub-steppe habitat, crowding out nutritious plants. • Stands of aspen trees have declined. • Some of the best mule deer habitat in Oregon has been permanently lost to development, particularly on low-elevation winter range. • Mule deer populations never rebounded from severe winters and dry summers in the 80s and early 90s. Deep snow and ice keep deer from reaching food and increase their vulnerability to predation. Drought sends deer into winter with fewer fat reserves. • Some predator populations, including cougars and coyotes, have grown in the past few decades. The extent to which predators affect mule deer populations varies with the circumstances surrounding each herd at any particular time. • Vehicle traffic collisions take numerous mule deer annually. • Off-highway vehicle (OHV) trails and cross country travel have increased exponentially in the past few decades and can displace mule deer into unfamiliar or less productive habitat. Population Trend: The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife’s current deer management population objective for the WWMU for Mule deer is 5,500 deer. The current estimate of the deer herd as of April 2013 is 3,800 individuals, approximately 70% of management objectives. The buck/doe ratio objective is 25/100 for the North Warner Subunit of the WWMU. As of December 2013, post hunting season, the buck/doe ratio was 29/100. The population has been holding steady to slightly increasing during the last several years (Foster, pers. Comm. 2014).
Project Area Current Conditions The CMH project area has winter/summer range habitat for mule deer. The CMH project area has abundant hiding cover due to fire suppression and overstocked stands. Hiding cover in the project area is mostly created by large patches of young pine trees and tall brush. Forested vegetation is dense and overstocked, juniper encroachment and rock outcrops along some of the ridges or draws also provide topographic hiding cover, especially in occasions where the rocks interrupt the landscape view from the roadside.
Foraging and winter range habitats are in decline due to decades of fire suppression. Currently, most of the forage within the project area is limited to decadent and woody bitterbrush, which is not as palatable or as nutritious as younger bitterbrush plants. Although it provides thermal cover, the dense overstory shades out bitterbrush, grasses, and forbs. Overall, foraging habitat is in poor condition due to the
113 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
following: 1) much of the bitterbrush is decadent because stands are overstocked which prohibits understory growth, 2) riparian conditions (i.e. aspen and meadows) are poor due to the encroachment of conifers, and 3) a lack of fire has limited the availability of early successional habitat across the landscape.
The project area is located within the Warner Unit. The Warner Unit is one of five designated Mule Deer Initiative (MDI) Areas in the State of Oregon. See ODFW web page for additional details on MDI units in the State of Oregon.
Environmental Consequences
Alternative 1 – No Action This alternative would not have any direct effect on mule deer. Mule deer use and numbers are expected to remain stable. Thermal and hiding cover would remain for the short term (<20 years) and stand densities would continue to increase due to fire suppression, increasing potential cover over time. Available forage would remain in the short term (< 20 years). As stands of trees continue to grow and canopy cover increases, the quality and quantity of available forage would continue to decline. Mature shrubs would increase in abundance through time, but as shrubs become decadent, the nutritional quality would decline. Most of the project area is fire regime condition class III, indicating the potential for wildfire is high. Wildfire would result in a loss of cover and an increase in early successional forage. The risk of uncharacteristic wildfire and resultant loss of habitat increases with no restoration treatments. Road densities would not change with this alternative; they would remain high within the CMH project area. The road density within subwatersheds ranges from 0 to 5.18 mi2 (mi/sq. mile). Within the CMH project area the overall road density is 3.70 mi2. This value exceeds the Fremont National Forest Plan recommendations for mule deer summer and winter range.
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Vegetation management treatments within ponderosa pine, dry mixed conifer, lodgepole pine, sage steppe, juniper woodlands and riparian areas would improve habitat for mule deer. Although 15,440 acres of hiding cover would be affected, it is anticipated the quality of winter/summer range habitat would improve. Thinning within stands that are forage limited stimulates forage production and would enhance the juxtaposition of cover to forage that is favorable to mule deer habitat. Thermal and hiding cover may omit less dense vegetation types, which deer also recognize as cover (Gay 1998). For example, some of the retention areas may not be in stands that are mapped as cover; however, they would be placed where there is dense understory structure. Therefore, the retention patches left within treatment units and the no treatment areas would provide cover for mule deer. Overall, increasing heterogeneity across the landscape would improve habitat for mule deer.
Treatments are expected to reduce canopy and allow more sunlight to hit the forest floor increasing foraging opportunities by stimulating shrub, grass, and forb growth. By implementing the variable density prescriptions, openings would be created which would result in fine scale patches of foraging habitat. Prescribed burning would also have a beneficial impact to mule deer by increasing the production and quality of early successional plants, which are generally more palatable for mule deer. Project design criteria are in place to ensure an adequate amount and distribution of bitterbrush throughout the project area. Bitterbrush would be reduced across the project area, but a minimum of 30- 50% of the existing bitterbrush would remain in a mosaic across the project area.
Temporary roads may have a short-term (<5 years) impact on mule deer distribution and use. During operations, these roads would be used by operators which would increase disturbance. However, these
114 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
roads would be decommissioned after the treatments are completed, so there would be no long term effects from temporary road construction.
Culvert replacement/repair would not impact mule deer habitat. Spring enhancement and headcut repair would have very localized improvements to mule deer habitat. These treatments may increase riparian foraging habitat and water retention.
Riparian thinning, aspen enhancement, juniper removal, sage steppe and mahogany restoration projects would substantially improve habitat conditions in both summer/winter range habitat for mule deer.
Road closures and decommissioning would result in reduced road densities benefitting mule deer habitat by reducing the potential for human disturbance. In the long-term (15+ years), physical habitat components such as vegetative cover would be expected to recover on decommissioned roads. This would decrease the potential for localized disturbance to mule deer. The changes to MVUM would have minimal effects to mule deer.
Table 42. Measureable Indicator for Mule Deer (Acres of winter/summer range) Indicator Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Approximate acres suitable winter range habitat affected by the proposed treatments 0 acres 8,013 acres Approximate percent of winter range habitat affected across the Fremont National NF(~129,525 acres total) 0% 6% Approximate acres suitable summer range habitat affected by the proposed treatments 0 acres 43,512 acres Approximate percent of summer range habitat affected across the Fremont National Forest (~1,062,065 acres) 0% 4% Qualitative assessment of the distribution of mule deer forage Poor Good/Excellent
Table 43. Measureable Indicator for Mule Deer (Acres of hiding cover) Indicator Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Approximate acres suitable hiding/thermal cover affected by the 0% 15,440 acres proposed treatments Approximate percent of suitable hiding cover affected across 0% 3% the Fremont National Forest (~522,762 acres) Approximate percent of suitable hiding cover affected across 0% 1.5% the Fremont-Winema National Forest (~1,146,185 acres)
Cumulative Effects The residual impacts of actions that occurred during the past 50 years such as timber harvests, fire suppression, livestock grazing, firewood gathering, road development, wildfires and prescribed fire in the project area have resulted in the distribution of mule deer habitat described in the existing condition. On- going activities that may impact mule deer and their habitat include recreation (hunting) and visitors using the roads. These activities are all associated with increased human presence having the potential for disturbance to mule deer. Cumulatively, there would be some short term increase in human presence over what has been the norm for the area, which may lead to different habitat use patterns, but is not likely to have any measurable impact to mule deer or their potential habitat.
Impact Determination Considering all direct, indirect and cumulative effects to mule deer for Alternative 2, this project would not contribute to a negative trend in viability on the Fremont National Forest. Alternative 2 would result
115 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
in improved foraging habitat, improved fawning habitat, a reduction in hiding/thermal cover, a better distribution of cover to forage, and increased security with a reduction in road densities. Therefore, the incremental effects of Alternative 2 to mule deer and mule deer habitat, when added to all of the past, present and reasonably foreseeable actions would be minimal. The Crooked Mud Honey Project is consistent with the Forest Plan and continued viability of mule deer is expected on the Fremont National Forest.
American Marten Martes martes
Existing Condition Habitat Use: The American marten was chosen as an MIS species due to its close association with late successional mixed conifer and lodgepole pine forests. American marten are typically associated with late-seral coniferous forests with closed canopies, large trees, and abundant snags and down wood (Zielinski et al. 2001). Wisdom et al. (2000; Appendix 1, Table 1) list subalpine and montane forests in old multi- and single-story, and unmanaged young multi-story structural stages as providing source habitat for American marten in the Columbia Basin. Lower montane forests are not listed as source habitat (Wisdom 2000). Snags and down logs are identified as special habitat features of source habitat for the marten (Appendix 1, Table 2 Wisdom 2000). Down logs provide habitat for prey and subnivean access points. Raphael and Jones (1997) found that down wood and slash piles were important resting and denning structures in the eastern Cascades of central Oregon. Forests in their study area were dominated by lodgepole pine. In central Oregon lodgepole pine-dominated areas, no relationship was found between resting sites and streams (Raphael and Jones 1997).
In the Cascades, marten selected sites with higher canopy closure during snow periods than during snow- free periods (Raphael and Jones 1997). In Oregon, canopy closure at rest sites in lodgepole pine dominated stands averaged 36% in snow periods and 27% in snow-free periods (Raphael and Jones 1997). Slauson et al. (2007) also found that larger patch sizes of habitat were important for marten occurrence. Marten used patches over 100 ha (247 acres) at higher rates than availability (Slauson et al. 2007). At the 1-km radius scale, a 10% increase in the amount of logged area was associated with a 23% decrease in marten occurrence (Slauson et al. 2007). Martens were not detected at any sample unit with more than 50% of the area logged in the 1-km radius circle (Slauson et al. 2007). The MIS Information Sheet American Marten (Martes americana) is incorporated by reference (Mellen-McClean 2011a).
Threats: • Past extensive logging and trapping for pelts led to extirpation in some areas. Loss/degradation of habitat due to timber harvest remains a threat in some areas. (NatureServe 2010) • Loss of down wood, resultant loss in prey availability and subnivean access, due to fuels reduction treatments (Bull and Blumton 1999). • Reduction in amount of late-seral forest and associated large snags and logs (Wisdom et al. 2000). • Fragmentation of habitat (Wisdom et al. 2000, Hargis et al 1999). • Availability of prey can limit marten populations (Wisdom et al. 2000).
Distribution: Globally, marten are distributed throughout Canada and Alaska, south through the Rockies, Sierra Nevada, northern Great Lakes, and northern New England (NatureServe 2013). In Oregon and Washington, marten are distributed throughout montane forests of the southern Oregon Coast Range, Siskiyou Mountains, Cascade Mountains, Blue Mountains, Olympic Peninsula, and northeast Washington (Marcot et al. 2003). Marten are absent from the northern Oregon and southern Washington coastal mountains, and are rare in the Olympic Peninsula (Zielinski et al. 2001).
116 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Conservation Status: NatureServe (http://www.natureserve.org/explorer/servlet/NatureServe)
• Global – G5 – Widespread, abundant, secure • Oregon – S3S4 – Vulnerable to Apparently secure ODFW – • Vulnerable (Blue Mountains, Coast Range) (http://www.dfw.state.or.us/wildlife/diversity/species/docs/SSL_by_taxon.pdf) • Harvested as a furbearer state-wide (http://www.dfw.state.or.us/resources/hunting/small_game/regulations/docs/2010- 2012_Furbearer_Regs.pdf)
Population Trend: Zielinski et al. (2001) described the distribution of martens in coastal California, Oregon, and Washington from 1900 to 1949 using museum and trapping records and compared it to recent (1989-1998) detections at camera and track-plate stations. Martens were detected at only 12 of 237 (5.1%) survey sample units. Martens may have declined on the Olympic Peninsula of Washington. Few data exist from northwestern Oregon and southwestern Washington, but the limited amount of protected public land and absence of reported road kills are reasons for concern for populations in this region. Martens still occur in the central and southern coastal mountains of Oregon. In the coastal area of the Pacific states, detections are clumped in 4 locations, separated by significant distances, which presents a conservation challenge.
Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project (ICBEMP): The assessment process that was used by the ICBEMP is based on using the concept of HRV to assess likelihood of maintaining viable populations of species. By managing habitat within HRV it is assumed that adequate habitat will be provided because species survived those levels of habitat in the past to be present today. Thus, if we manage current habitats within the range of historic variability, we will likely do an adequate job of ensuring population viability for those species that remain (Landres et al. 1999).
Viability analysis for MIS can tier to large-scale assessments, especially where a viability assessment has not been completed for the Forest. Source Habitats for Terrestrial Vertebrates of Focus in the Interior Columbia Basin: Broad-Scale Trends and Management Implications (Wisdom et al. 2000) provides valuable information on habitat trends in the Columbia Basin. Ecological Reporting Units (ERUs) divide the Columbia Basin into 13 Units analyzed for changes between historical and current habitat conditions. The CMH project falls within the Northern Great Basin ERU.
Table 44. Percent of Ecological Reporting Units (ERUs) in American marten habitat for current and historical conditions, and the relative change in habitat (Wisdom et al. 2000). American Marten Percent of ERU in Source Habitat1 ERU Relative ERU Name Number Historical Current Change1 Trend Category Northern Great Basin 4 6.16 13.67 >100 Strongly increasing 1From Volume 3 - Table 5 – pg 493.
Project Area Current Conditions Habitat is abundant within the lodgepole pine and mixed conifer habitats, especially along riparian areas. Based on VEM, there are approximately 551,017 acres of potential marten reproductive habitat on the Fremont-Winema National Forest. Of this total 290,065 acres occur on the Fremont National and 20,414 acres within the CMH project area. There is 1 observation of marten in the NRIS wildlife database within
117 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
the project area. This individual was detected during a photo plot survey conducted between 1991 and 1993.
Data Collection/Methodology Surveys were not completed for American marten. Analysis for marten is based on available data in NRIS, suitable habitat as mapped by VEM and potential effects of proposed treatments to suitable marten habitat.
Environmental Consequences
Alternative 1 – No Action This alternative would not have any direct effect on marten. In the short term, marten are expected to continue using the higher elevation eastside mixed conifer and aspen/willow riparian corridors in a manner similar to their current usage. In the long term, precluding a large scale wildfire or insect/disease outbreak, encroachment of white fir and lodgepole pine into the ponderosa habitat, increasing tree mortality rates, and resulting increases in decadence in the ponderosa pine, lodgepole pine, and mixed conifer habitats will favor marten expansion in the CMH Project area. However, the risk of uncharacteristic wildfire and resultant loss of habitat increases with no restoration treatments. Most of the project area is fire regime condition class III, indicating the potential for wildfire is high. The potential for loss of large tracts of habitat due to wildfire or other disturbance factors increases with the no action alternative.
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Vegetation management treatments within ponderosa pine, dry mixed conifer, lodgepole pine, and riparian areas results in both negative and beneficial impacts to martens. Although restoration treatments would be designed to maintain and develop large tree structure, canopy cover would decrease resulting in more open stand condition which may negatively impact use and dispersal throughout the area. However, vegetation management treatments would also reduce the risk of habitat loss through large scale disturbance and facilitate the development of late successional habitat.
Variability on the landscape in the form of individual trees, openings, retention patches, and no treatment areas would result in individual and patches of trees that would remain subject to insect, disease, or fire mortality allowing for the continued recruitment of snag and down wood habitat. In addition, no treatment areas will be well distributed across the landscape and contribute to landscape heterogeneity. Most notable, the no treatment areas consisting of 5,900 acres of predominately lodgepole pine for black- backed woodpeckers would also provide habitat for marten. This mix of treatment and no treatment may provide the appropriate balance of maintaining some complexity in stand structure. In the long-term, creating diversity in age classes within eastside mixed conifer stands would reduce the potential for large scale habitat loss due to fire, insect, and disease events.
Martens are known to use aspen habitat for denning and foraging. In the short term (<10 years), desirable aspen structure would be maintained. In the long term (10+ years), removing the conifers in aspen stands is expected to result in an expansion and increased regeneration of aspen which would increase the amount of marten habitat.
Large trees, snags, and logs would be retained as denning or resting habitat for marten and other species. Project design criteria are in place to maintain habitat for marten and other small mammals. Although the development of future large snags may be retarded post-treatment as inter-tree competition is reduced, many of the large trees present already have decay components such as mistletoe or broken tops and fungi infections that would continue to provide habitat. In addition, restoration treatments would promote the
118 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
development of large tree structure which would provide for large snags in the long term (25+ years). Incidental snag loss may occur for safety purposes.
Prescribed fire can be used to create a diversity of forest communities, which over time, may support more marten. Small scale torching would create small openings for foraging habitat. Some loss of snags and down wood may impact travel, denning habitat, and subnivian hunting, yet some new snags are likely to be created.
Temporary roads may have a short-term (<5 years) impact on marten populations. During operations, these roads would be used by operators which would increase disturbance. However, these roads would be decommissioned after the treatments are completed, so there would be no long term effects from temporary road construction.
Routine maintenance of roads, stream restoration projects (culvert replacement, headcut repair, and stream bank stabilization), and spring enhancement would have no impact to the marten. Non-forested vegetation restoration treatments removing small conifer and juniper encroachment would also have no impact to marten.
Road closures and decommissioning would result in reduced road densities benefitting marten habitat by reducing the potential for human disturbance and snag loss. In the long-term (15+ years), physical habitat components such as vegetative cover would be expected to recover on decommissioned roads. The changes to MVUM would have minimal effects to marten.
Table 45. Measureable Indicator for Marten (acres suitable habitat) Indicator Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Approximate acres suitable marten habitat affected by the proposed treatments 0 acres 13,175 acres Approximate percent of suitable habitat affected across the Fremont National Forest (~290,065 acres total) 0% 5%
Cumulative Effects The residual impacts of actions that occurred during the past 50 years such as timber harvest, fire suppression, firewood gathering, road development, wildfires and prescribed fire in the project area have resulted in the distribution of potential marten habitat described in the existing condition. Ongoing firewood gathering and recreation, which generally occur adjacent to main travel routes, is not expected to add to cumulative effects to marten or their habitat.
It is expected that the Northern Great Basin ERU would remain above historic levels of source habitat for marten as suggested by Wisdom et al. (2000). 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. Thus, if we manage current habitats within the range of historic variability, we would do an adequate job of ensuring population viability for those species that remain (Landres et al. 1999).
Impact Determination Considering all direct, indirect and cumulative effects to marten for no action alternative and Alternative 2, this project would not contribute to a negative trend in viability on the Fremont National Forest. Alternative 2 would affect 5% of the suitable habitat on the Fremont National Forest. Therefore, the incremental effects of Alternative 2 to marten and marten habitat, when added to all of the past, present and reasonably foreseeable actions would be minimal. The Crooked Mud Honey Project is consistent with the Forest Plan and continued viability of marten is expected on the Fremont National Forest.
119 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Goshawk Accipiter gentilis
Existing Condition Habitat Use: The northern goshawk is the largest North American accipiter and was chosen as a MIS species due to its association with mature and late and old structure (LOS) ponderosa and mixed conifer forest structural stages for nesting. The goshawk home range encompasses about 6,000 acres and is composed of a nest core area, post-fledging area (PFA), and a foraging area. Various forest structural stages are associated with the components of the home range. Nest areas often occur on north aspects, along stream zones, or other areas where a dense forest canopy and LOS forest conditions are present. Preferred nest stands have a minimum of 40% canopy closure; and the nest sites within these stands have >60% canopy closure (Reynolds et al. 1991). Goshawks often use stands of old growth forest as nesting sites (DuBois, et al. 1987). PFAs usually resemble the nest area, but also include a variety of forest types and conditions where hiding cover (for the young) and prey availability is present (Reynolds et al., 1991). Foraging areas may be as closely tied to prey availability as to habitat structure and composition. These areas often contain a mixture of various forest structural stages with snags, downed logs, large trees, and small openings with an herbaceous and/or shrubby understory present. The Northern Goshawk (Accipiter gentilis) Management Indicator Species Assessment Wallowa-Whitman National Forest is incorporated by reference (Keown 2011).
Threats: • Habitat alteration due to timber and fire management practices (Squires and Kennedy 2006). • Fire suppression may lead to increased susceptibility of stand replacing fire and insect and disease outbreaks, which can result in the deterioration or loss of nesting habitat (NatureServe 2010, Wisdom et al. 2000). • Loss of foraging habitat due to dense conifer understory as a result of fire suppression. Dense understories may obstruct flight corridors used by goshawks to hunt prey (Wisdom et al. 2000).
Distribution:
Figure 32: Goshawk distribution
Conservation Status: NatureServe (http://www.natureserve.org/explorer/servlet/NatureServe)
120 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
• Global – G5 – Widespread, abundant, secure • Oregon – S3 – Vulnerable Population Trend: The reliability rating given to the Breeding Bird data used for the population trend information in Oregon is given a red reliability rating, meaning the data reflects deficiencies such as very low abundance, very low sample size, or very imprecise (Sauer et al. 2008). Given the caution in the data, here is the available information regarding the population trends of goshawks.
Partners In Flight (PIF) Species Assessment Process evaluates six factors related to biological vulnerability and two measures of area importance for each North American bird species to generate global or regional status assessments of birds. The six factors considered include population size, breeding distribution, non-breeding distribution, threats to breeding, threats to nonbreeding, and population trend. Simple numerical scores are generated that rank each species in terms of its biological vulnerability and regional status. Each score is based on the best available science and is heavily reviewed by experts both within and outside the PIF science committee (Panjabi 2005).
Partners in Flight Species Database
Table 46. Summary of Northern Goshawk Species Assessment Scores for the Great Basin Bird Conservation Region (9). (http://www.rmbo.org/pif/scores/scores.html) Score Qualitative Definition Threats to Breeding 3 Slight to moderate decline in the future suitability of breeding or non-breeding conditions is expected. Population Trend 4 Possible moderate decrease. Regional Concern species Yes
Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project: The assessment process used by the ICBEMP is based on using the concept of HRV to assess likelihood of maintaining viable populations of species. By managing habitat within HRV it is assumed that adequate habitat will be provided because species survived those levels of habitat in the past to be present today. Thus, if we manage current habitats within the range of historic variability, we will likely do an adequate job of ensuring population viability for those species that remain (Landres et al. 1999).
Viability analysis for MIS can tier to large-scale assessments, especially where a viability assessment has not been completed for the Forest. Source Habitats for Terrestrial Vertebrates of Focus in the Interior Columbia Basin: Broad-Scale Trends and Management Implications (Wisdom et al. 2000) provides valuable information on habitat trends in the Columbia Basin. Ecological Reporting Units (ERUs) divide the Columbia Basin into 13 Units analyzed for changes between historical and current habitat conditions. The CMH project falls within the Northern Great Basin ERU.
Table 47. Percent of Ecological Reporting Units (ERUs) in goshawk habitat for current and historical conditions, and the relative change in habitat (Wisdom et al. 2000). Goshawk Percent of ERU in Source Habitat1 ERU Relative ERU Name Number Historical Current Change1 Trend Category Northern Great Basin 4 25.20 34.03 33.05 Increasing 1From Volume 3 - Table 5 – pg 492.
Project Area Current Conditions There is potential goshawk habitat across the project area. Based on VEM, there are approximately 232,756 acres of potential reproductive habitat on the Fremont National Forest and 31,382 acres within
121 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
the project area. There are eight documented nest sites and ten observations in the NRIS wildlife database within the project area.
Table 48. Goshawk Detections on 4,946 Surveyed Acres in the Crooked Mud Honey Planning Area in 2013/2014 Location Name Core and PFA Detection/Comments Comments established White Pine Marsh #1 Yes Active nest with fledglings Nest tree located. Three northern goshawk fledglings. Honey Creek #1 Yes Adults and juveniles present Nest tree possibly located. A cluster of northern goshawk nest trees was located. It appeared one of the trees was the 2013 nest tree based on white wash and nest condition. Sherman Valley west Yes Adults and juveniles present Nest tree not located. Adults and #1 juvenile consistently found within PFA. Sage Creek #4 No Adults present (On multiple No juveniles observed. Did not pin visits). After follow up work in down a site center with intensive stand 2014 it appears we were calling searches. in birds from the Honey Creek #1 NORTHERN GOSHAWK site. Walker #1 No Adult present. No juveniles observed. Did not pin down a site center with intensive stand searches. White Pine Marsh #2 Yes No detections Four northern goshawk nest structures, plus one active red-tail hawk nest.
Fremont National Forest LRMP Standards and Guidelines (S&Gs) for goshawks, as amended by the Regional Forester’s Amendment #2, are to protect a 30-acre nest core, to delineate a 400-acre post fledging area (PFA) with an emphasis of maintaining existing LOS stands and moving younger stands toward LOS condition, and to protect every known active and historical nest site from disturbance. To meet the direction of the Regional Forester’s Amendment #2, a nest stand and a post fledging area (PFA) were identified for each nest.
Data Collection/Methodology
In 2013, the wildlife staff conducted surveys for northern goshawk in the CMH project area. Prior to this survey there were five historic observation of northern goshawk in the CMH project area. Due to limited resources, the wildlife staff prioritized sampling location based on historic goshawk nest sites, areas with prior goshawk detections, and areas of large contiguous stands of conifers. A total of 4,946 acres within the Crooked Mud Honey Project area were surveyed during the 2013 season. Of the approximately 4,946 acres surveyed, six areas were occupied by goshawks (see Table 48). A two year survey protocol was not complete and the entire project area was not surveyed. If time permits we will survey additional habitat for northern goshawk during the spring/summer of 2014. Analysis for goshawk is based on suitable habitat as mapped by VEM , local habitat modeling and the available data in NRIS.
Environmental Consequences
Alternative 1 – No Action This alternative would not have any direct effect on goshawks. Current trends impacting goshawk habitat would continue including 1) a loss of large diameter trees to insect/disease mortality, 2) an expansion of lodgepole pine and white fir into ponderosa pine stands, and 3) a reduction in ground cover shrubs and forbs with increased canopy closure. This trend increases decadence and multistory canopy closure that
122 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
generally favors goshawk habitat. In the short term (<15 years), forage and habitat conditions are both positively and negatively impacted. The increased decadence contributes desirable dead wood structure and increased tree canopies but it also decreases understory habitat diversity that supports prey species.
In the long term (>15 years), loss of the large tree structure and slowed development of future large tree structure will negatively impact desirable goshawk nesting structure. Most of the CMH project area is fire regime condition class III, indicating the potential for wildfire is high. The potential for loss of large tracts of habitat due to wildfire or other disturbance factors increases with the no action alternative.
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action The four identified goshawk nest cores and PFA’s would be treated with prescriptions designed to maintain habitat for goshawk nesting and foraging habitat. The established 30 acre nest core areas would receive no treatments. The restoration treatments within the PFAs would improve habitat by 1) maintaining stand complexity for nesting habitat, 2) creating openings to improve foraging opportunities, 3) prescribed burning would increase vegetative diversity including small scale torching which improves foraging habitat due to snag recruitment, 4) improving fine-scale and stand level heterogeneity, and 5) limit harvesting within the PFA to approximately 50% of the total area. This would create stand heterogeneity while protecting the nest core.
Other vegetation management treatments within ponderosa pine, dry mixed conifer, lodgepole pine, aspen/meadow restoration, and riparian areas result in both negative and beneficial impacts to goshawks. Although restoration treatments would be designed to maintain and develop large tree structure and to maintain heterogeneity through retention areas, individuals, clumps, and openings, canopy cover would decrease, resulting in more open stand condition. This would negatively impact nesting habitat but would improve foraging habitat. Other beneficial impacts include a reduction in the risk of habitat loss through large scale disturbance and restoration treatments that would facilitate the development of late successional habitat.
Meadow, Riparian, and Other Hardwood Treatments would improve habitat for goshawks by increasing the abundance and diversity of riparian vegetation thereby improving foraging habitat. Goshawks will nest in mature aspen, so in the short term (<10 years), desirable aspen structure would be maintained. In the long term (10+ years), aspen stands are likely to respond to the increased sunlight and decreased competition from conifers resulting in an expansion and increased regeneration of aspen and other hardwoods which would increase potential nesting and foraging habitat.
No treatment and retention areas are well distributed across the landscape and contribute to landscape heterogeneity. Most notable, the no treatment area for black-backed woodpeckers would provide 5,900 acres of lodgepole habitat. This would provide foraging opportunities and diversity on the landscape. This mix of treatment and no treatment along with protecting known sites may provide the appropriate balance of maintaining some complexity in stand structure while reducing the potential for stand replacement fire.
Temporary roads may have a short-term (<5 years) impact on goshawk populations. During operations, these roads may be used by operators and the public which would increase disturbance. However, these roads would be closed after the treatments are completed, so there would be no long term effects from temporary road construction.
Routine maintenance of roads, stream restoration projects (culvert replacement, headcut repair, and streambank stabilization), and spring enhancement would have no impact to the goshawk. Non-forested vegetation restoration treatments removing small conifer and juniper encroachment would also have no impact to goshawk.
123 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Road closures and decommissioning would result in reduced road densities benefitting goshawk habitat by reducing the potential for human disturbance, firewood cutting and additional vegetative cover along roadways. In the long-term (15+ years), physical habitat components such as vegetative cover would be expected to recover on decommissioned roads. The changes to MVUM would have minimal effects to goshawks.
Project design criteria are in place to reduce the potential for direct disturbance to nesting goshawks. Seasonal restrictions or LOP’s would be applied during the nesting season to all known goshawk nest sites. If nest sites are discovered during implementation, then a seasonal restriction would be applied and a 30 acre no treatment area and a 400 acre PFA would be identified.
Table 49. Measureable Indicator for Goshawks (acres of suitable habitat) Indicator Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Approximate acres suitable goshawk habitat affected by the proposed treatments 0 acres 19,326 acres Approximate percent of suitable habitat affected across the Fremont National Forest (~232,756 acres total) 0% 8%
Cumulative Effects The residual impacts of actions that occurred during the past 50 years such as timber harvests, fire suppression, livestock grazing, firewood gathering, road development, wildfires and prescribed fire in the project area have resulted in the distribution of goshawk habitat described in the existing condition. On- going activities that may impact potential goshawk habitat include firewood gathering. This activity would result in reductions in snags, however impacts are expected to be minimal as existing snags would be retained across the project area, along with large trees and clumps of retention areas that would provide for future snags and nesting habitat. Therefore, the incremental effects of Alternative 2 to goshawk and goshawk habitat, when added to the past and ongoing actions would be minimal.
Impact Determination Considering all direct, indirect and cumulative effects to goshawks for Alternative 2, this project would not contribute to a negative trend in viability on the Fremont-Winema National Forest. It is expected that the Northern Great Basin ERU would remain above historic levels of source habitat for goshawks as suggested by Wisdom et al. (2000). By managing habitat within HRV it is assumed that adequate habitat will be provided because species survived those levels of habitat in the past to be present today. Thus, if we manage current habitats within the range of historic variability, we will likely do an adequate job of ensuring population viability for those species that remain (Landres et al. 1999). The effects of Alternative 2 would impact 8% of the suitable habitat on the Fremont National Forest. The CMH Project is consistent with the Forest Plan and continued viability of goshawks is expected on the Fremont National Forest.
Pileated Woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus
Existing Condition Habitat Use: Pileated woodpeckers in the Columbia Basin are associated with late-seral stages of the subalpine, montane and lower montane forests. Specifically, the old-forest single- and multi-strata stages of grand fir-white-fir, interior Douglas-fir, western larch, western white pine, western red cedar-western hemlock; and the old-forest multi-strata stage of Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir, Pacific silver fir-mountain hemlock (Wisdom et al. 2000). Special habitat features are snags, down logs, and large hollow trees
124 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
(Wisdom et al. 2000). The MIS Information Sheet Pileated Woodpecker (Dryocopus pileatus) is incorporated by reference (Mellen-McClean 2011c).
Threats: • Habitat loss (NatureServe 2010) • Declines in densities of large snags (>21” dbh) and large hollow trees (Wisdom et al. 2000). • Possibly unsustainable conditions in late-seral montane forests. Due to fire exclusion and past management, forests are susceptible to catastrophic fire, insect, and disease problems in parts of the Columbia Basin (Wisdom et al. 2000).
Distribution:
Global: NatureServe (http://www.natureserve.org/explorer/servlet/NatureServe?searchName=Dryocopus+pileatus) “RESIDENT: from southern and eastern British Columbia and southwestern Mackenzie across southern Canada to Quebec and Nova Scotia, south in Pacific states to central California, in the Rocky Mountains to Idaho and western Montana, in the central and eastern U.S. to the eastern Dakotas, Gulf Coast, and southern Florida, and west in the eastern U.S. to Iowa, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas (AOU 1983).”
Oregon and Washington: Wide-spread resident in forested areas of Oregon and Washington including the Olympic Peninsula, Coastal Mountains, Klamath Mountains, Cascade Mountains, Blue Mountains, Northeast Washington, and forested fringes of the Puget Trough, Willamette, Rogue and Umpqua Valleys. Absent from higher and lower elevations due to lack of large trees for nesting, roosting, and foraging (Marshall et al. 2003).
Conservation Status: NatureServe (http://www.natureserve.org/explorer/servlet/NatureServe?searchName=Dryocopus+pileatus) • Global – G5 – Widespread, abundant, secure • Oregon – S4 – Apparently secure ODFW – Vulnerable (Blue Mountains, Eastern Cascades Slopes and Foothills, Klamath Mountains) (http://www.dfw.state.or.us/wildlife/diversity/species/docs/SSL_by_taxon.pdf)
Population Trend: The reliability rating given to the Breeding Bird data used for the population trend information in Oregon is given a yellow reliability rating, meaning the data reflects deficiencies such as low abundance, small sample size, or quite imprecise (Sauer et al. 2008). Given the caution in the data, here is the available information regarding the population trends of pileated woodpecker.
Partners In Flight (PIF) Species Assessment Process evaluates six factors related to biological vulnerability and two measures of area importance for each North American bird species to generate global or regional status assessments of birds. The six factors considered include population size, breeding distribution, non-breeding distribution, threats to breeding, threats to nonbreeding, and population trend. Simple numerical scores are generated that rank each species in terms of its biological vulnerability and regional status. Each score is based on the best available science and is heavily reviewed by experts both within and outside the PIF science committee (Panjabi 2005).
125 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Partners in Flight Species Database
Table 50. Summary of Pileated Woodpecker Species Assessment Scores for the Great Basin Bird Conservation Region (9). (http://www.rmbo.org/pif/scores/scores.html) Score Qualitative Definition Threats to Breeding 3 Slight to moderate decline in the future suitability of breeding or non-breeding conditions is expected. Population Trend 2 Possible increase. Regional Concern species No
Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project: The assessment process that was used by the ICBEMP is based on using the concept of HRV to assess likelihood of maintaining viable populations of species. By managing habitat within HRV it is assumed that adequate habitat will be provided because species survived those levels of habitat in the past to be present today. Thus, if we manage current habitats within the range of historic variability, we will likely do an adequate job of ensuring population viability for those species that remain (Landres et al. 1999).
Viability analysis for MIS can tier to large-scale assessments, especially where a viability assessment has not been completed for the Forest. Source Habitats for Terrestrial Vertebrates of Focus in the Interior Columbia Basin: Broad-Scale Trends and Management Implications (Wisdom et al. 2000) provides valuable information on habitat trends in the Columbia Basin. Ecological Reporting Units (ERUs) divide the Columbia Basin into 13 Units analyzed for changes between historical and current habitat conditions. The CMH project falls within the Northern Great Basin ERU.
Table 51. Percent of Ecological Reporting Units (ERUs) in pileated woodpecker habitat for current and historical conditions, and the relative change in habitat (Wisdom et al. 2000). Pileated Woodpecker Percent of ERU in Source Habitat1 ERU Relative ERU Name Number Historical Current Change2 Trend Category Northern Great Basin 4 0.22 12.91 >100 Strongly increasing 1From Volume 3 - Table 5 – pg 494. 2From Volume 1 – page 33
Project Area Current Conditions Based on VEM, there is approximately 67,693 acres of potential reproductive habitat on the Fremont National Forest and 9,538 acres within the CMH project area. White fir encroachment has favored pileated woodpecker use. It has also increased the potential for stand replacement fire within the project area. There are zero documented nest sites and sixteen observations in the NRIS wildlife database within the project area.
Data Collection/Methodology Surveys were not completed for pileated woodpeckers. Analysis for pileated woodpeckers is based on available data in NRIS, suitable habitat as mapped by VEM, and the potential effects of proposed treatments to suitable pileated woodpecker habitat.
Environmental Consequences
Alternative 1 – No Action This alternative would not have any direct effect on pileated woodpeckers or pileated woodpecker habitat. Alternative 1 would provide for the greatest amount of pileated foraging and nesting habitat in the short term (< 50 years). All snags and down wood would remain on site. Nesting and foraging habitat may
126 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
improve with increased stand densities and an expansion of white fir into ponderosa pine communities, resulting in mortality of the overstory due to bark beetle mortality.
In the short term, the increased decadence contributes positively to pileated woodpecker foraging habitat. In the long term (>50 years), loss of the large tree structure and slowed development of future large tree structure will negatively impact desirable pileated woodpecker habitat. Most of the CMH project area is fire regime condition class III, indicating the potential for wildfire is high. The potential for loss of large tracts of habitat due to wildfire or other disturbance factors increases with the no action alternative.
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Ponderosa pine, lodgepole pine, and riparian areas do not provide habitat for pileated woodpeckers, therefore restoration treatments within these habitat types would have no impact to pileated woodpeckers. Vegetation management treatments within the dry mixed conifer would have negative impacts to pileated woodpeckers due to a decrease in canopy closure and the removal of white fir. Incidental large snag removal may occur for safety reasons. However, restoration treatments are designed to maintain old trees and to promote large tree development. This would result in an increase in large conifers and provide future large snag habitat. Treatment areas within dry mixed conifer stands will maintain small patches of habitat across the landscape.
Prescribed burning is expected to create a mosaic of conditions that are favorable for pileated woodpeckers. Although a loss of snags and down wood is expected with prescribed burning, small scale torching would result in snag recruitment. There is expected to be a net loss of down wood and a net increase in snags, due to fire mortality, similar to the results seen in research by Saab et al. (2006). See the Primary Excavator analysis below and DecAID Analysis and background information (Appendix C of the Wildlife Report) in the project record for more discussion on the impacts of this alternative to snag habitat.
Routine maintenance of roads, stream restoration projects (culvert replacements, headcut repairs and stream bank stabilization), and spring enhancement would have no impact to pileated woodpecker. Non- forested vegetation restoration treatments removing small conifer and juniper encroachment would also have no impact to pileated woodpecker.
Road closures and decommissioning would result in reduced road densities benefitting pileated woodpecker habitat by reducing the potential for human disturbance, firewood cutting and snag loss. This would decrease the potential for localized disturbance to pileated woodpeckers. The changes to MVUM would have minimal effects to pileated woodpeckers.
Table 52. Measureable Indicator for Pileated Woodpeckers (acres of suitable habitat) Indicator Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Approximate acres of suitable habitat affected by the proposed treatments 0 acres 9,583 acres Approximate percent of suitable habitat affected across the Fremont National Forest (~67,693 acres total) 0% 14%
Cumulative Effects The residual impacts of actions that occurred during the past 50 years such as timber harvests, fire suppression, livestock grazing, firewood gathering, road development, wildfires and prescribed fire in the project area have resulted in the distribution of pileated woodpecker habitat described in the existing condition. On-going activities that may impact woodpecker habitat include firewood gathering. This activity would lead to loss of snags in the project area. Cumulatively, the impacts would be minimal because the project would retain existing snags and large trees that have the potential to become snags in
127 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
the long-term. Therefore, the incremental effects of Alternative 2 to pileated woodpeckers and pileated woodpecker habitat when added to the past and ongoing actions would be minimal.
Impact Determination Considering all direct, indirect and cumulative effects to pileated woodpeckers for Alternative 2, this project would not contribute to a negative trend in viability on the Fremont National Forest. It is expected that the Northern Great Basin ERU would remain above historic levels of source habitat for pileated woodpeckers as suggested by Wisdom et al. (2000). By managing habitat within HRV it is assumed that adequate habitat will be provided because species survived those levels of habitat in the past to be present today. Thus, if we manage current habitats within the range of historic variability, we will likely do an adequate job of ensuring population viability for those species that remain (Landres et al. 1999). Alternative 2 would potentially impact 14% of the suitable habitat on the Fremont National Forest. The effects of Alternative 2 would be minimal because snags, large trees and old white fir trees would be retained on the landscape. The CMH Project is consistent with the Forest Plan and continued viability of pileated woodpeckers is expected on the Fremont National Forest.
Red-naped Sapsucker Sphyrapicus nuchalis
Existing Condition Habitat Use: Red-naped sapsuckers are closely associated with aspen and deciduous riparian or forest stands. Sapsucker species require older trees with heart rot for nesting as well as adjacent conifers or mountain mahogany for sapwell feeding. Habitat recommendations include greater than 10 percent cover of aspen saplings in the understory to provide adequate representation of younger seral stages for replacement, greater than 4 trees and greater than 4 snags per 1.5 acres where trees and snags are greater than 39 feet in height and 10 inches dbh; and a mean canopy closure of 40 to 80 percent (Altman and Holmes, 2000). Conservation issues identified for the maintenance of aspen for red-naped sapsuckers are the lack of recruitment of aspen due to livestock grazing and fire suppression, reduced presence of large aspen trees and snags due to limited replacement, and the encroachment of conifer trees (Altman and Holmes, 2000). Cattle often graze young aspen trees later in the summer when the grass dries out. Therefore, the negative impacts of grazing on aspen regeneration are often more pronounced when pastures experience late season grazing year after year.
Aspen stands provide ecological as well as aesthetic diversity to the landscape, forage and cover for ungulates, nesting, feeding and migratory habitat for a variety of avian species, and habitat for a wide variety of small mammals. Other species that benefit from large aspen trees and snags are the house wren, mountain bluebird, Williamson’s sapsucker, tree swallow, and northern flicker. Generally, aspen stands are declining throughout the western U.S. and may be currently at only 5 percent of pre-settlement occurrence (Wall et al. 1999).
Threats (Altman 2000): • Lack of recruitment of young aspen due to livestock grazing and fire suppression • Reduced presence of large aspen trees and snags due to limited replacement • Encroachment of conifer trees into aspen stands
Distribution (NatureServe): Nesting range includes the Rocky Mountain region from the southeastern quarter of British Columbia, southwestern and southeastern Alberta, western and central Montana, and the Black Hills of South Dakota south, east of Cascades and Sierra Nevada, to east-central California, southern Nevada, central Arizona, southern New Mexico, and extreme western Texas (Davis and Guadalupe mountains) (AOU 1998).
128 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
During the nonbreeding season, the range extends from southern California (casually Oregon), southern Nevada, Utah, and central New Mexico south to southern Baja California.
Conservation Status: NatureServe (http://www.natureserve.org/explorer/servlet/NatureServe) • Global – G5 – Widespread, abundant, secure • Oregon – S4B,S3N – Apparently secure
Population Trend: The reliability rating given to the Breeding Bird data used for the population trend information in Oregon is given a yellow reliability rating, meaning the data reflects deficiencies such as low abundance, small sample size, or quite imprecise (Sauer et al. 2008). Given the caution in the data, here is the available information regarding the population trends of red-naped sapsuckers.
Partners In Flight (PIF) Species Assessment Process evaluates six factors related to biological vulnerability and two measures of area importance for each North American bird species to generate global or regional status assessments of birds. The six factors considered include population size, breeding distribution, non-breeding distribution, threats to breeding, threats to nonbreeding, and population trend. Simple numerical scores are generated that rank each species in terms of its biological vulnerability and regional status. Each score is based on the best available science and is heavily reviewed by experts both within and outside the PIF science committee (Panjabi 2005).
Partners in Flight Species Database
Table 53. Summary of Red-naped Sapsucker Species Assessment Scores for the Great Basin Bird Conservation Region (9). (http://www.rmbo.org/pif/scores/scores.html) Score Qualitative Definition Threats to Breeding 3 Slight to moderate decline in the future suitability of breeding or non-breeding conditions is expected. Population Trend 2 Possible increase. Regional Concern species No
Project Area Current Conditions: Aspen stands (generally 5-60 acres in size) are found throughout the project area. In general, aspen stands are in moderate health. Many aspen stands are becoming encroached by conifers which can reduce the health and vigor of aspen stands due to the shading of sunlight and competition for water. Grazing occurs throughout the project area and aspen recruitment through sprouting is limited. There are zero documented nest sites and zero observations in the NRIS wildlife database.
Data Collection/Methodology Surveys were not completed for red-naped sapsuckers. Aspen stands have not been completely mapped on the Fremont National Forest. On the Fremont National Forest approximately 6,700 acres of aspen have been mapped within the Warner Mountains, Bridge/Buck, and Upper Sycan Project areas. Based on existing mapping, field knowledge and an estimation in the Forest Plan (LRMP p. 103), there is estimated to be approximately 14,000 acres of aspen on the Fremont National Forest. Based on field reconaisance and aerial aspen mapping, it’s estimated there are approximately 2,500 acres of aspen within the CMH project area. Analysis for red-naped sapsucker is based on available data in NRIS, estimated acres of aspen in the CMH project area and estimated acres of aspen on the Fremont National Forest from the LRMP.
129 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Environmental Consequences
Alternative 1 – No Action With the no action alternative, the overall health of aspen would continue to decline due to conifer encroachment and lack of fire. Some aspen clones, especially those that are small (<1 acre), may completely disappear. Overall, the potential habitat for red-naped sapsuckers would decline with the no action alternative.
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Vegetation management treatments within ponderosa pine, dry mixed conifer, lodgepole pine, and riparian areas would improve habitat for aspen and red-naped sapsuckers. Overstory vegetation treatments would also benefit mahogany stands necessary for foraging. Treatments are designed to aggressively remove conifers within and adjacent to aspen stands to allow for the persistence and expansion of aspen by reducing water and sunlight. Prescribed fire would be applied within aspen stands with the objective of maintaining a mosaic of burned/unburned to stimulate aspen suckering while maintaining some of the existing mature aspen. Overall, restoration treatments would greatly improve aspen and red-naped sapsucker habitat.
Routine maintenance of roads, stream restoration projects (culvert replacement, headcut repairs, and streambank stabilization), and spring enhancement would have no impact to the red-naped sapsucker. These treatments will provide additional riparian vegetation that will benefit the species. Non-forested vegetation restoration treatments removing small conifer and juniper encroachment would also have no impact to this species.
Road closures and decommissioning would result in reduced road densities benefitting red-naped sapsucker habitat by reducing the potential for human disturbance, firewood cutting and snag loss. The changes to MVUM would have minimal effects to red-naped sapsuckers.
Table 54. Measureable Indicator for red-naped sapsucker (acres of suitable habitat) Indicator Alt. 1 Alt. 2
Approximate acres suitable habitat affected by the proposed treatments 0 acres 2,500 acres
Approximate percent of suitable habitat affected across the Fremont National Forest (~14,000 acres total) 0% 18%
Cumulative Effects The residual impacts of actions that occurred during the past 50 years such as timber harvests, fire suppression, livestock grazing, firewood gathering, road development, wildfires and prescribed fire in the project area have resulted in the distribution of red-naped sapsucker habitat described in the existing condition. On-going livestock grazing may impact potential red-naped sapsucker habitat by reducing new suckers in some stands. Alternative 2 activities are expected to improve habitat conditions for red-naped sapsuckers primarily through vegetation treatments. Therefore, the incremental effects of Alternative 2, when added to the past and ongoing actions would be minimal to red-naped sapsucker and their habitat.
Impact Determination Considering all direct, indirect and cumulative effects to red-naped sapsuckers for Alternative 2, this project would not contribute to a negative trend in viability on the Fremont National Forest. Alternative 2
130 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
would affect 18% of the suitable habitat on the Forest primarily through restoration treatments in aspen stands in CMH. Therefore, the incremental effects of Alternative 2 to red-naped sapsuckers and red- naped sapsucker habitat, when added to all of the past, present and reasonably foreseeable actions, would be minimal. The CMH Poject is consistent with the Forest Plan and continued viability of red-naped sapsuckers is expected on the Fremont National Forest.
Black-backed Woodpecker Picoides arcticus
Existing Condition Habitat Use: The Fremont National Forest is considered to be outside of the range of three-toed woodpeckers. Black- backed woodpecker has been substituted for three-toed woodpecker as an MIS species since they have similar habitat requirements. Black-backed woodpecker is used as an indicator of overmature and mature lodgepole pine forests. It is distributed from Alaska to California, through Canada to South Dakota, and elsewhere in northern and eastern U.S. Black-backed woodpeckers occur in conifer forests with snags, especially recently burned or bark-beetle killed forests. They nest in live trees with heart rot or dead trees, and can use smaller trees for nest cavities. Their main diet is larvae of wood-boring beetles gathered from under bark of trees.
Threats: The following list of threats is from Dixon and Saab (2000), NatureServe (2010), and Wisdom et al. (2000) • Salvage of fire-killed or insect-infested trees • Altered frequency of stand-replacing fire due to fire suppression • Altered pattern of beetle outbreaks through silvicultural practices • Decline in availability of snags infected with heart rot • Decline in late-seral montane forests
Distribution: Global: Black-backed Woodpecker - North America: NatureServe (http://www.natureserve.org/explorer) “RESIDENT: often locally, from western and central Alaska to northern Saskatchewan and central Labrador, south to southeastern British Columbia, central California, northwestern Wyoming, southwestern South Dakota, central Saskatchewan, northern Minnesota, southeastern Ontario, and northern New England (AOU 1983). Wanders irregularly south in winter.”
Black-backed Woodpecker - Oregon and Washington: A rare to locally common resident in both states. In Oregon, the bird occurs at high elevations of the west Cascades, is more widespread on the east slope of the Cascades with its center of abundance lodgepole pine forests from Bend to Klamath Falls, is uncommon in the Blue Mountains, and occasionally seen in the Siskiyou Mountains (Marshall et al. 2003). In Washington, it occurs at mid to high elevations east of the Cascade crest, rarely west of the crest (Wahl et al. 2005).
Conservation Status: NatureServe (http://www.natureserve.org/explorer/index.htm) • Global – G5 – Widespread, abundant, secure • Oregon – S3 – Vulnerable • Washington – S3 – Vulnerable ODFW – Vulnerable (http://www.dfw.state.or.us/wildlife/diversity/species/docs/SSL_by_taxon.pdf)
131 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Population Trend: The reliability rating given to the Breeding Bird data used for the population trend information in Oregon is given a low reliability rating, meaning the data reflects deficiencies such as low abundance or small sample size (Sauer et al. 2008). Given the caution in the data, here is the available information regarding the population trends of black-backed woodpeckers. Partners In Flight (PIF) Species Assessment Process evaluates six factors related to biological vulnerability and two measures of area importance for each North American bird species to generate global or regional status assessments of birds. The six factors considered include population size, breeding distribution, non-breeding distribution, threats to breeding, threats to nonbreeding, and population trend. Simple numerical scores are generated that rank each species in terms of its biological vulnerability and regional status. Each score is based on the best available science and is heavily reviewed by experts both within and outside the PIF science committee (Panjabi 2005).
Partners in Flight (PIF) Database Table 55. Summary of Black-backed Woodpecker Species Assessment Scores for the Great Basin Bird Conservation Region (9). (http://www.rmbo.org/pif/scores/scores.html) Score Qualitative Definition
Threats to Breeding 3 Slight to moderate decline in the future suitability of breeding or non-breeding conditions is expected.
Population Trend 3 Stable or possible decrease.
Regional Concern species No
Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project: The assessment process that was used by the ICBEMP and forest plan revisions is based on using the concept of HRV to assess likelihood of maintaining viable populations of species. By managing habitat within HRV it is assumed that adequate habitat will be provided because species survived those levels of habitat in the past to be present today. Thus, if we manage current habitats within the range of historic variability, we will likely do an adequate job of ensuring population viability for those species that remain (Landres et al. 1999).
Viability analysis for MIS can tier to large-scale assessments, especially where a viability assessment has not been completed for the Forest. Source Habitats for Terrestrial Vertebrates of Focus in the Interior Columbia Basin: Broad-Scale Trends and Management Implications (Wisdom et al. 2000) provides valuable information on habitat trends in the Columbia Basin. Ecological Reporting Units (ERUs) divide the Columbia Basin into 13 Units analyzed for changes between historical and current habitat conditions. The CMH project falls within the Northern Great Basin ERU.
132 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 56. Percent of Ecological Reporting Units (ERUs) in black-backed woodpecker habitat for current and historical conditions, and the relative change in habitat (Wisdom et al. 2000). Black-backed Percent of ERU in Woodpecker Source Habitat1
ERU Relative ERU Name Number Historical Current Change2 Trend Category
Northern Great Basin 4 25.17 35.62 41.52 Increasing
1From Volume 3 - Table 5 – pg 497. 2From Volume 1 – page 33
Project Area Current Conditions There is suitable black-backed woodpecker habitat in the project area within lodgepole pine and mixed conifer stands, particularly those with recent bark beetle activity. Based on VEM, there are approximately 474,972 acres of potential reproductive habitat on the Fremont National Forest and 13,044 acres within the CMH project area.
There are 183 black-backed woodpecker observations and seven confirmed historic nesting pairs throughout the Fremont-Winema National Forest. In 2013, there were two incidental observations of black-backed woodpecker in the CMH Project Area. One observation occurred on September 29, 2013 in the McDowell subwatershed of Honey Creek on the border of the roadless area; and a second on July 30, 2013, in the Upper Crooked Creek subwatershed of Crooked Creek in mixed dry conifer forest. However, there have been no focused woodpecker surveys conducted in CMH. It is likely that they occur where appropriate habitat is available.
Green Forests: In northeast Oregon, Bull et al. (1986) found black-backed woodpeckers nesting primarily in ponderosa pine forest types, using ponderosa pine and lodgepole pine snags and live trees as nest sites. The woodpeckers foraged in all forest types, but showed a strong preference for foraging on beetle-infested lodgepole pine trees and snags. Nielsen-Pincus and Garton (2007) found nesting habitat included mature and old trees infested with disease or heart-rot, or dead trees in the early stages of decay. Nest sites were positively associated with high density of small (9-15 inch dbh) snags.
In the lodgepole pine dominated forests of central Oregon, Goggans et al. (1988) reported black-backed woodpeckers selected mature and overmature forest, and avoided logged areas and immature stands within their home ranges while foraging. The majority (89%) of nests were in lodgepole pine stands, and all were in lodgepole pine trees or snags with heart-rot. Mountain pine beetle infestation occurred at 66% of nest stands.
Recently Burned Forests: In central Oregon, Cahall and Hayes (2009) reported relative abundance of black-backed woodpeckers increased with the density of snags greater than fourteen inches dbh in a stand-replacing burn in conifer forests of primarily ponderosa pine. Relative abundance of black-backed woodpeckers were higher in unsalvaged stands than in salvaged stands, and the negative response to salvage was not mitigated by a lower intensity of salvage logging (Cahill 2007).
In south-central Oregon, Forristal (2009) found snag density was the strongest predictor of nest-site selection, with the odds of a nest occurrence nearly doubling for every fifty additional snags over nine inches dbh. However black-backed woodpeckers selected smaller snags for nesting with every two inch
133 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
increase in tree diameter over six inch dbh decreasing the odds of a black-backed woodpecker nesting in the snag by fifteen percent.
Thus snags of all sizes are necessary for black-backed woodpeckers with preferred habitat being dense stands of snags with a variety of snag diameters but particularly smaller snags used for nesting, roosting and foraging.
Current fire management policy of controlled burns, forest thinning and salvage logging are unlikely to increase black-backed woodpecker habitat because controlled burns and forest thinning reduce the amount of recent stand-replacement burned forest and salvage logging devalues the quality of habitat that does exist (Hutto 1995). It is crucial for this and other fire-dependent species that some level of stand replacement fire exempt from salvage logging occur on portions of the forest.
Data Collection/Methodology Surveys were not completed for black-backed woodpeckers. Analysis for black-backed woodpeckers is based on available data in NRIS, suitable habitat as mapped by VEM, and the potential effects of proposed treatments to suitable black-backed woodpecker habitat.
Environmental Consequences
Alternative 1 – No Action This alternative would not have any direct effect on black-backed woodpeckers. With increases in understory densities, there remains the risk of disease, insect outbreaks, or stand replacement fire that could lead to small population eruptions of this species throughout the project area. Immediately after disturbance (<5 years), populations are expected to increase. When the bark beetle populations begin to decline post disturbance (5+ years), the woodpecker populations would also decline. This alternative would provide the greatest amount of habitat for black-backed woodpeckers assuming disturbance events would continue.
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Vegetation management treatments within ponderosa pine, dry mixed conifer, lodgepole pine, and riparian areas would result in a reduction of potential habitat for black-backed woodpeckers. The proposed treatments are expected to reduce the risk for bark beetle mortality and wildfire over time which is the preferred habitat. Small scale torching is expected with prescribed burning which would result in small scale patches of potential habitat. Variability in the form of individuals, clumps, opening, retention patches, and no treatment areas would also result in individual and patches of trees that would remain subject to insect, disease, or fire mortality allowing for the continued recruitment of snag habitat. In addition 5,900 acres comprising approximately 8 units of lodgepole pine would not receive treatment within the project area. These retention areas would be left for black-backed woodpecker nesting and foraging habitat. See the Primary Excavator analysis below and DecAID Analysis and background information (Appendix C of the Wildlife Report) in the project record for more discussion on the impacts of this alternative to snag habitat.
Routine maintenance of roads, stream restoration projects (culvert replacement, headcut repair, and stream bank stabilization), and spring enhancement would have no impact to the black-backed woodpecker. Non-forested vegetation restoration treatments removing small conifer and juniper encroachment would also have no impact to black-backed woodpecker.
134 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Road closures and decommissioning would result in reduced road densities benefitting black-backed woodpeckers by reducing the potential for human disturbance, firewood cutting and snag loss. The changes to MVUM would have minimal effects to black-backed woodpeckers.
Table 57. Measureable Indicator for Black-backed Woodpecker (acres of suitable habitat) Indicator Alt. 1 Alt. 2
Approximate acres of suitable habitat affected by the proposed treatments 0 acres 13,044 acres
Approximate percent of suitable habitat affected across the Fremont National Forest (~474,972 acres total) 0% 3%
Cumulative Effects The residual impacts of actions that occurred during the past 50 years such as timber harvests, fire suppression, livestock grazing, firewood gathering, road development, wildfires and prescribed fire in the project area have resulted in the distribution of black-backed woodpecker habitat described in the existing condition. On-going activities that may impact woodpecker habitat include firewood gathering. This activity would lead to loss of snags in the project area, however the 5,900 acres of lodgepole pine stands that are being retained for black-backed woodpecker would help ensure areas of snags would exist in sufficient numbers in the project area. Cumulatively, the impacts would be minimal because the project would retain existing snags and large trees and the 5,900 acres of retention area for black backed woodpecker that have the potential to become snags in the long-term.
It is expected that the Northern Great Basin ERU would remain above historic levels of source habitat for black-backed woodpeckers as suggested by Wisdom et al. (2000). By managing habitat within HRV it is assumed that adequate habitat will be provided because species survived those levels of habitat in the past to be present today. Thus, if we manage current habitats within the range of historic variability, we will likely do an adequate job of ensuring population viability for those species that remain (Landres et al. 1999).
Impact Determination Considering all direct, indirect and cumulative effects to black-backed woodpeckers for no action alternative and Alternative 2, this project would not contribute to a negative trend in viability on the Fremont National Forest. Alternative 2 would affect 3% of the available habitat for black-backed woodpeckers on the Fremont National Forest. Therefore, the incremental effects of Alternative 2 to black-backed habitat, when added to all of the past, present and reasonably foreseeable actions, would be minimal. The CMH Project is consistent with the Forest Plan and continued viability of black-backed woodpeckers is expected on the Fremont National Forest.
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus
Existing Condition The bald eagle ranges throughout much of North America, nesting on both coasts and north into Alaska, and wintering as far south as Baja California. The largest breeding populations in the contiguous United States occur in the Pacific Northwest and Great Lake states, Chesapeake Bay, and Florida. Oregon and Washington are important areas for wintering bald eagles in the conterminous United States.
135 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Bald eagles are most common along coasts, major rivers, lakes and reservoirs (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1986), and require accessible prey and trees for suitable nesting and roosting habitat (Stalmaster and Newman1978). Food availability, such as aggregations of waterfowl or salmon runs, is a primary factor attracting bald eagles to wintering areas and influences the distribution of nests and territories. Bald eagles feed primarily on fish during the breeding season, and eat waterfowl, seabirds and carrion during the winter (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1995).
Bald eagles usually nest in trees near water, but are known to nest on cliffs and (rarely) on the ground. Nest sites are usually in large trees along shorelines in relatively remote areas that are free of disturbance. The trees must be sturdy and open to support a nest that is often 5 feet wide and 3 feet deep. Adults tend to use the same breeding areas year after year, and often the same nest, though a breeding area may include one or more alternative nests (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1999).
Wintering eagles can be found concentrated at salmon spawning areas and waterfowl wintering areas. Wintering eagles can sometimes be found in large communal roosts during the winter. Isolation is an important feature of winter habitat and night roosts are usually in remote areas with less human disturbance. In Washington, 98 percent of wintering eagles tolerated human activity at a distance of 300 m (328 yards), but only 50 percent tolerated activity within 150 m (164 yards) (Stalmaster and Newman 1978).
As of August 8, 2007, the bald eagle is no longer protected under the Endangered Species Act. However, bald eagles remain protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) (16 U.S.C. 703-712) and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (Eagle Act) (16 U.S.C. 668-668c).
Take is prohibited under both the MBTA and Eagle Act. The MBTA defines “take” as “pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, possess or collect.” The Eagle Act defines “take” as “pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, molest, or disturb.” The definition of disturb was further clarified on June 5, 2007, in the Federal Register:
“Disturb means to agitate or bother a bald or golden eagle to a degree that causes, or is likely to cause, based on the best scientific information available, (1) injury to an eagle, (2) a decrease in its productivity, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior, or (3) nest abandonment, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior.”
With the delisting of the bald eagle imminent, the FWS released new National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2007), which can be found at http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/baldeagle.htm. The guidelines contain recommendations for avoiding disturbance to nesting, roosting, and foraging eagles. The activity and distance recommendations are generally 660 feet away from nest for activities such as building construction, mining, chainsaw operation, and clearing of vegetation. Topography, visibility from the nest, and ongoing similar activities in the area are modifying factors and some activities may occur as close as 330 feet from the nest.
Project Area Current Conditions There is potential bald eagle habitat across the project area. Based on VEM, there are approximately 151,402 acres of suitable habitat on the Fremont National Forest, and 21,008 acres within the CMH project area. The CMH Project area has one occupied bald eagle nest and three observations of bald eagles in the NRIS wildlife database within the project area. This nest is monitored for nest success on an annual basis and LOP’s will be in place during restoration activities. In 2014 two eaglets and an adult bald eagle were observed at the nest location.
136 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
In the CMH project area VEM data in acres is not necessarily representative of the area’s ability to support breeding bald eagles. The preferred hunting areas for these raptors are large lakes. The only body of water in the CMH project area is Vee Lake, a small lake/large pond in the Honey Creek watershed.
Data Collection/Methodology Analysis for bald eagles is based on available data in NRIS, suitable habitat as mapped by VEM, and the potential effects to suitable bald eagle habitat. Monitoring of the active nest would occur during CMH project activities or the nest location will be assumed active.
Environmental Consequences
Alternative 1 – No Action This alternative would not have any direct effect on bald eagles. The continued loss of large tree structure from insect and disease mortality and slowed development of future large tree structure would negatively impact desirable nesting habitat. The CMH project area is fire regime condition class III, indicating the potential for wildfire is high. The potential for loss of large tracts of habitat due to wildfire or other disturbance factors increases with the no action alternative.
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action A known bald eagle nest is located within the CMH project area. This site will be protected and vegetation prescriptions will develop future bald eagle nesting habitat. This would include no activity within 660’ of the bald eagle nest during the breeding season (Jan 1st- Aug 31st). Other restrictions will apply based on the Fremont National Forest LRMP. To develop future nest trees, there would be an emphasis on retaining individual young healthy trees within an opening to promote and expedite the development of large trees with large limbs. Vegetation management treatments within ponderosa pine, dry mixed conifer, and riparian areas would also result in a benefit to bald eagle habitat because treatments would transition dense multi-story stands to open stands with large tree structure, which is desirable for bald eagles. Restoration treatments are designed to maintain old trees and to promote large tree development. This would result in an increase in large ponderosa pine nesting structure and large snag habitat. Snags that provide the highest quality roosting structure would be retained with the exception of incidental large snag removal that may occur due to safety reasons. Riparian, meadow, and other hardwood restoration would result in an increase in the abundance and diversity of riparian vegetation which would improve foraging habitat for prey species. Although a loss of snags and down wood is expected with prescribed burning, small scale torching would result in new snag recruitment.
Routine maintenance of roads, stream restoration projects (culvert replacement, headcut repair, and stream bank stabilization), and spring enhancement would have no impact to bald eagles. Non-forested vegetation restoration treatments removing small conifer and juniper encroachment would also have no impact to bald eagle.
Road closures and decommissioning would result in reduced road densities benefitting bald eagle habitat by reducing the potential for human disturbance, firewood cutting and snag loss. The changes to MVUM would have minimal effects to bald eagles.
137 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 58. Measureable Indicator for bald eagle (acres of suitable habitat) Indicator Alt. 1 Alt. 2
Approximate acres suitable habitat affected by proposed treatments 0 acres 12,813 acres
Approximate percent of suitable habitat affected across the Fremont National Forest (~151,402 acres total) 0% 8%
Cumulative Effects The residual impacts of actions that occurred during the past 50 years such as timber harvests, fire suppression, firewood gathering, road development, wildfires and natural features like lakes and water bodies in the project area have resulted in the distribution of bald eagle habitat described in the existing condition. On-going activities that may impact bald eagle habitat include firewood gathering and recreation. These activities would lead to loss of snags in the project area and human disturbance, which may change some use patterns in the area. Cumulatively, the impacts would be minimal because the project would retain existing snags and large trees and recreation use of the area is not extensive.
Impact Determination Considering all direct, indirect and cumulative effects to bald eagle for Alternative 2, this project would not contribute to a negative trend in viability on the Fremont National Forest. The effects of Alternative 2 would impact 8% of the suitable habitat for bald eagle on the Fremont National Forest. Therefore, the incremental effects of Alternative 2 to bald eagle habitat, when added to all of the past, present and reasonably foreseeable actions, would be minimal. The CMH Project is consistent with the Forest Plan and continued viability of bald eagle is expected on the Fremont National Forest.
Primary Excavators
Existing Condition Primary cavity excavators such as woodpeckers and nuthatches are forest dwelling birds that are specialized for foraging on and nesting in decaying wood. They require trees with rotted heartwood for excavating nest holes and for a foraging substrate (Jackman 1974). This foraging substrate consists of insects such as bark and wood boring beetles on the surface of trees. Their impact is sometimes great enough to prevent insect outbreaks (Jackman 1974).
The most significant role primary excavator’s play in the forest community is the provision of nest holes for small mammals or for cavity nesting birds that do not excavate their own holes (Jackman 1974). Approximately 31 percent of the total bird fauna use snags for nesting and denning, foraging, roosting, communicating, and as hunting and resting perches (Raphael and White, 1984). Rose et al. (2001) identifies 96 wildlife species associated with snags and 86 species associated with down wood. Most snag-using wildlife species are associated with snags greater than 14.2 inches dbh with about a third of these using snags greater than 29.1 inches dbh.
Dead wood is also a fundamental feature of healthy forests. Logs contribute to the hydrology of a site and provide microhabitats that protect wood-dwelling organisms with moist, thermally stable, predator- protected niches in which to live (Torgersen, unpublished). Logs can be considered places in which animals such as American marten forage, or places that animals such as fawns or black bear use for hiding cover and protection. Logs are also used for lookouts, feeding and reproduction, sources and storage of food, and bedding (Franklin et al., 1981). The persistence of large logs has special importance in providing wildlife with habitat continuity over long periods and through major disturbances (Franklin et al., 1981) and they have more potential uses as wildlife habitat (Rose, 2001). Rose (2001) states that
138 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
large accumulations of decaying wood provide wildlife habitat and influence basic ecosystem processes such as soil development and productivity, nutrient immobilization and mineralization, and nitrogen fixing. On the other hand, Rose et al. (2001) also states that forests east of the Cascade Crest are also strongly influenced by accumulations of decaying wood that set the stage for ecosystem disturbances from fire, insects, and disease.
Studies on the effects of prescribed fire on downed wood and forest structure observed increases in snag densities, including large diameter snags (Saab et al. 2006). This study also observed that nearly half of large down wood (greater than 9 inches large end diameter) was consumed by prescribed fire (Saab et al. 2006). Other studies have shown a decrease in overall snag densities. Fire severity during the burn operations contributes largely to the expected impacts to snags and down wood loss and recruitment.
Project Area Current Conditions Field reconnaissance suggests that snag densities appear to be increasing in the project area due to localized insect and disease mortality. Stand densities have also increased from decades of fire suppression. This has increased snags within some of the snag per acre categories.
The GNN data suggests that snags >10” within the project area are close to reference conditions. Three categories are below reference condition 6-12, 12-18, and 18+ for snags per acre (see Figure 33). This is due to past logging operations on the landscape. Non-treatment areas, retention areas and plantations on the landscape will move snags per acre closer to reference conditions. Two categories are above reference conditions 0, and 0-6 for snags per acre. A high percentage of the landscape in current condition is higher than reference in the 0 to 0-6 snags per acre range. This is the result of increased stand densities, conifer encroachment, insects and disease interactions within the CMH project area.
The GNN data suggests that snags >20” within the CMH project area are close to reference conditions. The only category below reference condition is the 2-4 snags per acre category (see Figure 34). The primary reason snags are deficient in this category is past harvest activities. Historic operations included salvage logging, seed tree and overstory removal. These logging practices removed a high percentage of larger dbh dead and live trees.
139 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Eastside Mixed Conifer (EMC) Habitat Type Comparison of Current Condition and DecAID Reference Conditions for Snags >10" 40 34 35 33 30 30 24 25 21 20 18 16 Current Condition 15 12 Reference Condition 10 Landscape Percent of 10
5 3
0 0 0-6 6-12 12-18 18+ Snags per acre
Figure 33: Existing Condition for Snag Densities Greater Than 10 Inches dbh Compared to the Reference Conditions in DecAID
EMC Habitat Type Comparison of Current Condition and DecAID Reference Conditions for Snags >20" DBH
50 46 45 42 40 35
30 26 25 Current Condition 20 17 14 Reference Condition 15 13 Percent of Percent of Landscape 9 10 10 8 5 5 0 0 0 - 2 2 - 4 4 - 6 6 + Snags per Acre
Figure 34: Existing Condition for Snag Densities Greater Than 20 Inches dbh Compared to the Reference Conditions in DecAID
140 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Data Collection/Methodology See the DecAID Analysis and background information (Appendix C of the Wildlife Report) in the project record.
Environmental Consequences
Alternative 1 – No Action With increases in understory densities, there remains the risk of disease, insect outbreaks, or stand replacement fire. If stand replacement fire occurred the increased snag densities would be a short-term pulse of additional snag habitat. These snags would fall over time and stand conditions would take years to recover. Disease and insect outbreaks would also contribute to increased snag recruitment with the potential of losing large areas of forested vegetation. The CMH project area is fire regime condition class III, indicating the potential for wildfire is high. The potential for loss of large tracts of habitat due to wildfire or other disturbance factors increases with the no action alternative.
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Vegetation management treatments within ponderosa pine, dry mixed conifer, lodgepole pine, and riparian areas would not salvage dead trees, except for those incidental snags that need to be felled for safety purposes. Opening stands with restoration treatments would promote the development of large trees which would allow for the recruitment of large snags over time. Variability in the form of individual tree retention, openings, retention patches, and no treatment areas would result in individual and patches of trees that would remain subject to insect, disease, or fire mortality allowing for the continued recruitment of snag habitat.
Although a loss of snags and down wood is expected with prescribed burning, small scale torching would result in snag recruitment. There is expected to be a net loss of down wood and a net increase in snags, due to fire mortality, similar to the results seen in research by Saab et al. (2006). Over time, restoration treatments would result in an increase in the amount of area with high densities of small and large diameter snags which would bring the project area closer to the DecAID reference conditions.
Routine maintenance of roads, stream restoration projects (culvert replacement, headcut repair, and streambank stabilization), and spring enhancement would have no impact to primary excavators. Non- forested vegetation restoration treatments removing small conifer and juniper encroachment would have no impact to primary excavators.
Road closures and decommissioning would result in reduced road densities benefitting primary excavator habitat by reducing human disturbance, firewood cutting and snag loss. The changes to MVUM would have minimal effects to primary excavators.
Project design criteria are in place to protect snag and down wood habitat. Existing snags would be left to provide habitat for snag dependent wildlife species; or if needed to be felled for safety reasons, would be left for down wood. Snag loss during logging operations would be avoided to the extent possible by placing skid trails and landings away from snag clumps.
Cumulative Effects The residual impacts of actions that occurred during the past 50 years such as timber harvests, fire suppression, livestock grazing, firewood gathering, road development, wildfires and prescribed fire in the project area have resulted in the distribution of snag and down wood habitat for primary excavators described in the existing condition. On-going activities that may impact snag and down wood habitat include firewood gathering. This activity would lead to loss of snags in the project area. Cumulatively,
141 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
the impacts would be minimal because the project would retain existing snags and large trees that have the potential to become snags in the long-term.
Impact Determination The project is designed to maintain and recruit snag and down wood habitat. In addition, it is expected that the project area would move toward the historic snag densities as described in DecAID over time. By managing habitat within HRV it is assumed that adequate habitat will be provided because species survived those levels of habitat in the past to be present today. Thus, if we manage current habitats within the range of historic variability, we will likely do an adequate job of ensuring population viability for those species that remain (Landres et al. 1999). Considering all direct, indirect and cumulative effects to primary excavators for Alternative 2, this project would not contribute to a negative trend in viability on the Fremont National Forest. The CMH project is consistent with the Forest Plan and continued viability of primary excavators is expected on the Fremont National Forest.
Landbirds
Existing Condition PIF Bird Conservation Regions (BCR’S) Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) are ecologically distinct regions in North America with similar bird communities, habitats, and resource management issues (see Figure 35). BCRs are a hierarchical framework of nested ecological units delineated by the Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC). The CEC framework comprises a hierarchy of 4 levels of eco-regions. At each spatial level, spatial resolution increases and eco-regions encompass areas that are progressively more similar in their biotic (e.g., plant and wildlife) and abiotic (e.g., soils, drainage patterns, temperature, and annual precipitation) characteristics.
A mapping team comprised of members from United States, Mexico, and Canada assembled to develop a consistent spatial framework for bird conservation in North America. The teams US members met to apply the framework to the United States and developed a proposed map of BCRs. The map was presented to and approved by the US North American Bird Conservation Initiative (NABCI) Committee during its November, 1999 meeting. The map is a dynamic tool. Its BCR boundaries will change over time as new scientific information becomes available. It is expected that the map will be updated every three years. More information on BCRs can be found at http://www.nabci-us.org/bcrs.htm
The overall goal of these BCR lists are to accurately identify the migratory and resident bird species (beyond those already designated as federally threatened or endangered) that represent our highest conservation priorities.
BCR lists are expected to be updated approximately every five years by the US Fish and Wildlife Service.
142 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Figure 35. Bird Conservation Regions
The Birds of Conservation Concern 2008 In December, 2008, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service released The Birds of Conservation Concern Report (BCC) which identifies species, subspecies, and populations of migratory and resident birds not already designated as federally threatened or endangered that represent highest conservation priorities and are in need of additional conservation actions.
While the bird species included in BCC 2008 are priorities for conservation action, this list makes no finding with regard to whether they warrant consideration for Endangered Species Act (ESA) listing. The goal is to prevent or remove the need for additional ESA bird listings by implementing proactive management and conservation actions. It is recommended that these lists be consulted in accordance with Executive Order 13186, “Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds.” In the BLM and FWS MOU, both parties shall: Work collaboratively to identify and address issues that affect species of concern, such as migratory bird species listed in the Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) and FWS’s Focal Species initiative. (BLM and FWS MOU, 2012, Section VI, page 4).
This report should also be used to develop research, monitoring, and management initiatives. BCC 2008 is intended to stimulate coordinated and collaborative proactive conservation actions among Federal, State, Tribal, and private partners. The hope is that, by focusing attention on these highest-priority species, this report will promote greater study and protection of the habitats and ecological communities upon which these species depend, thereby contributing to healthy avian populations and communities.
The CMH project area includes BCR 9 (Great Basin). Table 59 lists the bird species in BCR 9 that are known or are likely to occur within the project area.
143 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 59. Bird Species of Conservation Concern
Bird Species10 BCR
greater sage grouse, eared grebe, ferruginous hawk, golden eagle, yellow rail, flammulated owl, calliope hummingbird, Lewis’ woodpecker, Williamson’s sapsucker, white-headed woodpecker, loggerhead shrike, pinyon jay, sage thrasher, Virginia’s warbler, green-tailed towhee, brewer’s sparrow, sage sparrow, bald eagle, peregrine falcon, long-billed curlew, black swift, willow flycatcher 9
Avian Conservation Planning: (Migratory and Resident Birds): Migratory birds are those that breed in the U.S. and winter south of the border in Central and South America. Many of our well known passerine songbirds, flycatchers, vireos, swallows, thrushes, warblers, and hummingbirds, fall in this category. Most others are included in the resident category. Birds are a vital element of every terrestrial habitat in North America. Conserving habitat for birds will therefore contribute to meeting the needs of other wildlife and entire ecosystems (Partners In Flight Continental Plan). Continent wide declines in population trends for many avian species has developed into an international concern and led to the creation of the North American Bird Conservation Initiative (NABCI). Under this initiative, plans have been developed for the conservation of waterbirds, shorebirds, seabirds and landbirds. The landbird initiative known as Partners-In-Flight (PIF) has developed a series of bird conservation plans for every state. PIF has gained wide recognition as a leader in the landbird conservation arena.
The Oregon and Washington Chapter of PIF was formed in 1992 and has since developed a series of publications aimed at assisting private, state, tribal and federal agencies in managing for landbird populations. The most recent and applicable publications for the two state area have been Conservation Plans for landbirds.
PIF Bird Conservation Plans: Five conservation plans have been developed by PIF covering the various geographic regions found in Oregon and Washington. These documents have been prepared to stimulate and support a proactive approach to the conservation of landbirds throughout Oregon and Washington. They represent the collective efforts of multiple agencies and organizations within Oregon and Washington. Participants included biologists from federal and state agencies, industry, private consulting firms, environmental organizations, and academia in order to ensure a full range of ideas and practicalities were addressed by the plans.
Recommendations included in the documents are intended to inform planning efforts and actions of land managers, and stimulate monitoring and research to support landbird conservation. The recommendations are also expected to serve as a foundation for developing detailed conservation strategies at multiple geographic scales to ensure functional ecosystems with healthy populations of landbirds.
The plans can be found on the OR-WA PIF web site at www.orwapif.org
Conservation Strategy for Landbirds in the Columbia Plateau of Eastern Washington and Oregon
Conservation Strategy for Landbirds of the East-Slope of the Cascade Mountains in Washington and Oregon
10 Table only includes those species known to occur on the Fremont-Winema National Forest.
144 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
The overall goal of PIF Bird Conservation Planning is to ensure long-term maintenance of healthy populations of native landbirds. These documents are intended to facilitate that goal by identifying conditions and habitat attributes important to the landbird community, describing the desired landscape based on habitat relationships of a select group of species, providing interim management targets (i.e., biological objectives) to achieve desired conditions, and recommending management actions (i.e., conservation options) that can be implemented by various entities at multiple scales to achieve the biological objectives.
Implementation of parts or all of the strategy should help prevent reactionary approaches typically needed to address listed species issues. When these ecosystem-driven conservation strategies are fully implemented at large geographic scales, the aggregated effect will be the creation of landscapes that should function to conserve landbird communities.
The strategy for achieving functioning ecosystems for landbirds is described through the habitat requirements of "focal species". By managing for a group of species representative of important components in a functioning coniferous forest ecosystem, many other species and elements of biodiversity also will be conserved. E.O. 13186 and the MOUs signed by the FS and BLM with the FWS require agencies to incorporate migratory bird conservation into agency planning processes whenever practicable. The PIF plans assist federal agencies in achieving this direction.
Table 60. Priority Habitat Features and Associated Focal Species for Conservation in Priority and Unique Habitats in the Central Oregon and Klamath Basin Subprovinces of the East Slope of the Cascades (Altman, 2000).11 Focal Species for Central Habitat Habitat Feature Oregon/Klamath Basin Large patches of old forest with large snags White-headed woodpecker Ponderosa Pine Large trees Pygmy nuthatch Open understory with regenerating pines Chipping sparrow Patches of burned old forest Lewis’ woodpecker Large trees Brown creeper Mixed Conifer Large snags Williamson’s sapsucker (Late- Interspersion grassy openings and dense thickets Flammulated owl Successional) Multi-layered/dense canopy Hermit thrush Edges and openings created by wildfire Olive-sided flycatcher Large conifer trees and snags Lewis’ woodpecker Lodgepole Pine Old growth Black-backed woodpecker Whitebark pine Old growth Clark’s nutcracker Meadows Wet/dry Sandhill Crane Aspen Large trees with regeneration Red-naped sapsucker Subalpine fir Patchy presence Blue Grouse
11 Table only includes those habitats/species known to occur on the Fremont-Winema National Forest.
145 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 61. Priority Habitat Features and Associated Focal Species for Conservation in Priority and Unique Habitats in the Great Basin Subprovince of the Columbia Plateau of Eastern Oregon and Washington (Altman and Holmes, 2000).12 Focal Species for Habitat Habitat Feature Great Basin Shrub-Steppe Steppe Native bunchgrass cover Grasshopper Sparrow Interspersion of tall shrubs and openings Loggerhead Shrike Steppe-Shrubland
Large areas of sagebrush with diverse understory of Sage Grouse native grasses and forbs Large unfragmented patches Sage Sparrow Sagebrush Sagebrush cover Brewer’s Sparrow Sagebrush height Sage Thrasher Ecotonal edges of herb, shrub, and tree habitats Lark Sparrow Shrublands Upland sparsely vegetated desert scrub Black-throated Sparrow Juniper-Steppe Scattered mature juniper trees (savannah) Ferruginous Hawk Riparian Large snags (cottonwood) Lewis’ Woodpecker Woodland Large canopy trees Bullock’s Oriole Subcanopy foliage Yellow Warbler Shrub density Willow Flycatcher Shrub Shrub-herbaceous interspersion Lazuli Bunting Unique Habitats Aspen Large trees and snags with regeneration Red-naped Sapsucker Juniper Woodland Mature juniper with regeneration Gray flycatcher Cliffs and Undeveloped foraging areas Prairie Falcon Rimrock Mountain Large diameter trees with regeneration Virginia’s Warbler Mahogany
Environmental Consequences
Table 62. Effects to Landbirds Impacts to Habitat General Habitat Species Type No Action Alternatives 2
These species generally select for more open stand conditions. These species would benefit from all the white-headed woodpecker, pygmy Therefore, they would continue to be vegetation management treatments proposed nuthatch, chipping sparrow, Lewis’ negatively affected due to the lack Ponderosa Pine because dry forest restoration treatments woodpecker, bald eagle, northern dry forest restoration vegetation would open stands and create more goshawk management treatments. This heterogeneity at the stand and landscape scale. habitat would also continue to be at risk of stand replacement fire.
12 Table only includes those habitats/species known to occur on the Fremont-Winema National Forest.
146 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Impacts to Habitat General Habitat Species Type No Action Alternatives 2
Currently, stands do not provide the These species would benefit from all the heterogeneity that many species vegetation management treatments proposed because dry forest restoration treatments brown creeper, Williamson’s sapsucker, select for. Therefore, this habitat would open stands and create more flammulated owl, hermit thrush, olive- type would be negatively affected heterogeneity at the stand and landscape scale. Mixed Conifer sided flycatcher, Lewis’s woodpecker, due to the lack of dry forest Basal area retention would be slightly higher rufous hummingbird, purple finch, green- restoration vegetation management within the mixed conifer stand, so the resultant tailed towhee treatments. This habitat would also continue to be at risk of stand stand structure would be more variable and replacement fire. denser than ponderosa pine which is preferred by these species. Addressed under Management Addressed under Management Indicator Lodgepole Pine black-backed woodpecker Indicator Species. Species. The opportunity to improve Outside of Drake/McDowell IRA tree thinning whitebark pine habitat is foregone and RX fire would reduce conifer competition, with this alternative. This habitat resulting in better growing conditions for Whitebark Pine Clark’s nutcracker would continue to be at risk of stand whitebark pine. Planting whitebark pine replacement fire. would help ensure survival of the tree population into the future, thereby providing habitat for Clark’s nutcracker. There is no subalpine fir within the There is no subalpine fir within the project Subalpine Fir blue grouse project area. area. In many areas, riparian areas are in Conifer reduction within aspen, cottonwood, and riparian areas would open up riparian sandhill crane, red-naped sapsucker, poor health due to encroachment of areas which will result in increased diversity Lewis’ woodpecker, Bullock’s oriole, conifers and grazing management. and abundance of riparian species. All the yellow warbler, willow flycatcher, lazuli The opportunity to improve riparian Riparian other riparian enhancement treatments are bunting, long-billed curlew, western habitat with riparian enhancement designed to enhance the natural processes for grebe, Caspian tern, eared grebe, yellow treatments is foregone with this the particular site. All riparian associated rail, Calliope hummingbird alternative. treatments are expected to enhance habitat for riparian species. grasshopper sparrow, loggerhead shrike, The opportunity to improve sage- sage grouse, sage sparrow, Brewer’s steppe habitat is foregone with this Vegetation management activities would Sage-Steppe sparrow, sage thrasher, lark sparrow, alternative. This habitat would reduce conifer competition. This will black-throated sparrow, ferruginous continue to be at risk of stand substantially improve habitat conditions. hawk, golden eagle, horned lark replacement fire. The opportunity to improve juniper woodland habitat is foregone with Vegetation management activities would Juniper Woodland gray flycatcher, pinyon jay this alternative. This habitat would reduce conifer competition. This will continue to be at risk of stand substantially improve habitat conditions. replacement fire. This habitat would continue to be at Forest structure would be modified adjacent to cliffs and rimrock, but this is not expected to prairie falcon, peregrine falcon, black risk of stand replacement fire. Cliffs and Rimrock impact the use of cliffs and rimrock for swift nesting. This will minimize impacts to these species. Mountain mahogany would continue Vegetation management activities would to be decadent and in poor health reduce conifer competition within mountain Mountain Mahogany Virginia’s warbler due to the encroachment of conifers. mahogany. This would improve the health and This habitat would continue to be at vigor of mountain mahogany and may result in risk of stand replacement fire. increased regeneration.
147 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Climate Change – Both Alternatives There are many models and programs available that discuss predictions and relate it back to effects on vegetation, which equates to effects on habitat for wildlife species. While, these effects can be quantified in models, there is not necessarily agreement between models regarding the severity, timing, or exact changes that are predicted to occur in the future. The information presented here and much more can be found on the Climate Change Resource Center website related to vegetative changes (http://www.fs.fed.us/ccrc/topics/vegetation.shtml).
It is expected that the weather pattern will become warmer and dryer with more moisture coming in the form of rainfall instead of snow pack. The tree line will rapidly extend to the north, sequestering carbon from the atmosphere into the biosphere. Such gains in sequestered northern carbon also will be accompanied by enhanced forest growth over much of the temperate to higher latitudes over the early part of the 21st century; increases in high-latitude precipitation increases, longer growing seasons, and elevated CO2 concentration will facilitate this growth (Neilson et al. 1998, Scholze et al. 2006). However, with further warming, rapidly increasing evaporative demands will likely cause widespread drought stress in boreal and temperate forested and nonforested ecosystems (Neilson et al. 1998, Scholze et al. 2006). This widespread temperature-induced drought stress is expected to cause dramatic increases in the amount of biomass consumed by fire throughout much of the boreal forest, especially in continental interior regions. The drought-insect infestation processes currently underway are expected to continue. Drought and fire are expected to increase in both the western and eastern forests of the United States (Bachelet et al. 2001, in press; Lenihan et al., in press.). Parts of the interior West could experience increased precipitation, causing both enhanced woody expansion and increased fire, as a consequence of more fuel (Bachelet et al. 2001; Lenihan et al., in press).
Habitat for species will change at a faster rate, untreated stands will experience drought related stress and mortality that would benefit woodpeckers and cavity nesting species at the expense of species that require denser canopies for nesting, resting, roosting, and protection from predators. Ultimately, this would lead to the creation of additional early seral vegetation conditions that would benefit mule deer, elk and ground nesting bird species. Alternative 2 would provide a buffer against the projected future conditions by thinning trees and reducing competition for limited resources such as moisture. This would help provide forested habitat for a longer period of time versus Alternative 1.
148 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Fisheries and Aquatics This section examines the potential effects of the proposed CMH Project on fisheries and aquatic macroinvertebrates. This report is based on existing conditions, management guidelines from the Fremont National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan direction (USDA 1989), as amended. The analysis considers components of the proposed alternatives of the project, including forest vegetation treatments, prescribed fire, stream restoration, wildlife habitat enhancement, adjustments to the Motor Vehicle Use Maps (MVUM) and other restoration actions.
Resource Indicators and Measures The proposed alternative in the Environmental Assessment (EA) identifies the following Resource Elements related to aquatic resources: water quality and fish passage. These Resource Elements are addressed in this specialist report and are broken down into Resource Indicators with quantifiable measures (Table 63).
Table 63. Resource indicators and quantifiable measures for assessing effects Resource Measure Source Resource Indicator Element
Sediment or fines in Acres of potential disturbance 1 2 LRMP S/G ; INFISH Water the system in RHCAs quality Sediment or fines in Miles of roads in riparian 1 2 LRMP S/G ; INFISH the system areas/road density
Fish Fish Passage Forest Culvert Inventory; Project # of culverts in streams Passage Barriers Road Analysis 1 Land and Resource Management Plan (Fremont National Forest) Standards and Guidelines 2 Inland Native Fish Strategy
Methodology Generally, methodology and assumptions for fish habitat are based on data collected during the Forest’s Level II stream habitat surveys. Water quality, habitat quality, and the ability of the watershed and riparian areas to act as a buffer for stream systems are components of aquatic habitat considered in this analysis, where data is available. As such, the following Habitat Elements and corresponding Habitat Indicators have qualitative measures based on biological or habitat requirements for aquatic species (Table 64). These are used to assess effects according to regional guidance provided in the Inland Native Fish Strategy (INFISH) and the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Plan (ICBEMP), and provide a method of assessing current aquatic habitat conditions within the Project Area.
The use of INFISH and ICBEMP are somewhat limiting for this geographical area and given the aquatic species and habitat that occurs within this Project Area. The guidance within INFISH and ICBEMP were developed for salmonid fish species; the native fish occupying the subwatersheds within or downstream of the Project Area are uniquely adapted to this region, and therefore can endure broader environmental extremes than most salmonids.
149 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 64. Habitat indicators and qualitative measures for assessing effects Habitat Measure Source Habitat Indicator Element USFWS1 & ODEQ2, INFISH3, Water Temperature Annual monitoring 4 Water ICBEMP
quality Sediment or fines in the Percentage of fines 5 INFISH RMO system (<2mm) Pool frequency Pools per mile of stream INFISH RMO5, ICBEMP4
Pieces of large wood per 5 4 Large woody debris INFISH RMO , ICBEMP mile of stream Habitat Stream width to stream 5 quality Width to Depth ratio INFISH RMO depth
Bank Stability Percentage of stable bank INFISH RMO5
1 Land and Resource Management Plan (Fremont National Forest) Standards and Guidelines 2 Oregon Department of Environmental Quality 3 Inland Native Fish Strategy 4 Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Plan 5 Inland Native Fish Strategy Riparian Management Objectives
Affected Environment The CMH project is situated in the headwaters of several watersheds. Healthy watersheds are critical natural resources that provide water quality protection, help sustain healthy ecosystems, provide sustainable clean water, provide high quality recreational opportunities, and help prevent or reduce downstream effects from flooding or high-runoff events. Watersheds exist in a natural balance between environmental processes such as precipitation amount, seasonal climate, snow accumulation and melt, evaporation from surface water and vegetation, groundwater recharge from precipitation, and groundwater discharge that provides streamflow during dry periods each year.
This analysis will address the twelve 6th field HUC subwatersheds (Figure 36) originating from the Project Area. For cumulative effects analysis, off-Forest effects will be discussed to limited extent within these twelve subwatersheds. The reason for this is the downstream effects of sediment transport and surface runoff can affect lands located outside the Forest boundary. For the sake of this analysis, most detail will regard areas within Project and Forest boundaries, and less detail will address lands outside the Forest boundaries.
150 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Figure 36. Location of the Crooked Mud Honey Project relative to 6th field (HUC 12) subwatersheds.
The primary concerns with regard to effects from integrated restoration on watersheds are sediment and turbidity contamination of streams, wetlands, riparian areas, and lakes from roads and treatment areas. Road densities are included below (Table 67) because the greater the road density, the greater the risk of adverse watershed effects related to erosion and sedimentation.
Other dynamics that influence sediment contaminant levels include the number of road-stream crossings and the proximity of roads to streams. Greater stream and road densities within a watershed equate to greater interactions between the roads and streams and an increased risk of sediment contamination to streams caused by activities or erosion on the roads. Roads that cross streams, follow streams, or are in close proximity (within 300 feet) to stream courses, lakes, and wetlands increase the potential for sediment contamination to streams and other water bodies.
Treatment areas are a potential source of sediment contamination to streams in the Forest, as these may be located near drainages. Therefore, the number of acres of treatment areas within 300 feet of streams, lakes, and wetlands are discussed below. All of the proposed treatment areas are located throughout the Project Area.
Sediment occurs naturally in all waterways and there is no known baseline for the amount of sediment that currently exists in the Project Area. There is no doubt that the current condition does not resemble historic, or pre-settlement, conditions. Much of the sub-watersheds within the Project Area are crisscrossed by miles of roads and have been subject to multiple treatments in the past.
151 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Distribution and Status of Aquatic Species
Fish Species Status The following list in Table 65 shows the Proposed, Endangered, Threatened, or Sensitive (PETS) and Management Indicator Species (MIS) of fish species that are known or thought to exist on the Fremont- Winema National Forest.
Table 65. List of PETS fish species found on the Fremont-Winema National Forest and addressed under this aquatics report for the Crooked Mud Honey project.
Suitable Year Species Critical Fish Species Listing* Habitat Listed Present Present Habitat
Klamath River Bull Trout Threatened 1998 No No No (Salvelinus confluentus) Lost River Sucker Endangered 1988 No No No (Deltistes luxatus) Shortnose Sucker Endangered 1988 No No No (Chasmistes brevirostris) Modoc Sucker Endangered 1985 No No No (Catostomus microps) Warner Sucker Threatened 1985 Yes No No (Catostomus warnerensis) Goose Lake Lamprey Sensitive Yes No (Lampetra tridentate ssp.nov) Goose Lake Tui Chub Sensitive Yes No (Gila bicolor thalassina) Miller Lake Lamprey Sensitive No No (Lampetra minima) Oregon Lakes Tui Chub Sensitive Yes No (Gila bicolor oregonensis) Pit Roach Sensitive Yes No (Lavinia symmetricus mitrulus) Pit Sculpin Sensitive Yes No (Cottus pitensis) Redband Trout - Chewaucan Sensitive Yes Yes (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Redband Trout – Fort Rock Sensitive No No (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Redband Trout – Goose Lake Sensitive Yes Yes (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Redband Trout – Warner Lakes Sensitive Yes Yes (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Trout Family MIS Yes Yes (Salmonidae)
Field reconnaissance conducted in 2013 and past fish sampling records (ODFW 2005, USDA 2013) were used to determine the current distribution of fish, particularly Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive (TES) species, in and downstream of the Project Area.
. Modoc Suckers have been documented to occur in the Thomas Creek Watershed, but are limited to the Upper Thomas Creek subwatershed.
152 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
. Warner Suckers have been documented to occur in Honey and Little Honey Creeks, and are known to occupy habitat downstream of the project area.
. Goose Lake fishes (lamprey, tui chub, pit roach, pit sculpin) have been documented to occur in the Thomas Creek Watershed, and are known to occupy habitat downstream of the project area.
. Oregon Lakes tui chub have been documented to occur within the Chewaucan Basin. However, this species is limited to specific sites in the Summer Lake area and is not hydrologically connected to streams in the project area.
. Chewaucan redband trout populations have been documented to occur throughout Crooked Creek and are known to occupy habitat within the project area.
. Goose Lake redband trout populations have been documented to occur throughout the Thomas Creek Watershed and are known to occupy habitat downstream of the project area.
. Warner Lakes redband trout populations have been documented to occur throughout the Honey and Little Honey Creeks and are known to occupy habitat within the project area.
. Management Indicator Species (MIS) trout family (Salmonidae) have been documented to occur throughout the Project Area and are known to occupy habitat within the project area.
Since none of the remaining species listed in Table 65 above exist within the potentially affected watersheds, it has been determined that implementation of the CMH Project would have No Impact on Miller Lake lamprey or the Fort Rock redband trout populations. The project would have No Effect on bull trout, Lost River sucker, and Shortnose sucker. Due to the isolated location of two other species, this project would have No Impact on the Oregon Lakes tui chub, and No Effect on Modoc suckers. Therefore, these species will not be discussed further in this document.
Threatened and Endangered Species Warner Suckers and Warner Sucker Critical Habitat From the ODFW Warner Lakes native fish report (2011): “The Warner sucker Catostomus warnerensis is endemic to the Warner Valley, a sub-basin of the Great Basin in southeastern Oregon and northwestern Nevada. This species was historically abundant and its historical range includes three permanent lakes (Hart, Crump, and Pelican), several ephemeral lakes, a network of sloughs and diversion canals, and three major tributary drainages (Honey, Deep, and Twentymile creeks). Warner sucker abundance and distribution has declined over the past century and it was federally listed as threatened in 1985 due to habitat fragmentation and threats posed by the proliferation of piscivorous non-native game fishes.”
Honey and Little Honey Creeks historically provided spawning habitat for the Warner sucker. This species of sucker is endemic to the terminal desert lakes of the Warner Valley. Spawning habitat for the Warner sucker historically included the Honey Creek basin, Deep Creek basin and Twelvemile Creek basin. Reasons for the decline of the Warner sucker include: numerous diversion dams on tributary streams reducing spawning success, draining of the wetlands and introduction of predatory fish species into the lakes where young suckers rear (USDA 1992). In the 1930’s, residents of the Warner Valley reported that the spawning suckers would ascend Honey Creek “far into the canyon” (USFWS 1998). In the past, the Honey Creek drainage has been the final destination of large adfluvial spawning runs of Warner suckers. These runs have dwindled to very low numbers and it is uncertain whether any adfluvial runs still ascend the Honey Creek drainage onto National Forest Service Lands. Resident suckers may
153 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
still be present in the drainage approximately 2 ½ miles below the Forest boundary (USDA 1992). For the most recent and up-to-date information regarding Warner suckers, see the ARBO II biological opinion (USFWS, 2013) and the separate Biological Assessment (BA) written for this project.
Sensitive Fish Species Redband Trout Redband trout are well distributed throughout the Upper Sacramento and Oregon Closed basins, existing in most fish-bearing streams across the Forest. These fish have adapted over time to live in harsh environments characterized by great extremes in water temperatures and flow. Recent genetic studies suggest that redband trout of the Sacramento River system, including those in the Goose Lake, Warner Lakes, and Chewaucan sub-basins, represent distinct subspecies of redband (Behnke 1992; Currens et al.2000). These subspecies are divided into Species Management Units, or SMUs, by the State of Oregon.
Historically, redband trout in these basins were adfluvial, migrating from lakes to adjacent marshes and spawning areas in streams. Now some populations are completely isolated within streams that no longer access lakes (ODFW 2005), reducing the productivity of populations. The distribution of stream-dwelling redband trout varies according to annual precipitation and fluctuation of instream flows (ODFW 2005).
The following is summarized from the Oregon Native Fish Status Report (ODFW 2005):
Chewaucan Redband Trout SMU The Chewaucan Redband Trout SMU consists of four populations, three in Lake Abert sub-basin and one in Summer Lake sub-basin. Of these four, one resident/migratory redband trout population occurs within the project area: the Crooked Creek population. The population met five of the six interim criteria and is classified as ‘potentially at risk’ (ODFW, 2005), based reduced productivity due to degraded habitat conditions and the inability of migratory individuals to return to the spawning grounds.
Goose Lake Redband Trout SMU The Goose Lake Redband Trout SMU includes thirteen populations within the Oregon portion of the Goose Lake sub-basin that vary in life history, genetics, disease resistance, and status. Of these, one resident/migratory redband trout population occurs within the project area: the Thomas- Bauers Complex population. This population meets all six interim criteria and is classified as ‘stable’.
Warner Lakes Redband Trout SMU The Warner Lakes Redband Trout SMU includes four populations in the interior basin of pluvial Lake Warner. Of these four, one resident/migratory redband trout population occurs within the project area: the Honey Creek population. Densities and abundance are relatively high in the headwater and mid-reaches for this SMU. This population meets all six interim criteria and is classified as ‘stable’. Populations are connected to large lakes and able to intermix in high water years, however irrigation diversions and low water quality limit the expression of an adfluvial life history.
Goose Lake fishes (lamprey, tui chub, pit roach, pit sculpin) Relatively little is known about the life history and biology of the remaining sensitive species within and downstream of the project area. The following species descriptions were paraphrased from the Goose Lake Fishes Conservation Strategy (GLFWG 1996).
154 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Goose Lake Lamprey is an undescribed subspecies of Pacific lamprey, endemic to the Goose Lake Basin. These lamprey likely lives 1-2 years in Goose Lake, preying on Goose Lake suckers and redband trout, before migrating upstream in winter and spring to suitable spawning areas – typically gravel riffles with enough soft bottomed habitat downstream for survival of the ammocoetes (juveniles). The ammocoetes live in muddy or sandy backwater areas four to six years before metamorphosing into adults and moving in lake habitats. Limiting factors in the success of Goose Lake lamprey include desiccation and drying of habitats from drought, blocked migration routes, degradation of spawning habitat, and possibly decreases in adult forage fishes.
Goose Lake tui chub is a described subspecies of tui chub, endemic to the Goose Lake Basin. Tui chub, including Goose Lake tui chub, are tolerant of a wide range of water temperatures and alkalinities, and they are tolerant of low levels of dissolved oxygen (Moyle 2002). Generally, tui chubs prefer pool habitat and are generally not found in swift water. Most spawning takes place between April and early July. Tui chubs spawn in water less than 1.5 m deep, usually over beds of aquatic vegetation or algae covered rocks and gravel.
Goose Lake tui chub within the watershed (as well as the larger basin) face a number of threats. Stream-dwelling tui chub are threatened by loss of riparian habitat and other stream degradation. Lake-dwelling tui chub are vulnerable to desiccation of lakes and reservoirs, their primary habitat. Tributaries provide important refuge habitat during periods of drought. In 1992 when Goose Lake desiccated from drought and water became increasingly alkaline, large numbers of chub (and other native fishes) were observed attempting to enter streams (Moyle 2002).
Pit roach is a subspecies of California roach and is represented by the populations found in the upper Pit River tributaries and Goose Lake Basin. Their habitat is characterized by low flows, moderate gradients, warm temperatures, isolated pools and edge vegetation mats. Spawning generally occurs from March through June. The fish usually move up from pools onto shallow, flowing areas where the bottom is covered with small rocks 3-5 cm in diameter.
Pit sculpin, the only sculpin in the Goose Lake basin, are a distinct species that apparently evolved from riffle sculpin populations isolated in the upper Pit River. Pit sculpin are most abundant in fast-flowing rocky riffles in smaller, well shaded streams (Moyle 2002). They also occupy a wide variety of other habitats, from large boulder strewn rivers to spring-fed creeks, as long as oxygen levels are near saturation and water temperatures remain less than 25oC most of the time. They cannot survive water temperatures above 27.5oC. Spawning occurs in February through May, peaking in late February and March. They feed primarily on aquatic insect larvae and are highly selective in their feeding.
Management Indicator Species (MIS) The Fremont LRMP identifies the trout family (Salmonidae) as a management indicator of riparian/stream ecosystem health. Species in the project area that are members of the trout family are redband and brook trout. This analysis will use the redband trout effects analysis as the MIS trout family effects analysis, because redband trout are thought to be a better indicator of local riparian/stream ecosystem health than non-native brook, as redband trout are a native fish species and a Sensitive Species. Redband trout occupy approximately 48 miles of habitat within the analysis area.
Other Native Fish Species Thomas Creek watershed contains native non-listed fish species such as Pit- Klamath lamprey, speckled dace and Goose Lake suckers. The following species descriptions were paraphrased from the Goose Lake Fishes Conservation Strategy (GLFWG 1996).
155 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Pit-Klamath brook lamprey is primarily a stream dwelling species. This non-predacious lamprey appears to prefer cool clear streams or springs with sandy bottoms or edges (Moyle 2002). Lamprey spawning begins in the early spring, but can occur anytime during the summer. During the ammocoete stage that lasts about four years, the ammocoetes burrow into soft mud bottoms among aquatic plants, with metamorphosis probably occurring in the fall.
Speckled dace are a small, highly variable species and are abundant throughout the project area, occurring in most perennial streams. Speckled dace primarily inhabit cool flowing rocky- bottomed permanent streams and rivers, among rocks in riffles. Juveniles tend to concentrate in the warm shallows of streams. They become mature their second summer, with most spawning activity occurring in June and July, probably introduced by rising water temperatures (Moyle 2002). In intermittent streams, spawning may be introduced by flooding (Moyle 2002). Speckled dace are generally bottom browsers on small invertebrates.
Goose Lake Sucker is a subspecies of the Sacramento sucker and, like the Goose Lake tui chub, is endemic to the Goose Lake Basin. The Goose Lake subspecies is well adapted to the warm, alkaline conditions of Goose Lake and the harsh environment in the drainage. Goose Lake suckers have varying habitat requirements throughout the year, utilizing both lakes and streams; they can be found in swift, clear, cold streams as well as warm, shallow lakes. Similar to redband trout, suckers migrate to spawn in tributaries during April or May and prefer to spawn on rock and gravel substrates. They may be capable of shoreline spawning if gravel substrates are present (Moyle 2002). Food habits of Goose Lake sucker are similar to that of most suckers, with benthic invertebrates, algae, and detritus constituting most of their diet. Like other fishes in the watershed, the biggest threat to Goose Lake suckers is destruction of habitat. Like redband trout, suckers face additional obstacles as they must migrate in order to spawn; irrigation diversions can prevent them from reaching spawning areas.
Non-Native Fish Species The four watersheds within the project area contain introduced, non-native fish species including brook trout, fathead minnow, brown bullhead and largemouth bass (ODFW 2005). Non-native fish are not analyzed in this report because they are considered to be detrimental to native fish.
Existing Sensitive Aquatic Invertebrate Species The following list in Table 66 shows the R6 Sensitive aquatic invertebrate species that are known or thought to exist on the Fremont-Winema National Forest.
Table 66. List of PETS aquatic invertebrate species found on the Fremont-Winema National Forest and addressed under this aquatics report for the Crooked Mud Honey project. Suitable Year Species Invertebrate Species Listing* Habitat Listed Present Present
Western Ridged Mussel Sensitive N N (Gonidea angulata) Montane Peaclam Sensitive N N (Pisidium ultramontanum) Turban Pebblesnail Sensitive N N (Fluminicola turbiniformis) Great Basin Ramshorn Sensitive N N
156 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Suitable Year Species Invertebrate Species Listing* Habitat Listed Present Present (Helisoma newberryi newberryi) Highcap Lanx Sensitive N N (Lanx alta) Scale Lanx Sensitive N N (Lanx klamathensis) Archimedes Springsnail Sensitive N N (Pyrgulopsis archimedis) Lined Ramshorn N N (Vorticifex effusus diagonalis) Sensitive
Of the eight Region 6 sensitive aquatic invertebrate species listed, none are known to exist within the potentially affected subwatersheds of this project. Recent surveys (USDA 2005) across the forest have revealed that these eight sensitive species do not currently occupy habitat within the analysis area, therefore they will not be discussed any further in this document.
Existing Condition Existing conditions in the analysis area for this report will focus on the existing watershed conditions (Resource Elements) and existing aquatic habitat conditions (Habitat Elements). Physical stream conditions and habitat for aquatic species are interrelated, and are discussed below in an integrated fashion. Field reconnaissance conducted in 2013, and past survey records (USDA 2012, 2013) were used to determine the current aquatic habitat within the Project Area.
Existing Watershed Conditions Surface water resources on the Forest includes streams, springs, seeps, wetlands, riparian areas, lakes, ponds, and reservoirs. They contribute to aesthetic resources; habitat for terrestrial wildlife, fisheries, and fauna; natural water purification processes; flood control; and to agricultural and recreational uses. The Project Area is approximately 51,525 acres, with an estimated 4,380 acres of Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCAs) associated with all surface waters on the Forest; RHCAs account for 8.5% of the land base in the Project Area. The information in Table 67 below is based on geographic information systems (GIS) analysis and provides estimated miles and acres only.
Resource Indicator 1 - Stream Channels and Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCAs) The riparian zone is the interface between land and stream. In the high desert regions of Oregon, riparian areas provide important habitat and ecological function. Wetlands are areas saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency which influences the nature of soil development and the types of plants and animals supported. Wetlands include marshes, bogs, wet meadows, and spring and seep areas.
There are 4,380 acres of riparian and wetland areas within the Project Area (Table 67). These areas are called Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCAs) and based on a given standard width from INFISH that does not accurately reflect the extent of riparian zones on the ground. In many cases, the true riparian zone is less than the standard RHCA width. Although estimated riparian and wetland areas occupy less than 10 percent of the lands managed by the Forest in the Project Area, they are key to productive fisheries and wildlife habitat, reduce flooding, maintain high-quality water for downstream users, are groundwater recharge areas, and provide diverse scenery and recreation sites. Riparian and wetland areas also are important to sustaining timber and forage production.
157 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
There are approximately 48 miles of perennial streams and 60 miles of intermittent streams within the Project Area (Table 67), along with numerous ephemeral stream drainages that flow only during storm events or intermittently. The Project Area contains the headwaters of Honey Creek, Crooked Creek, and Mud Creek, all of which contribute to separate watersheds and are important habitat for native fish. Table 67 lists the acres of the sixth-level HUCs that lie partially within the Project Area and that are potentially influenced by proposed activities on the Forest
158 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 67. Existing watershed conditions within the Project Area
Riparian Number of Number of Open Closed Forest Perennial Intermittent Roads
Area of Area of Habitat perennial intermittent Roads in Roads in Road Streams Streams within 6th field 6th field Conservation stream/road stream/road 6th field 6th field Density/ within the within the RHCAs in within within Areas crossings crossings HUC HUC 6th field Project Project the Project the the (RHCAs) within the within the within within HUC Area on Area on Area on Project Project within the Project Project Project Project within NFSL per NFSL per NFSL per
basin 4th Field Area on Area on Project Area Area on Area on
- Area on Area on Project 6th field 6th field 6th field NFSL NFSL on NFSL per NFSL per NFSL per Basin 3rd Field 2 NFSL NFSL Area HUC HUC HUC Sub
Watershed 5th Field (acres) (mi ) 6th field 6th field 6th field (miles) (miles) (mi/mi2) (miles) (miles) (miles) Subwatershed 6th Field HUC (acres) HUC HUC
Lower 3,421 5.3 1.3 13.9 2.8 0.5 5.0 102.5 1 2 0.7 Crooked Lake Abert Creek
Crooked Crooked Upper Crooked 13,005 20.3 25.2 31.1 2.8 14.4 18.5 1277.0 8 15 4.3
Lower Camas 156 0.2 0.0 0.3 1.6 0.0 0.1 156.0 0 0 0.0
Upper Camas 1,660 2.6 4.4 3.5 3.1 0.9 1.1 81.6 0 1 0.9
Lower Drake 155 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 154.0 0 0 0.0
Deep Creek Upper Drake 612 1.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.6 16.4 0 0 0.0
Mud Creek 8,288 13.0 43.3 23.8 5.2 7.9 10.2 548.4 6 9 6.2 Basin Closed Oregon
Warner Lakes Middle Honey 747 1.2 0.8 4.0 4.0 0.0 1.5 8.2 0 0 0.0
Upper Honey 17,671 27.6 54.3 84.1 5.0 18.9 12.2 1,663.6 10 10 14.6
McDowell Honey Creek 5,095 8.0 0.0 2.5 0.3 5.5 10.2 364.9 0 0 0.8 Creek
Lower Cox 131 0.2 0.0 0.3 1.4 0.0 0.6 1.2 0 0 0.0 Upper Lake Creek Goose Goose Middle Thomas Thomas
Sacramento 584 0.9 0.0 0.6 0.6 0.0 0.0 6.5 0 0 0.0 Thomas Creek
TOTALS 51,525 80.5 129.3 164.2 3.6 48.5 60.1 4380.5 25 37 27.4
159 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Resource Indicator 2 - Roads Roads are generally major contributors of sediment to stream channels and some of the increased fine sediment levels in streams can be attributed to the existing road system. As shown in Table 67 above, there are numerous roads within the project area that enter riparian zones and cross streams and floodplains. Road crossings allow fine sediment to be delivered directly into the streams, due to erosion or vehicle movement. Road densities greater than 2.5 miles per square mile are thought to be an indicator of greater habitat degradation. Current road density within the Project Area is 3.65 miles per square mile.
As identified through GIS analysis and project road inventory, the Project Area currently has: • 163 miles of roads currently designated as closed to all motorized use • 130 miles of roads currently designated as open for motorized use • 28 miles of roads are currently within RHCAs. • Total number of existing roads in the Project Area is approximately 293 miles.
Resource Indicator 3 - Fish Passage Improperly placed or unmaintained culverts can reduce or eliminate fish passage (USDA 1997; Hermann et al. 2001) making road crossings a common migration barrier to fishes (Furniss et.al. 1991 (in Meehan); USDA 1997; Hermann et al. 2001). Recent inventories (USFS 2003 and 2013) have shown many of the existing culverts within the Project Area are undersized, which creates barriers to fish attempting to migrate up and downstream. No migration barriers due to culverts would provide appropriately functioning stream systems in the project area (USDA 1997). There are estimated 62 road/stream crossings (Table 73) with culverts on National Forest System Lands (NFSL) within the Project Area. Many of these culverts are on existing closed roads and most are at least seasonal barriers to native fish.
Figure 37. Example of culverts to be removed in the Project Area; right, Honey Creek and FS road 3724-357; left, Little Honey Creek and FS road 3615-034.
160 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 68. Resource indicators and quantifiable measures for the existing effects. Resource Resource Measure Existing Condition Element Indicator (Alternative 1) Sediment or fines Acres of potential in the system 0 disturbance in riparian area (RHCAs) Water quality Sediment or fines Miles of roads in riparian in the system 28 areas/road density (Roads) Fish Passage Fish Passage # of culverts in streams 62 Barriers
Existing Aquatic Habitat Year-round habitat for aquatic species within the Project Area is limited to the perennial waterbodies (Table 69). Seasonal habitat is available in tributaries throughout the project area when water flow is sufficient, but data is limited for these waterways. As shown in Table 67 above, there are approximately 48 miles of perennial streams and 60 miles of intermittent streams within the Project Area. Most of the perennial stream habitat is considered occupied by native fish (Table 69).
Table 69. Fish-bearing streams within the Project Area Stream Name Stream Type Fish Species Present Big Cove Creek Perennial Chewaucan redband Can Springs Creek Perennial Warner Lakes redband Crooked Creek Perennial Chewaucan redband First Swale Creek Perennial Warner Lakes redband Warner Lakes redband, (historic Warner sucker Honey Creek Perennial spawning); brook trout Little Cove Creek Perennial Chewaucan redband; no fish above R1 waterfall Warner Lakes redband, (historic Warner sucker Little Honey Creek Perennial spawning); brook trout Little Honey Creek, tributary Perennial Warner Lakes redband Long John Creek Perennial Warner Lakes redband Loveless Creek Perennial Chewaucan redband McDowell Creek, N. Fork Perennial Warner Lakes redband McDowell Creek, S. Fork Perennial Warner Lakes redband Middle Fork Crooked Perennial Chewaucan redband Mud Creek Perennial Warner Lakes redband Mud Creek, tributary Perennial Warner Lakes redband North Fork Crooked Perennial Chewaucan redband Porcupine Creek Perennial Warner Lakes redband Rosa Creek Perennial Warner Lakes redband Sage Creek Perennial Warner Lakes redband Salt Creek Perennial Goose Lake redband Goose Lake tui chub; speckled dace; brown Salt Creek tributary Perennial bullhead Second Swale Creek Perennial Warner Lakes redband
161 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Stream Name Stream Type Fish Species Present South Fork Crooked Perennial Chewaucan redband Twelvemile Creek Perennial Warner Lakes redband Walker Creek Perennial Warner Lakes redband Goose Lake redband, unidentified suckers; Warner Creek Perennial speckled dace; fathead minnow White Pine Creek Perennial Warner Lakes redband CH = Chewaucan redband; GL = Goose Lake redband; WL = Warner Lakes redband
Fish Habitat Surveys Periodic, recurring inventories are an integral part of the fish habitat and watershed management programs and form the foundation for effective program management. Inventory surveys generate the baseline information that will be used to support a variety of management activities, including, but not limited to; watershed analysis, timber sales, range allotments, special use permitting, and fish habitat and watershed restoration programs. They also serve as the basis for stream monitoring and evaluation programs. Specifically, inventories identify existing aquatic and riparian conditions, identify factors limiting the productive capabilities of habitats, measure attainment of meeting stream habitat objectives, and help to assess cumulative watershed effects. The inventories, called Level II stream habitat surveys, are conducted by the Forest and can be used to monitor and refine Land Management Plan Standards and Guidelines.
Existing conditions of aquatic habitat are assessed by using the data collected in Level II surveys and compared this data to the standards of INFISH Riparian Management Objectives (RMOs) (USDA 1995) and Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project (USDA 1997). In Table 70 below, existing conditions of the Habitat Indicators are made based on whether habitat objectives are being met, using INFISH and ICBEMP standards.
Table 70. Habitat indicators and qualitative measures for the existing effects. Habitat Measure Existing Condition Habitat Indicator Element (Alternative 1) Does not meet standards Water Temperature Annual monitoring Water in most cases quality Sediment or fines in Varies; correlates to road Percentage of fines (<2mm) the system density Does not meet standards Pool frequency Pools per mile of stream in most cases Pieces of large wood per mile Does not meet standards Large woody debris of stream in most cases Habitat quality Width to Depth ratio Stream width to stream depth Meets standards
Bank Stability Percentage of stable bank Meets standards
162 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Desired Condition
Resource Indicator 1 - RHCAs 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 under INFISH. Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas include traditional riparian corridors, wetlands, intermittent streams, and other areas that help maintain the integrity of aquatic ecosystems to (1) mimick natural levels of coarse sediment, organic matter, and woody debris to streams; (2)well vegetated stream banks to provide optimal root strength for increased channel stability; (3) adequate streamside vegetation to provide proper shading to the stream; and (4) protect water quality (Naiman et. al., 1992). Desired widths of RHCAs should be adequate to protect streams from non-channelized sediment inputs and be sufficient to provide other riparian functions, including delivery of organic matter and woody debris, stream shading, and bank stability (INFISH). The effectiveness of riparian conservation areas in influencing sediment delivery is based on proper functioning hydrologic processes.
Resource Indicator 2 - Roads Increasingly, road density is correlated with declining aquatic habitat conditions and aquatic integrity and is associated with declines in the status of four non-anadromous salmonid species. Total and overall road density on the Forest's roaded lands would be reduced to less than 2.5 miles of road per square mile of land. To accomplish this, some less-traveled roads would be closed (LRMP 1989). To meet the INFISH RMOs and avoid adverse effects to inland native fish, road and landing locations are minimized in RHCAs (INFISH RF-2), and roads not needed for future management activities are closed and stabilized or obliterated (INFISH RF-3).
Resource Indicator 3 - Fish Passage Reduction of road density and treating roads that are not needed for future management activities would also lead to the reduction in the number of culverts in streams. The desired condition is to provide and maintain full fish passage for all species and life histories at all road crossings of existing and potential fish-bearing streams (INFISH RF-5).
Habitat Elements Under INFISH, Riparian Management Objectives (RMOs) were developed to provide components used to identify stream channel conditions and provided criteria against which attainment or progress toward attainment of the riparian goals is measured. The intent of the RMOs was not to establish a ceiling for what constitutes good habitat conditions, but rather a target toward which land managers could aim as resource management activities are conducted across the landscape. It is not expected that the objectives would be met instantaneously, but rather would be achieved over time. For the purpose of analysis, activities are discussed in terms of how not to ‘retard the attainment of the RMOs’ or slow the rate of recovery below the near natural rate of recovery if no additional human caused disturbance was placed on the system. Actions that reduce habitat quality, whether existing conditions are better or worse than objective values, would be inconsistent with the purpose of this direction. Without the benchmark provided by measurable RMOs, habitat suffers continual erosion. The following Habitat Indicators are the same as the INFISH RMOs.
Habitat Indicator – Water Temperature Water temperatures are analyzed as annual 7-day average of daily maximum temperatures. High water temperatures within streams can have negative impacts on fish. The desired condition for water temperature in the Project Area is between 15.0o and 17.9o for redband trout and between 14.0o and 20.0o for Warner sucker spawning (INFISH 1995 and ICBEMP 2000).
163 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Habitat Indicator – Sediment/Substrate During stream surveys, individual particles of substrate ranging from boulders to silt are measured; these ‘pebble counts’ are completed twice in each stream reach. The smallest of these particles, silt/organics/sand, are often referred to collectively as ‘fine sediments’ or ‘fines’ and measure less than 6 mm. ICBEMP standards for this resource indicator are evaluated according to the Rosgen stream type (based on stream gradient) and the percentage of fines. The desired condition for sediment/substrate is less than 20% fines smaller than 6 mm.
Habitat Indicator – Pool Frequency and Quality To be functioning appropriately under INFISH, pool frequency for a stream with a wetted width of 10 feet is expected to have 96 pools per mile. Most of the streams in the Project Area are less than ten feet wide; the expectation to have this many pools is incompatible with the natural conditions found in these watersheds. Under ICBEMP, streams are based on stream slope classes, with those streams having a pool frequency greater than the 75th percentile is functioning appropriately.
Habitat Indicator – Large Woody Debris (LWD) Streams functioning appropriately under INFISH would have LWD that would be greater than 20 pieces per mile; greater than 12 inch diameter; and greater than 35 foot length. A large portion of the streams in the Project Area are open meadow systems dominated by willow, so the lack of LWD in these areas is a natural condition. Under ICBEMP, streams are based on stream slope classes, with those streams having LWD that is greater than 75th percentile is functioning appropriately.
Habitat Indicator – Width-to-Depth Ratios According to INFISH, the width-to-depth ratio should be < 10, mean wetted width divided by mean depth, to be functioning appropriately.
Habitat Indicator – Unstable Banks Bank stability under INFISH should be >80% stable for a stream to be functioning appropriately.
Environmental Consequences
Alternative 1 – No Action Alternative 1 would have no direct effects on any fish species as no activity would take place in or adjacent to any fish habitat. Alternative 1 would likely result in long-term detrimental effects to sensitive redband trout in the Project Area and threatened suckers downstream of the Project Area. Under Alternative 1, no action would be taken to protect water storage capacity and fish habitat reaches. Also, no action would be taken to reduce upland effects on fish habitat by thinning encroaching conifers from meadows, aspen stands and other riparian areas, and decommissioning, closing, reconstructing, and maintaining roads. No action would be taken which could reduce the potential of devastating wildfires. In summary, Alternative 1 would leave the Project Area in its current condition and undesirable fish habitat conditions would persist into the foreseeable future, as a passive approach to watershed restoration would be employed.
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Several of the proposed activities are likely to affect fish species and habitat: treatments within RHCAs, road maintenance and decommissioning that occurs in and near RHCAs, prescribed burning, and aquatic restoration activities. Direct effects to fish species occupying habitat in the Project Area are likely to occur during fish salvage operations prior to removal or replacement of culverts, removing road fills from
164 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
RHCAs, and during implementation of stream restoration projects, as these are all activities that may make direct contact with fish. Direct effects could entail temporary displacement of a species from a project site and temporary reduction in water quality due to increases in sediment and turbidity. Indirect effects may occur during treatments within RHCAs, road treatments, and prescribed burning, as these activities may result in some loss of vegetation near streams. This reduction may result in a temporary increase in water temperatures. To further reduce the likelihood of direct effects to fish, protection measures listed in Chapter 2 would be fully implemented. Effects to Resource Elements The following discussion is directly related to the three Resource Elements identified in this report. Table 71 shows the quantifiable measure of each resource indicator.
Table 71. Resource indicators and quantifiable measures for Alternative 2 Proposed Action. Resource Resource Measure Alternative 2 Element Indicator Sediment or fines Acres of potential in the system disturbance in riparian 3,630 (RHCAs) area Water quality Sediment or fines Miles of roads in in the system riparian areas/road 19 (Roads) density Fish Passage # of culverts in Fish Passage 24 Barriers streams
Resource Indicator 1 – Treatments in RHCAs The objective of the RHCA treatments within project units is to reduce the potential for adverse impacts from high intensity wildfire. Historically, fire has been an integral disturbance agent in riparian systems (Dwire and Kauffman 2003). However, fire suppression has reduced the influence of fire, resulting in fuel accumulation and increased likelihood of large, severe wildfires (Taylor and Skinner 1998). These RHCA treatments would provide a safer and more effective fire suppression environment, improve forest health, and provide for a more sustainable vegetation condition consistent with protecting and maintaining riparian habitat values. All RHCA treatments are designed to minimize erosion from soil disturbance, and to protect and maintain the riparian vegetation that provides bank stabilization and habitat for wildlife, fish, and other aquatic species. The resource protection measures listed in Chapter 2 would be fully implemented to maintain INFISH RMOs.
Under INFISH TM-1, harvesting of timber is prohibited in RHCAs except where silvicultural practices in the RHCAs acquire the desired vegetation characteristics needed to attain the INFISH Riparian Management Objectives (RMOs). Most RHCAs in the Project Area are currently encroached by conifers and juniper, mainly due to the suppression of wildfires. Many RHCAs are open meadow systems dominated by willows and the encroachment of conifers and juniper.
Additionally, trees may be felled in RHCAs when they pose a safety risk; felled trees may be utilized on site to meet the large woody debris objectives (INFISH RA-2). Designing and implementing watershed restoration projects in a manner that promotes the long-term ecological integrity of ecosystems, conserves the genetic integrity of native species, and contributes to attainment of Riparian Management Objectives (INFISH WR-1) also allows for changes to be made in RHCAs.
165 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
In addition to the proposed vegetation treatments within RHCAs, the following (Table 72) lists proposed activities within RHCAs that would contribute to the attainment of RMOs. These activities would improve fish habitat and stream conditions within the Project Area.
Table 72. Acres of Proposed Aquatic Restoration Activities within RHCAs. Acres Priority Stream Activity Location (estimated) Road crossing removal and road Honey 1 decommissioning (Road 3615-357 T37S, R21E, Sec 12 250 Creek and 358) and stream restoration Road decommissioning (Road T36S, R21E, Sec 25 and Little Honey 2 3615-372 and 015) and stream 36; T37S, R21E, Sec 1 190 Creek restoration and 2 Road crossing removal, road Tributary to T36S, R21E, Sec 23, 24, 3 decommissioning (Road 3615-370), 35 Little Honey and 25 and stream restoration Road crossing removals (Road Loveless T37S, R21E, Sec 9, 10, 4 3624-128 and 3624-012) and stream 15 Creek and 16 restoration Road crossing removal and road First Swale 5 decommissioning (Road 3720-132 T37S, R22E, Sec 5 46 Creek and 133) White Pine 6 Headcut repair in meadow T36S, R21E, Sec 35 112 Creek White Pine Willow planting and beaver T36S, R21E, Sec 25 and 7 70 Creek protection 26 Long John T37S, R21E, Sec 12 and 8 Headcut repair 65 Creek 13 Rebuild spring enclosures to protect 9 Springs Throughout project area 10 water quality Total acres: 793
Resource Indicator 2 – Roads in RHCAs Roads contribute more sediment to stream than any other land management activity (Hermann et al. 2001; USDA 1997; Meehan 1991), but most land management activities are dependent on roads. The majority of sediment from timber harvest activities is related to roads and road construction (Chamberlain et al.1991; Furniss et al. 1991; USDA 1997; Hermann et al. 2001). Roads directly affect natural sediment and hydrologic regimes by altering streamflow, sediment loading, sediment transport and deposition, channel morphology, channel stability, substrate composition, stream temperature, water quality, and riparian conditions within a watershed (USDA 1997).
As identified and recommended through the Crooked Mud Honey Project Roads Analysis: • 174 miles of roads would be closed post-implementation • 29 miles of roads would be decommissioned post-implementation • 90 miles of roads would be open for motorized use post-implementation
166 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 73. Miles of Proposed Road Removal in RHCAs. Road Priority Stream Activity Location Miles (estimated) Culvert removal; Road T36S, R21E, Sec 25 and Little Honey 1 decommissioning (Roads 3615-372 36; T37S, R21E, Sec 1 2.4 Creek and 015) and 2 Road crossing removal and road 2 Honey Creek decommissioning (Road 3615-357 T37S, R21E, Sec 12 6 and 358) White Pine Road crossing removal and road T36S, R21E, Sec 24 and 3 2.6 Creek decommissioning (Road 3615-370) 25 Porcupine Road decommissioning (Road T38S, R21E, Sec 2; 4 1.4 Creek 3615-025) T38S, R21E, Sec 1; Road decommissioning (Road T37S, R21E, Sec 12, 13, 5 Sage Creek 0.3 3720-117) and 14 Road crossing removal and road First Swale 6 decommissioning (Road 3720-132 T37S, R22E, Sec 5 1.1 Creek and 133) Total Road Miles: 13.8
Resource Indicator 3 – Fish Passage Sites where roads and stream intersect can be a major source of sediment to streams resulting from channel fill around culverts and subsequent road crossing failures (USDA 1997; Furniss et al. 1991). Plugged culverts and fill slope failures are frequent and often lead to catastrophic increases in stream channel sediment, especially on old abandoned or unmaintained roads (USDA 1997; Hermann et al. 2001). Unnatural channel widths, slope, and stream bed form occur upstream and downstream of stream crossings (USDA 1997; Heede 1980), and these alterations in channel morphology may persist for long periods of time
With the removal of culverts in streams, riparian habitat conditions could be significantly improved with noted improvement in overall water quality. Evidence of eroded stream banks could be notably reduced from present levels and some areas could be restored to dry or wet meadow conditions (LRMP 1989).
The following culvert removal/replacements have been identified as either being on roads that are no longer needed for future management activities and/or are current migration barriers for fish. Removal or replacement of these structures would improve stream conditions within the Project Area.
167 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 74. Miles of Streams and Fish Passage Restored. Miles of Priority Stream Activity Location Stream (estimated)
2 Honey Creek Culvert removal (Road 3615-357) T37S, R21E, Sec 12 2.5
Little Honey Culvert removal (Road 3615-034); 1 T36S, R21E, Sec 25 2.2 Creek drivable ford to be installed. Little Honey 7 Replace culvert (Road 3615-000) T37S, R21E, Sec 2 0.85 Creek Loveless Culvert removals (Road 3624-128 3 T37S, R21E, Sec 16 2 Creek and 3624-012). Replace culvert (Road 3615-018) Porcupine T38S, R21E, Sec 2; 4 and remove culvert (Road 3615- 1.9 Creek T38S, R21E, Sec 1; 024) S. Fork 6 Replace culvert (Road 3615-000) T37S, R22E, Sec 31 1 Crooked Crk Replace culvert (Road 3615-000) S. Fork 5 and remove culvert from spur road T37S, R21E, Sec 25 1.2 Crooked Crk just above Rd. 3615 Second 9 Replace culvert (Road 3720-012) T37S, R22E, Sec 6 0.8 Swale Creek White Pine 8 Replace culvert (Road 3615-000) T36S, R21E, Sec 26 1.7 Creek Total Miles of Stream restored: 14.15
168 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Effects to Habitat Elements The following discussion is directly related to the two Habitat Elements identified in this report. Table 75 shows the qualitative measure of each habitat indicator.
Table 75. Habitat indicators and qualitative measures for Alternative 2. Habitat Habitat Measure Alternative 2 Element Indicator Water Annual monitoring (Redband trout standard) Temperature Water quality Sediment or fines Percentage of fines (INFISH/ICBEMP standard) in the system (<2mm) Pools per mile of Pool frequency (INFISH/ICBEMP standard) stream Large woody Pieces of wood per (INFISH/ICBEMP standard) debris mile of stream Habitat quality Width to Depth Stream width to (INFISH/ICBEMP standard) ratio stream depth
Percentage of stable Bank Stability (INFISH/ICBEMP standard) bank
Habitat Indicator – Water Temperature Vegetation within 1911 acres of riparian areas in Alternative 2 may be disturbed during treatments in this project. Alternative 2 proposes to treat 1911 acres of RHCAs during commercial tree harvest activities. An additional 1787 acres of RHCAs would be treated by non-commercial restoration activities, such as prescribed burning, juniper thinning, meadow encroachment conifer removal, road and culvert removal, and stream restoration projects.
Treatments may remove some existing shade-providing trees in the short-term, however resource protection measures are designed to minimize the potential of this happening. In the long term, removal of these conifers may allow for greater growth of the remaining stand and increased shade on these streams. It is not likely that treating these stands along streams would result in long term increased stream temperatures downstream on fish-bearing waters or cause adverse effects to inland native fish.
Prescribed burning would be done throughout the project area and may impact some acres of RHCAs. Burning in riparian areas would be done under controlled conditions so extensive vegetation loss near streams is unlikely. Prescribed fire may produce water temperature increases through reduction of streamside shade (Amaranthus et al. 1989), though prescribed fire would be done in a way as to not remove any existing shade on streams already below standards (see resource protection measures).
Juniper thinning and meadow encroachment conifer removal may reduce shade-providing trees that reduce water temperatures, but RHCAs would benefit from the removal of this invasive upland tree and streams are likely to gain more flow as a result of juniper removal. Cut trees may be used as large woody debris in stream channels, creating aquatic habitat and providing alternative shade to stream channels.
Reducing roads within riparian areas, as recommended in the project’s road analysis, could allow more vegetation to grow near streams and increase the potential of shade cover in the future. Removal of roads
169 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
and culverts in RHCAs may reduce sediment input to streams, allowing the formation of deeper pools and reducing water turbidity, which may help to maintain lower water temperatures.
Stream restoration would create more complex habitat across the Project Area. Reducing headcuts and unstable banks may increase riparian vegetation growth near streams. Raising the water table and increasing floodplain activity may enhance the hyporheic zone that occurs near edges of water, where there is mixing of shallow groundwater and surface water. This surface water/groundwater interaction naturally cools stream water and plays an important role in fish spawning. Restoration and rehabilitation of springs and seeps may protect groundwater sources that provide cooler water to streams.
Habitat Indicator – Sediment/Substrate An aspect of habitat quality that apparently is influenced by management is the amount of fine sediment (sediment less than 6 mm) on channel beds. Road density significantly affects surface fines and corroborates the link between forest management practices and channel sediment characteristics.
Thinning, decommissioning and closing roads, underburning and fire lines associated with prescribed burning outside of RHCAs could result in some soil exposure. Mitigation measures would minimize soil disturbance and keep it far enough away from streams so potential sediment from these sources would not impact streams and would not increase embeddedness.
Thinning and prescribed burning within riparian areas may also expose soil. Burn intensities would be expected to be low and localized, and re-sprouting of vegetation could occur within two weeks of soil exposure (Agee 1993). Project design criteria were established to control sediment so that is not expected to be a measurable increase in sedimentation and would also not likely lead to an increase in embeddedness.
Habitat Indicator – Pool Frequency and Quality During thinning operations conifers may be removed from RHCAs reducing the amount of large wood that may potentially fall into the creek and potentially create more pools. Non-commercial riparian thinning may occur on a total of up to 1719 acres; possible commercial thinning may occur on a total of up to 1911 acres. It is not expected that there would be a sufficient quantity of trees removed to affect future pool formation within fish habitat. Where practiable, thinned trees may be felled toward the stream channels to increase the amount of large woody debris in streams. Thinning within riparian areas may expose soil. Mitigation measures would minimize soil disturbance and keep it far enough away from streams so potential sediment from these sources not impact streams and not enter streams in a sufficient quantity to affect pool quality. Mechanincal treatments are implemented only in dry or over snow conditions. A a result of vegetation treatments, pool quantity or quality are expected to increase.
Prescribed underburning in or through riparian areas within burn blocks and may create some potential future large wood and expose soil. This may indirectly increase the number of pools in the future. Burning in riparian areas would be done under controlled conditions so loss of existing large wood that form pools is not likely. Burn intensities would be expected to be low and localized, and re-sprouting of vegetation could occur within two weeks of soil exposure (Agee 1993). No firelines would occur within the RHCA, so no alterations to pool quantity or quality would occur as a result of this activity. There would not be a sufficient amount of sediment generated from underburning in RHCAs to affect pool quantity or quality.
A reduction in the overall number of open roads following project implementation, as proposed in the project’s road analysis, would reduce sediment input to streams increasing pool habitat.
170 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Habitat Indicator – Large Woody Debris During thinning operations, conifers may be removed from riparian areas, reducing the amount of large wood that may potentially fall into the creek. However, some treatments would contribute large wood to streams by manual actions of dropping cut trees directly into streams. Non-commercial riparian thinning may occur on a total of up to 1719 acres; possible commercial thinning may occur on a total of up to 1911 acres. Large trees are being retained by the proposal and resource protection measures are in place to minimize impacts to large wood quantities. It is not expected that there would be a sufficient quantity of trees removed to affect future retention of wood within these streams.
Prescribed underburning in or through riparian areas within burn blocks and may create some potential future large wood and expose soil. Burning in riparian areas would be done under controlled conditions so loss of existing large wood is not likely (see resource protection measures). Burn intensities would be expected to be low and localized, and re-sprouting of vegetation could occur within two weeks of soil exposure (Agee 1993). No fire lines would occur within the riparian areas, so no alterations to large wood production would occur as a result of this activity.
Reducing roads within riparian areas, as recommended in the project’s road analysis, would allow more trees to grow near streams and increase the potential of large wood in the future.
Habitat Indicator – Width to Depth Ratios Tree thinning, decommissioning and closing roads, burning and fire lines associated with prescribed burning outside of riparian areas could result in some soil exposure. Mitigation measures would minimize soil disturbance and keep it far enough away from streams so potential sediment from these sources not impact streams and not increase embeddedness.
Riparian thinning and prescribed burning may also expose soil. Burn intensities would be expected to be low and localized, and re-sprouting of vegetation could occur within two weeks of soil exposure (Agee 1993). Project design criteria where established to control sediment so that is not expected to be a measurable increase in sedimentation and would also not likely lead to an increase in width to depth ratios.
Cumulative Effects Some past activities, including thinning in riparian areas, road construction and maintenance, grazing, wildfires, fencing riparian areas, and riparian planting have all likely affected stream temperatures. Past harvest activities removed some trees that provided shade to streams within riparian areas. Road construction in riparian areas or crossing creeks removed riparian vegetation along the roadbed; in some cases this left long stretches of streams without shade. Grazing of riparian areas in the past removed vegetation that was providing shade and also caused higher stream width to depth ratios through bank trampling. This created a larger surface area versus depth increasing the efficiency of solar radiation heating up streams. Grazing has been modified since this time and most past effects to shade are recovering.
Other past activities have increased shade and contributed to lower stream temperatures. Non- commercial thinning in riparian areas, after a brief reduction in shade, encouraged remaining trees and shrubs to grow larger so that they provide more shade than the original stand.
All activities that reduce stream shade could potentially increase stream temperatures. Currently much of the past reduction in shade is recovering or will continue to recover in the future. Overall there would still be some roads that would contribute to a reduction in shade along some segments of streams. Grazing would still impact riparian vegetation on some streams, but with current management little
171 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project impact to stream temperatures should be seen. Activities proposed in this project could cumulatively decrease the amount of shade on affected stream reaches in the short term, but since so few trees would be felled near perennial streams no measurable cumulative effect to stream temperatures is expected.
The activities contributing sediment to streams, if left as is, would continue to impact aquatic habitats. Actions taken in the past in an attempt to reduce the amount of sediment entering into streams were to decommission and hydrologically stabilize roads that were no longer needed. However, there are still roads and road/stream crossings that continue contributing sediment to streams. Most proposed activities, while they may cumulatively contribute to sediment mobilization, would not cumulatively add to the amount of sediment in streams due to riparian buffers and several mitigation measures designed to keep sediment from reaching streams. Though road decommissioning may contribute to additional sediment input in the short term, these roads would stabilize once closed and return to more natural conditions.
The Project Area subwatersheds may have experienced an increase in sediment load due to past management activities including road construction, timber harvest, wildfire suppression, grazing, and failure of instream fish structures. Road construction increased the drainage area with stream crossings that allow sediment to be transported directly to the streams from roads. Management activities and grazing in the past caused bank destabilization, which contributed sediment to the fish-bearing streams within the Project Area. Road culverts have caused bank erosion contributing sediment to the streams; some of these structures have since been removed. Past activities that have reduced sediment input into streams include removal of roads within RHCAs, allowing riparian vegetation to recover providing more structure for increased bank stability.
Present activities that are contributing to an increase in sediment transport to streams include grazing and existing roads. Continued grazing is still causing bank destabilization at some locations. Several roads in riparian areas are chronic sediment sources for area streams.
An ongoing action that may affect sediment load is grazing, which though minimized, may continue to input sediment at isolated locations. Maintaining adaptive management techniques and encouraging livestock to move out of riparian areas regularly may help to stabilize stream banks and restore floodplain function so more sediment can be filtered out of streams during high flows.
Some past activities including thinning in riparian areas, road construction and maintenance, grazing, wildfire suppression, fencing riparian areas, riparian planting and installation of road culverts have all likely affected pools or pool quality.
Road construction along or crossing creeks disturbed the stream channel at each of these crossings. Pools may have been lost at some of these crossings when gravel was placed in the stream channel to facilitate vehicle crossing. Grazing of riparian areas in the past has led to bank trampling which increased the amount of sediment entering streams affecting pool quality downstream. Grazing has been modified since this time and most past effects to stream banks are recovering. Modification of grazing has also allowed for willows to recover, which has allowed the return of multiple beaver colonies in perennial streams. Activities by beavers help to create deeper pools that can help fish survive periods of low flow and/or drought conditions (Collen & Gibson, 2001).
Ongoing activity in this watershed that would affect pools includes grazing. Impacts of grazing can lead to a reduction in pool quality at isolated locations, due to hoof shear along banks that increase bank erosion and sediment input to streams. Grazing continues to be modified and most past effects to stream banks are recovering and very little effect to pool quality is expected.
172 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Some past activities including thinning in riparian areas, road construction and maintenance, wildfire suppression, aspen stand restoration, and riparian planting have all likely affected large wood. Past harvest activities removed some trees that would have been potential large wood within riparian areas. Road construction along or crossing creeks removed all riparian vegetation along the roadbed. In some cases, this activity removed trees that would have become large wood once it fell into the stream.
No present activities, other than those in the proposed action, would lead to an increase in future large wood in the analysis area. There are no future foreseeable activities proposed for this watershed that would affect large wood.
Grazing caused higher width to depth ratios through bank trampling and excessive sediment input to streams. Continued grazing would still impact riparian vegetation on some streams, but with current management little impact to stream banks and width to depth ratios would be expected. The proposed action is not expected to result in cumulative effects to width to depth ratios.
No adverse cumulative effects to fish populations are expected under Alternative 2. Any cumulative watershed effects resulting from implementation of the CMH Project are expected to be beneficial to existing fish populations, based on the expected long term improvements to watershed health.
Determination of Effect to Aquatic Species On the basis of the above evaluation, if the project is implemented as described in the project proposal (Alternative 2), the potential for adverse impacts to listed Warner suckers and sensitive redband trout is very low. This project may ‘impact individual redband trout, but would not contribute to a loss of species viability or lead to federal listing of any PETS fish species or aquatic invertebrate species’.
Critical habitat for Warner suckers in Honey Creek is approximately 2.5 miles downstream of National Forest Lands and the Project Area. Critical habitat is limited to low gradient reaches of streams and there is no known occurrence of Warner suckers within the analysis area. Therefore, the CMH Project is ‘Not Likely to Adversely Affect’ Warner suckers or their critical habitat.
Redband trout are known to occur throughout the Project Area. Some proposed activities would occur adjacent to occupied habitat, with the exception of instream activities such as culvert removal and active stream restoration. Proposed activities other than instream work is not likely to have direct impacts to fish and is expected to contribute beneficial effects to fish habitat. All activities would have mitigation measures to protect fish habitat. Based on the activities described above, this project ‘May impact individuals or habitat, but would not likely contribute to a trend towards Federal listing or loss of viability to the population or species’ on redband trout or the MIS-listed trout family.
Implementation of the CMH Alternative 2 is not expected to adversely affect inland fish nor would it prevent attainment of RMOs as described in INFISH and is therefore consistent with the Forest Plan and INFISH.
173 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 76. Summary of effects on PETS fish species found on the Fremont-Winema National Forest and addressed under this aquatics report for the Crooked Mud Honey project. Effects of Suitable Year Species Critical Actions** Fish Species Listing* Habitat Listed Present Habitat Present Habitat Species
Klamath River Bull Trout Threatened 1998 No No No NE NE (Salvelinus confluentus) Lost River Sucker Endangered 1988 No No No NE NE (Deltistes luxatus) Shortnose Sucker Endangered 1988 No No No NE NE (Chasmistes brevirostris) Modoc Sucker Endangered 1985 No No No NE NE (Catostomus microps) Warner Sucker Threatened 1985 Yes No No NE NLAA (Catostomus warnerensis) Goose Lake Lamprey Sensitive Yes No NI NI (Lampetra tridentate ssp.nov) Goose Lake Tui Chub Sensitive Yes No NI NI (Gila bicolor thalassina) Miller Lake Lamprey Sensitive No No NI NI (Lampetra minima) Oregon Lakes Tui Chub Sensitive Yes No NI NI (Gila bicolor oregonensis) Pit Roach Sensitive Yes No NI NI (Lavinia symmetricus mitrulus) Pit Sculpin Sensitive Yes No NI NI (Cottus pitensis) Redband Trout - Chewaucan Sensitive Yes Yes NI MIIH (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Redband Trout – Fort Rock Sensitive No No NI NI (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Redband Trout – Goose Lake Sensitive Yes Yes NI MIIH (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Redband Trout – Warner Sensitive Yes Yes NI MIIH Lakes (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Trout Family MIS Yes Yes NI NI (Salmonidae) *Listing: Endangered/Threatened = ESA Federal Listing; Sensitive = R6 Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species List. **Effects: ESA Listing: NE = No Effect, NLAA = May Affect; Not Likely to Adversely Affect. R6/MIS Listing: NI = No Impact; MIIH = May impact individuals or habitat, but would not likely contribute to a trend towards Federal listing or loss of viability to the population or species
174 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 77. Summary of effect on PETS aquatic invertebrate species found on the Fremont-Winema National Forest and addressed under this aquatics report for the Crooked Mud Honey project. Suitable Year Species Effects of Actions** Invertebrate Species Listing* Habitat Listed Present Present Habitat Species
Western Ridged Mussel Sensitive N N NI NI (Gonidea angulata) Montane Peaclam Sensitive N N NI NI (Pisidium ultramontanum) Turban Pebblesnail Sensitive N N NI NI (Fluminicola turbiniformis) Great Basin Ramshorn Sensitive N N NI NI (Helisoma newberryi newberryi) Highcap Lanx Sensitive N N NI NI (Lanx alta) Scale Lanx Sensitive N N NI NI (Lanx klamathensis) Archimedes Springsnail Sensitive N N NI NI (Pyrgulopsis archimedis) Lined Ramshorn N N NI NI (Vorticifex effusus diagonalis) Sensitive *Listing: Endangered/Threatened = ESA Federal Listing; Sensitive = R6 Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species List. **Effects: ESA Listing: NE = No Effect R6 Listing: NI = No Impact
Summary The proposed action would allow the purpose and need for the project to be met by achieving the desired conditions as outlined in the LRMP, as amended by INFISH. Implementing this action may allow the identified aquatic resource and habitat elements to be met, as measured by resource and habitat indicators. Reduction of road miles in RHCAs, selected vegetation treatments within RHCAs, and removal of fish passage barriers would not retard or prevent attainment of Riparian Management Objectives (RMOs) or adversely affect native fish (TM-1and FM-1 of INFISH), as no adverse direct or indirect effects to any fish species is expected. All RHCAs treatments are designed to acquire desired vegetation characteristics in order to attain RMOs (TM-2 of INFISH).
Fuels reduction in the Project Area may reduce the risk of wildfire and its effects on fish habitat described above, thereby contributing to the attainment of RMOs (FM-4 of INFISH). Proposed road decommissioning, closure, reconstruction, and maintenance would serve to accelerate attainment of RMOs and are fully consistent with the goals and applicable INFISH Standards and Guidelines, particularly, RF-2 and FW-1 of INFISH. The greatest potential to retard the attainment of RMOs with Alternative 2 stems from the potential sediment delivery to streams resulting from harvest activities within RHCAs. The amount of sediment delivered to streams in the short term is expected to be at an immeasurable level compared to the existing site conditions and is expected to be reduced in the long term. Therefore, implementation of Alternative 2 is not expected to retard the attainment of RMOs.
The CMH Project would have No Impact on Miller Lake or Goose Lake lamprey, Oregon Lakes or Goose Lake tui chub, Pit roach, Pit sculpin, or the Fort Rock redband trout populations, but may impact individuals or habitat, but would not likely contribute to a trend toward Federal listing or loss of viability to the population or species, for Chewaucan, Goose Lake, and Warner redband trout populations. The
175 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project project would have No Effect on bull trout, Lost River sucker, Shortnose sucker, and Modoc sucker, but may affect, not likely to adversely affect Warner suckers and their designated critical habitat.
Summary of Environmental Effects
Table 78. Summary comparison of environmental effects to resources.
Resource Element Indicator/Measure Alt 1 – No Action Alt 2 – Proposed Action Water quality Sediment or fines in the No treatments would be conducted in Treatments within RHCAs would allow system (acres of RHCAs. Riparian areas would for stream restoration to stabilize banks potential disturbance continue to degrade and the threat of and headcuts, raise water tables, and the within RHCAs) catastrophic wildfire would continue to addition of large woody debris to stream exist. channels.
Thinning in 3,630 acres of RHCAs would allow the removal of fuels and the addition of large woody debris to achieve INFISH RMOs. Aquatic restoration projects would improve 783 acres in RHCAs.
Water quality Sediment or fines in the No new road construction or stream No new stream crossings proposed, system (miles of roads crossings would be implemented, therefore sediment increase would be within RHCAs) therefore sediment increases would be minimal and limited to road limited to existing road condition and improvements. usage. Sedimentation would be reduced by 28 miles of existing roads within eliminating 29 miles and RHCAs would not be improved to decommissioning 174 miles of roads required design standards, having a within the project area. 9 miles of roads continued adverse effect on water would be removed within RHCAs. 90 quality. miles of roads would be improved to meet required design standards, reducing impacts to water quality.
Fish Passage Fish Passage Barriers (# No new road construction or stream No new stream crossings proposed, of culverts) crossings would be implemented, therefore sediment increase would be therefore sediment increases would be minimal and limited to road limited to existing road condition and improvements. usage. Sedimentation would be reduced by 62 existing road- stream crossings eliminating 38 crossings located within would not be improved to required the project area; 24 crossings would be design standards, having a continued improved to meet required design adverse effect on water quality. standards, reducing impacts to water quality.
176 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Hydrology and Soils This section contains an analysis of the potential effects of each alternative of the CMH Project on watershed and soil resources.
Vegetation management projects that include logging and prescribed fires have the potential to impact both soil and hydrologic resources due to possibility of soil compaction, erosion, and/or displacement (Luce and Black 1999; Ares et al. 2005; Moore and Wondzell 2005; Scott 2007), and changes in streamflow, channel morphology, and/or water quality (Luce and Black 1999; Scherer and Pike 2003; Moore and Wondzell 2005; Janisch et al. 2012).
This analysis focuses on roads, stream flow regime, upland and riparian vegetation, groundcover, infiltration, overland flow (runoff), erosion potential, and impacts to soils including compaction, and displacement. This section also discusses potential effects to water quality. These watershed considerations, along with the analysis of the expected and potential effects for each alternative, are discussed and assessed using relevant scientific literature, field survey data, and professional judgment.
Other issues pertinent to watershed resources, such as effects to aquatic habitat and fish are discussed in the Fisheries and Aquatics section of this EA.
Resource Indicators and Measures Resource indicators and measures as shown in Table 79 will be used to assess effects of the alternatives.
Table 79. Resource indicators and measures for assessing effects Measure Source Resource Element Resource Indicator
Water quality Sediment delivery 1. Road density LRMP S/G1 Water quantity Water yield 2. Road density LRMP S/G
Riparian Function, and Sediment delivery and 3. Acres of RHCA treated 2 3 LMRP S/G, INFISH , BMP Channel Stability stream cover 4. Detrimental disturbance Soil Stability Soil Erosion LRMP S/G, BMP (acres) Water quality Sediment delivery 5. Miles road decommissioned LRMP S/G, BMP 1 Land and Resource Management Plan (Fremont National Forest) Standards and Guidelines 2 Inland Native Fish Strategy 3 Best Management Practices
Methodology This assessment of environmental consequences relies on relevant scientific literature, field observations, field survey data, monitoring data and observations from similar past projects, and professional judgment and experience.
The techniques and methodologies used in this analysis consider the best available science. The analysis includes a summary of the credible scientific evidence which is relevant to evaluating reasonably foreseeable impacts. The analysis also identifies methods used and references scientific sources relied upon. The conclusions are based on the scientific analysis that shows a thorough review of relevant scientific information.
177 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
The analysis relies on identified methods, and reference materials which lends credibility and helps substantiates conclusions. The conclusions are based on intuitive thinking and logic that take into consideration responsible divergent views, the acknowledgment of incomplete or unavailable information, uncertainty, and risk.
The best available science is a composite of several elements. These elements may include but are not limited to:
• On-site field survey, data collection and history; • Scientific literature. Literature reviewed and cited is listed in Literature Cited; • Field monitoring and research papers indicating effectiveness of BMPs/SWCPs.
These determinations reached in the specialists report are based upon ground reconnaissance of the proposed project area, previous monitoring of similar types of activities on NFS lands, and a review of the literature that is cited in the specialist report. The hydrologist reviewed all of those documents and has included the entire bibliography in the project record.
The following analysis assumes that all relevant BMPs are applied to project activities.
Analysis included field visits May 14, 15, and 16 2014, review of the Fremont Soil Resource Inventory, literature reviews, knowledge of previous similar projects and the impacts associated with implementing similar projects. Analysis also includes notes, data collection, data analysis from previous hydrologist and his field visits in summer 2013.
Data Collection Methodology General information on the project area is presented in the Deep Creek Watershed Analysis (USDA 1998), in which part of the project area is located, and synthesized in this report. GIS and the National Hydrography Dataset were used to calculate stream distances within the project area. The 2010 Water Quality Report by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ 2010) was used to determine if a stream was officially listed as having impaired water quality (denoted by placement on the 303(d) list). The Fremont National Forest Soil Resource Inventory (SRI) (Wenzel 1979), as amended by the LRMP (USDA Forest Service 1989), was used to help characterize soil conditions within the project area.
The SRI was used to help characterize soil and hydrologic conditions within the project area. To assess the impacts of past treatments on soil resources, soil monitoring was conducted during the summer of 2013 following the methods in the Forest Soil Disturbance Monitoring Protocol (USDA 2009). This protocol provides quantification of physical soil attributes that may affect site sustainability and hydrologic function. A total of 37 randomly oriented transects, each with 30 monitoring locations spaced approximately 150 feet apart (1110 total monitoring locations), were established across a range of soil types, slope, aspect, and vegetation cover. Measurements at each monitoring location (measurement area defined as a randomly placed 6 inch diameter circle) included forest floor depth and presence and degree of topsoil displacement, erosion, rutting, compaction, burning, platy/massive structure, bare soil, rock and live plant cover, and fine and coarse woody debris. Based upon the measurements collected, the soil condition at each monitoring location was placed into one of four disturbance classes: Class 0 (no disturbance), Class 1 (slight disturbance), Class 2 (moderate disturbance), or Class 3 (severe disturbance).
Information Sources Sources of information included the Watershed Condition Framework (WCF), SRI, literature review, watershed analysis, and OR DEQ 303(d) list.
178 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Incomplete and Unavailable Information Details regarding land use (timber harvest and ranching on private lands) along with stream channel conditions on non FS lands are incomplete and unavailable for inclusion into cumulative effects analysis.
Climate Change There is potential for projected changes in climate to impact hydrologic regimes within the project area. In the western United States, many changes in hydrologic regimes have been attributed to changes in climate. For example, as average annual temperature has increased, average snowpack depth has decreased (Mote et al. 2005; Stewart et al. 2009), peak streamflow is occurring 1 to 3 weeks earlier (McCabe and Clark 2005; Regonda et al. 2005; Stewart et al. 2004, 2005; Reiman and Isaak 2010), and a higher proportion of precipitation now falls as rain versus snow (Knowles et al. 2006; Chang and Jung 2010). In the Klamath Basin, summer streamflow has declined 38% over the last 50 years, and snowpack has decreased 40% at many locations (Chang and Jung 2010).
Affected Environment The CMH Project area is located in Thomas Creek, Crooked Creek, and Deep Creek Watersheds (Table 80). Hydrologic Unit Codes (HUCs) are listed in Table 86. The subwatersheds in which the project area is located are shown in Figure 38. The acres of each subwatershed incorporated into the project area and the corresponding percentage are also listed.
Table 80. Basins, subbasins, watersheds, and subwatersheds (and corresponding HUCs) in which the Crooked Mud Honey Project area is located. Basin Subbasin Watershed Subwatershed Project Area Percent of (HUC 6) (HUC 8) (HUC 10) (HUC 12) (Acres) Subwatershed (%) Upper Goose Lake Thomas Creek Lower Cox 131 2 Sacramento (18020001) (1802000102) (180200010203) (180200) Middle Thomas 584 1 (180200010210) Oregon Closed Lake Abert Crooked Creek Upper Crooked 13,005 45 Basin (17120006) (1712000603) (171200060301) (171200) Lower Crooked 3,421 18 (171200060302 Warner Lakes Deep Creek Mud Creek 8,288 57 (17120007) (1712000703) (171200070301) Upper Camas 1,660 8 (171200070302) Lower Camas 156 2 (171200070307) Upper Drake 612 3 (171200070308) Lower Drake 155 1 (171200070309) Honey Creek Upper Honey 17,671 93 (1712000704) (171200070401) Middle Honey 747 3 (171200070401) McDowell Creek 5,095 22 (17200070404)
179 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Figure 38. Location of the Crooked Mud Honey Project relative to 6th field (HUC 12) subwatersheds.
Past Activities Portions of the project area were logged between the 1970s and 1990s, mostly in response to a beetle infestation that caused mortality in portions of the project area. Some salvage logging occurred around 2000 in response to the Antelope Springs Fire.
Fire suppression within the project area began around the turn of the 20th century, with the most recent large fires having occurred in 1925 (reported 941 acres, NFS and private), 1986 (reported 22 acres, all NFS), and 1991 (reported 162 acres, all private). In large part, fuels reduction efforts within the project area have not occurred within the last 30 years. The Bull Stewarship project treated 197 acres in 2005 and the North Warner Sage Shrub project treated 3,215 acres between 2005 and 2015. These two projects account for less than 1% of the project area. The lack of fuels treatments has led to high fuel levels, conifer encroachment into meadows and riparian areas resulting in changes to plant composition and reducing soil water infiltration.
Existing Condition Hydrology
Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCAs) are portions of watersheds where riparian-dependent resources receive primary emphasis and management activities are subject to specific standards and guidelines (USDA 1995). RHCAs include traditional riparian corridors, wetlands, and other areas that
180 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project help maintain the integrity of aquatic ecosystems by (1) influencing the delivery of coarse sediment, organic matter, and woody debris to streams, (2) providing root strength for channel stability, (3) shading the stream, and (4) protecting water quality (USDA 1995). In the Fremont LRMP Management Area (MA) 15 is designated for riparian areas and encompasses all streams, lakes, reservoirs, seeps, moist and wet meadows, springs, and associated riparian vegetation on the forest. Acres of RHCA and MA 15 within each subwatershed are shown in Table 81.
Table 81. Acres of RHCA and MA 15 within the project area by subwatershed. Subwatershed RHCA Management Area 15 (HUC 12) (acres) (acres) Lower Cox 1 10 Middle Thomas 6.5 10 Upper Crooked 1277 879 Lower Crooked 102.5 126 Mud Creek 548 593 Upper Camas 82 59 Lower Camas 156 0 Upper Drake 16 3 Lower Drake 154 3 Upper Honey 1664 1223 Middle Honey 8 7 McDowell Creek 365 617 Total 4380 3530
Streamflow The project area contains approximately 136 miles of stream, 131 miles of which are on NFS land (Table 82). The project area contains perennial (year-round flow), intermittent (seasonal flow), and ephemeral (short-term precipitation- or snowmelt-induced flow) streams (Table 88). The main perennial streams within the project area are: Honey Creek, Little Honey Creek, Mud Creek, Porcupine Creek, Sage Creek, Crooked Creek, North Fork Crooked Creek, South Fork Crooked Creek, Twelvemile Creek, Little Cove Creek, Big Cove Creek, South Fork McDowell Creek, and Long John Creek (Figure 39)
Other perennial streams are present, but flow less than 1 mile through the project area (or have less than 1 mile of perennial flow, but may flow intermittently for longer distances). These include Clover Creek, Loveless Creek, Parker Creek, Rosa Creek, Mapes Creek, Squaw Butte Creek, Jones Creek, First Swale Creek, Second Swale Creek, as well as some of the tributaries to the main perennial creeks listed above (Figure 39).
Table 82. Miles of intermittent and ephemeral streams across the entire project area as well as on only NFS land. Stream Type Distance: Entire Project Area Distance: NFS Land (miles) (miles) Perennial 48 47 Intermittent 60 56 Ephemeral 28 28 Total 136 131
181 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Figure 39. Perennial, intermittent, and ephemeral streams within the project area.
182 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Water Quality Four streams within the project area are on the ODEQ 303(d) list of impaired streams (Table 83). Turbidity and fecal coliform concentrations are not measured in any of the streams within the project area due to time and financial constraints. It should be noted that water quality measurements are not collected on all streams within the project area, and lack of placement on the 303(d) list does not necessarily indicate that a stream does not have impaired water quality. The streams listed for temperature are for elevated temperature. Elevated temperatures are based upon a 7 day average maximum greater than 20 degrees Celsius (68 degrees Fahrenheit). Honey Creek is also listed for year round pH between 7.0 and 9.0 which is too basic.
Table 83. Streams with impaired water quality, as denoted by placement on the ODEQ 303(d) of impaired water quality. Approximate distances in which the streams flow through the project area are also listed. Stream Water Quality Impairment Distance in Project Area (miles) Drake Creek Temperature 0.2 Honey Creek Temperature, pH 6.5 Little Honey Creek Temperature 7.0 Porcupine Creek Temperature 3.2
Soils Soils within the project area are characterized in the Fremont National Forest SRI (Wenzel 1979). Soils are derived from basalt, andesite, rhyolite, and tuff parent materials. The project area can be stratified into 45 land types, which are areas with similar soils, bedrock, landforms, and vegetation (Wenzel 1979). The majority of these land types cover less than 3% of the project area. Land types 37A and 37B are the only ones that compose more than 10% of the project area (14.8 and 15.4 percent, respectively). See the Fremont National Forest SRI (Wenzel 1979) for a detailed description of each land type. It should be noted that the SRI is not designed to be utilized for areas less than 40 acres, but does provide a general overview of soil conditions and can be useful in site characterization.
Potential for Sediment Yield, Erosion, Compaction, and Displacement Summaries of potential erosion, compaction, displacement, and sediment yield, as characterized in the LRMP and SRI are shown in Table 84. There is a high potential for erosion and compaction across 44% and 54.7%, respectively, of the project area. In contrast, there is high potential for displacement and sediment yield on only 14.2% and 12.9%, respectively, of the project area.
Table 84. Potential for erosion (rill and gully), compaction, displacement, and sediment yield displacement within NFS land across the entire project, as defined in the Fremont LRMP, which amended the SRI. Potential Level Percent of Project Area Erosion Potential Compaction Displacement Sediment Yield Potential Potential Potential Low 23.0% 10.9% 72.5% 55.0% Moderate 33.0% 34.4% 13.3% 20.2% High 44.0% 54.7% 14.2% 12.9% N/A - - - 11.9%
The FS Watershed Condition Framework (FS-977, 2011) and Watershed Condition Classification (FS- 978, 2011) rated watersheds on 12 Indicators and 24 Attributes. These attributed were in four Process Categories: Aquatic Physical, Aquatic Biological, Terrestrial Physical, and Terrestrial Biological. These 24 Attributes were evaluated to give an overall score/rating of between 1.0 and 3.0 corresponding to a
183 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Good, Fair, or Poor overall rating for FS lands. Those ratings are summarized in Table 85, below for the five 6th HUCs that comprise 93% of the project area.
Table 85. Summary of Watershed Condition Class rating by HUC 12. HUC_12_NAME USFS CONDITION RATING USFS WATERSHED CONDITION CLASS
Upper Crooked Creek 1.6 Functioning at Risk Fair Lower Crooked Creek 1.3 Functioning at Risk Fair Mud Creek 2.0 Functioning at Risk Fair Upper Honey Creek 1.7 Functioning at Risk Fair
McDowell Creek 1.5 Functioning properly Good
Upper Crooked and Lower Crooked Creek watersheds received a rating of 2 for open road density, Mud Creek and Upper Honey Creek watersheds received a rating of 3 for open road density and McDowell Creek watershed received a rating of 1. All of the watersheds received a rating of 3 for road maintenance. Based upon the ratings in the WCC, roads are problematic in the overall watershed condition and function.
Road Density Miles of closed and open roads, miles of road within RHCAs, and open road density within each subwatershed in the project area are shown in Table 86. See the Transportation report for a detailed description of road maintenance levels (MLs). Note that total miles may be slightly different than the sum from the individual subwatersheds due to rounding. The Fremont LRMP has a management goal of an open road density of 2.5 miles/miles2.
Table 86. Miles of closed and open roads, miles of road within RHCAs, and open road density within each subwatershed in the project area. Subwatershed Miles of Miles of Miles of road Project area Open Road (HUC 12) closed roads open roads within RHCAs NSF land Density (ML 1) (ML 2-5) (miles2) (miles/miles2) Lower Cox 0.3 0 0 0.205 0 Middle Thomas 0.6 0 0 0.913 0 Upper Crooked 31.1 25.2 25.2 20.32 1.24 Lower Crooked 13.9 1.3 1.3 5.35 0.24 Mud Creek 23.8 43.3 43.3 12.95 3.34 Upper Camas 3.5 4.4 4.4 2.59 1.70 Lower Camas 0.3 0 0 0.244 0 Upper Drake 0 0.1 0.1 0.956 0.10 Lower Drake 0 0 0 0.242 0 Upper Honey 84.1 54.3 54.3 27.61 1.97 Middle Honey 4.0 0.8 0.8 1.17 0.68 McDowell Creek 0 2.5 2.5 7.96 0.31 Total 163 130 27 80.51 1.61
184 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Resource Indicator and Measure 1 (Sediment delivery/Road Density) Sediment delivery from roads can impair water quality and roads generate more sediment and erosion than other aspects of forestry operations. Table 86 above lists miles of road within RHCAs by HUC. Generally, more roads result in a greater the potential for sediment related impacts to water quality. No streams in the project area are listed on the state 303(d) report for water quality related to sediment.
Resource Indicator and Measure 2 (Water yield/Road Density) Roads, total length and density can reduce soil infiltration and cut off natural flow paths which lead to increased flows including peak flows. Table 86 above lists miles of road and road density by HUC. Generally more roads equates to an elevated potential for increased peak flows and decreased late season flows.
Resource Indicator and Measure 3 (Sediment delivery and stream cover/Acres RHCA treated) Total length of roads within RHCAs can be a relative measure of how much roads may be impacting riparian function and channel stability. Roads that are near to streams can alter channel form and function by limiting stream sinuosity, lack trees that provide shade and root mass for stream stability, and occupy areas that might otherwise support riparian vegetation. Table 86 above lists miles of road and road density by HUC. Generally, the more roads that exist within the RHCAs results in greater potential for impacts to channel form and function as well as riparian function.
Desired Condition Direction for the management of the planning area comes primarily from the Standards and Guidelines of the Fremont LRMP.
Anticipated Future Conditions In 10 Years: • Noticeable improvement in some degraded riparian zones will be evident at the end of the first decade. Willows, alder, and other deciduous species will give those areas a more brushy look. Consequently, fish habitat will be improved.
In Fifty Years: • Fisheries habitat would be improved considerably over present conditions. Management would emphasize the restoration, maintenance, and/or improvements of habitat quality on major fish- bearing streams.
• Riparian habitat conditions would be significantly improved with noted improvements in overall water quality. Evidence of eroded streambanks would be notably reduced from present levels. Minimum streamflows would be maintained on selected streams. Additional improvements would be apparent in presently active eroding gullies. These areas would be restored to dry or wet meadow conditions. Many would provide water flow as a result of improvement measures.
185 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Environmental Consequences
Alternative 1 – No Action Under Alternative 1, no logging or prescribed burning would occur, and there would be no potential for negative impacts to soil or hydrologic resources related to these activities. However, without logging or prescribed fire, the extent of the canopy cover would likely continue to increase while shrub and herbaceous ground cover would continue to decrease Therefore, the ability of water to infiltrate the soil and recharge groundwater would continue to decrease over time as groundcover is further reduced, and the risk for decreased stream baseflows and increased peak streamflows and erosive overland flow would continue.
Under Alternative 1, uncharacteristically high fuel loads and their risk of creating high intensity wildfires would remain (DeBano et al. 1998). If a high intensity wildfire were to occur, there would likely be negative impacts to both soil and hydrologic resources. For example, extreme heat from high intensity fires could consume soil organic layers and destroy soil structure. High heat from wildfires could also cause the soil to become hydrophobic, in which the soil repels water and causes an increase in the amount of water that flows over the soil surface (Debano 2000; Letey 2001). Soil hydrophobicity, coupled with the decrease in plant ground cover and root networks, would decrease soil water infiltration rates and lead to increased surface erosion and sediment delivery to streams, and decreased water quality. The decrease in soil water infiltration would also lead to a decline in the groundwater table and a subsequent decrease in stream baseflows. Further, velocity of peak stream flows would have potential to increase, which could lead to streambank erosion and degradation.
Implementation of Alternative 1 would likely lead to continued conifer encroachment into meadows and RHCAs, which would lead to a reduction in shrub and herbaceous ground cover and a subsequent decrease in soil water infiltration (Pierson et al. 2007, 2010; Peterson et al. 2008). Decreased soil water infiltration would have the potential to decrease groundwater table height and reduce stream baseflows. Increased overland flow and sediment delivery to streams would likely occur. Encroachment of conifers into RHCAs would also increase the probability that a high intensity wildfire would burn vegetation adjacent to streams, which would increase soil erosion and stream sediment delivery and decrease stream shading. Further, no stream or meadow restoration would occur, and degradation of impaired streams and meadows would likely continue.
No temporary roads would be constructed under Alternative 1, and potential negative impacts to soil and hydrologic resources from road construction would not occur. However, road decommissioning would not occur, total road densities would remain above the LRMP standard of 2.5 miles/mile2 (Table 86), and the potential reduction in stream sediment delivery from road surfaces would not occur. Road networks are also associated with increases in sediment delivery to streams and increases in runoff and peaks flows. Under Alternative 1, no road decommissioning would occur and water yield and sediment delivery to streams would not be reduced. The 26 miles of road would not be decommissioned or closed and may be subject to culverts plugging, roads washing out and delivering sediment into channels.
In summary, implementation of Alternative 1 would pose no short-term risks to soil or hydrologic resources. However, long-term increases in understory groundcover and soil water infiltration that would likely occur following logging and prescribed burning would not occur, and the risk of a high intensity wildfire and associated negative impacts to soils, water quality and quantity, and stream geomorphology would remain.
186 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action
Direct and Indirect Effects When assessing potential impacts to soil and hydrologic resources, the direct effect would occur at the same time and place as the proposed activities. Indirect effects would occur offsite or later in time and are defined as short term or long term. Short term refers to five years or less while long term refers to greater than five years. Direct effects will be measured using soil compaction, soil displacement, and stream restoration. Indirect effects will be measured using soil erosion, soil productivity, stream flow, channel morphology, and water quality.
Table 87. Resource indicators and measures for Alternative 2 Resource Element Resource Indicator Measure Alt 2 Proposed Action
Water quality Sediment delivery 1. Road density in RHCA See table 94
Water quantity Water yield 2. Road density in RHCA See table 94
Riparian Function, and Sediment delivery and 3. Acres RHCA treated Mechanical 2862 ac or 81% Channel Stability stream cover
Riparian Function, and Sediment delivery and 4. Acres of RHCA treated Across landscape Channel Stability stream cover Rx Fire
Soil Stability Soil Erosion 5. Detrimental disturbance (acres Less than20% of or % area) activity area
Water quality Sediment delivery 6. Miles road decommissioned 26
Resource Indicator and Measures 1 and 2 (Road density in RHCA)
Table 88. Roads in RHCAs Subwatershed Miles of Miles of RHCA Open Road (HUC 12) closed roads open roads (miles2) Density (ML 1) (ML 2-5) (miles/miles2) Lower Cox 0.02 0 0.205 0 Upper Crooked 3.5 1.1 20.32 0.06 Lower Crooked 0.7 0 5.35 0 Mud Creek 4.3 1.5 12.95 0.1 Upper Camas 0.9 0.2 2.59 0.08 Upper Honey 11 5 27.61 0.18 McDowell Creek 0.7 0 7.96 0 Total 21 7.8 80.51
The proposed action could close a total of 21 miles of road that are within RHCAs. Only 7.8 miles of road would remain open within RHCAs. Reductions in the total length of roads and road density result in less runoff and erosion (sediment) getting into streams. The following 6th HUCs have zero road miles within the RHCA: Lower Camas, Lower Drake, Upper Drake, Middle Honey, and Middle Thomas, so they are not included in the table above.
187 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Reductions in the density and length of road can result in less runoff being intercepted and routed into streams thus increasing peak flows. Twenty-six miles of road would be decommissioned as part of this project. The following 6th HUCs have zero road miles within the RHCA: Lower Camas, Lower Drake, Upper Drake, Middle Honey, and Middle Thomas, so they are not included in the table above.
Resource Indicator and Measure 3 (Acres of RHCA treated by mechanical) The proposed action plans to treat 2862 acres or 81% of the total area of RHCA. Treating these areas may reduce fuel loads thus reducing the probability of an unplanned fire and the resulting adverse impacts to soil and water resources. Reducing juniper and conifer encroachment allows riparian vegetation such as sedges, willows, aspen and red osier dogwood among others to reestablish along streams. These plants provide root mass to hold stream banks together and provide shade for stream cooling. The areas that are thinned would have the material scattered or piled and burned. To protect water quality no piles would be within the riparian area. All appropriate BMPs would be part of project design and implementation.
Resource Indicator and Measure 4 (Acres of RHCA treated by RX fire) Prescribed burning may be allowed across the project area which could be approximately 51,000 acres. This has the potential to include all 3500 acres in MA 15 Riparian. Fires burn in a mosaic and not all acres would be burned or be burned at the same time. The riparian areas contain ephemeral, intermittent and perennial streams. Conifer and juniper are encroaching into these riparian areas and these areas need to be treated to return them to or get them closer to their natural vegetation composition rather than continued fire suppression and juniper and conifer encroachment resulting in altered vegetation in and along riparian zones. Prescribed fire has potential to lead to some negative impacts to soil and hydrologic resources, such as hydrophobic soils and increased stream sediment delivery. However, prescribed burning would occur under conditions in which fire would burn at low severities, and widespread negative impacts would be minimal. In many areas, prescribed burning would result in an increase in shrub and herbaceous groundcover, which would increase soil water infiltration and storage and lead to positive impacts to soil and hydrologic resources. Use of prescribed burning would also reduce potential for high intensity wildfires across the landscape. Prescribed burning is also discussed in the fire/fuels report.
Monitoring of prescribed fire and wildland fire use in dry ponderosa pine forests in Utah by the hydrologist shows that the areas had limited hydrophobic soils, low high burn severity (2.2% of burn area), and that re-vegetation occurred quickly (Goodman 2008). Observations of high and moderate burn severity from Barry Point fire show grass were reemerging quickly and needles providing groundcover shortly after the fire was out. Monitoring from Toolbox fire shows a high percentage of groundcover (grasses, shrubs) in high severity areas three years after the fire was out (Goodman 2013). Since the plan is to have a low severity fire the vegetation would not be impacted as much and would recover much quicker than in these high severity areas.
Treatments in riparian areas (RHCAs and MA 15) would include prescribed fire. Generally, prescribed fire would be allowed to back into or burn through riparian areas. Active ignition may occur within RHCAs on a limited basis as needed to ensure that encroaching juniper or other conifers actually burn. Prescribed fire within the RHCA may result in some short term increases in erosion or sediment getting into the stream. Since the prescribed fire is intended to be a low severity fire any changes in sediment or erosion would be short term and may not be noticeable due to natural variations in stream flow and erosion/sediment. “Prescribed fire conditions produce lower fire intensities and lower fire severity leading to reduced potential for subsequent damage to soil and water resources.” (Neary. RMRS GTR 42 vol 4. 2005). RMRS GTR 231, published in 2010 stated “Prescribed fires are typically intentionally set during times when flame lengths are expected to be low, fire residence times are expected to be short, soil
188 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
heating is expected to be low, and the effects of prescribed fires on soil properties and limited in severity and extend.” RMRS GTR 231 also stated “Low severity fire has a minimal effect on soil biota because maximum temperatures are generally nonlethal, except for the upper litter layer and consumption of the forest floor habitat is limited.”
As stated earlier in this report and in other specialist reports, the vegetation in the area has seen an increase in juniper which can out-compete other desired riparian vegetation including willows. Removal of some of the juniper either through hand cutting and/or prescribed fire may result in some short term increases in bare ground, erosion, runoff and sediment into the channels but the long term would see an increase in riparian vegetation and improved stream and riparian vegetation conditions.
Resource Indicator and Measure 5 (Detrimental soil disturbance) Soils monitoring described in detail in the following paragraphs, discloses that ground based harvest equipment impacts are well below the regional standard of 20% detrimental disturbance.
The precise extent and magnitude of potential detrimental soil conditions resulting from vegetation treatments remains unknown. However, extensive areas of detrimental soil conditions are not likely to occur under implementation of the Proposed Action. Short-term minimal adverse effects would be alleviated by application of mitigation measures. Insofar as practical, project design features and BMPs recommend utilization of existing roads, skid trails, and landings. Soil moisture limits preclude operations when resource damage is likely to occur. To minimize soil impacts and ensure consistency with LRMP objectives and goals, a comprehensive list of BMPs is included in Appendix D. With properly implemented BMPs and other mitigation measures, detrimental soil conditions are expected to remain below limits established by Regional direction and the LRMP.
In the 2007 Westside Fuels Reduction Project report, Forest Soil Scientist Desi Zamudio, reported the following from his monitoring.
“Current soil compaction was assessed along 19 transects across common map units in Westside project area. Sampling was stratified by soil map units and the common soil map units received 5 or more transects; map units R1R3, R1, and R3 received 12 transects. Transects cover areas with prior heavy equipment logging. Transects were systematically sampled along major compass lines to limit geographic bias. Soil features were sampled at 20 points along transects. Soil features were ranked on a scale from 1: soft soil tilth to 6: thick growth limiting plates. Soils transect methods are consistent with Region 6 and general soil protocols (Veihmeyer and Hendrickson 1948; Taylor and Ashcroft 1972; Soil Survey Division Staff 1993).
Zero percent compaction was found on 19 transects with no growth limiting condition ratings of 5 or 6. Transects generally had cut stumps and fading skid trails associated with prior heavy equipment logging. All 19 transects have suitable soil tilth, no transect or soil map unit exceeds the Pacific Northwest Region’s disturbance guideline of 20 percent (Forest Service, 1998).
In the R1 R3 map units, soil tilth features occurred in 19 of 20 points in 8 transects. In R1 R3 map units, 5 transects have 18 of 20 sample point in garden like soft soil class 1 and 2. Soil compression occurred in a few samples, no growth limiting compaction was found of classes 5 and 6.”
The soils monitoring discussed in Zamudio’s report consisted of 19 transects in prior heavy equipment logging areas and no growth limiting compaction was found on 20 samples along 400 meter transects, that is at 380 sample points. No transect or soil map unit exceeds Pacific Northwest Regional disturbance guideline of 20 percent.
189 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Forest soil monitoring in 2013 covered four soil land types (units 26, 43, 37A and 37B) and followed the soil disturbance monitoring protocol described under Methodology on page 179. A total of 1,110 sites were sampled with 73 of them showing detrimental disturbance, which is 6.5% of the sites. This is well below the regional standard of 20% detrimental disturbance.
To protect soils resources ground based operation would be limited to defined dry soil condition with soil moisture less than 15 percent, or on frozen ground, or packed snow cover over 18 inches in depth. The “Hand Test” can be used to determine soil moisture instead of a soil moisture probe. This technique is discussed in the NRCS publication “Estimating Soil Moisture by Feel and Appearance”, which is included as an Appendix in the Hydrology and Soils Report. Using this guide, soil moisture is determined by soil texture and moisture. The following table lists the soil types for those soils supporting juniper, pine and mixed conifer by texture.
Table 89. Soil Texture and SRI Units Fine Sand, Loamy Fine sand 34A, 348, 623
Sandy Loam, Fine Sandy Loam 37A, 37B, 37C, 41A, 41B, 41C, 42, 43, 63A, 66
68A, 68B, 68C, 88C, 376, 988
Sandy Clay Loam, Loam 25, 26, 34B, 57, 342
Clay, Clay Loam, Silty Clay Loam 30A, 30B, 60, 61,648, 676, 678
At any time during logging operations if ruts from equipment exceed four inches in depth, then operations should cease. In riparian areas or in meadows, the max depth before ceasing operations should be two inches.
Logging Operations on slopes over 35% Forwarder harvesters that operate on a mat of slash material may be allowed to operate on slopes above 35%. These machines cut slash material and build a mat of slash that the harvester drives on top of to access trees to be cut. This slash mat is usually very effective at protecting soils and watershed function. This equipment would be held to the same standard of 20% detrimental soil disturbance or less. These machines can be operated on slopes up 60% (uphill) and 70% (downhill). The slash mats should remain on the ground after harvest operations are complete to protect the soil resource. The slash mats would decompose, and provide nutrients and it is good for soil nutrient cycling. If fuel loads are too high (15 tons per acre or higher) then the fuels can be reduced/removed. When reducing fuel loads in slash mats, the upper layer of the slash could be removed. The bottom layer of slash that is partially imbedded in the soil should remain since removing that lower layer of slash would involve tearing up the soil.
Logging on these steeper slopes could also be done using cable logging systems if the slope deflection is right for the cable haul systems. Cable logging suspends the logs and usually results in less soil disturbance than ground based logging equipment.
Up to 4,000 acres of the proposed 19,000 of potential commercial harvest occurs on areas of greater than 35% slope. Approximately 2,307 acres on slopes less than 55% would be harvested using the Forwarder harvester system. Approximately 727 acres have been identified that could be cable logged. Refer to the Silviculturist report for details and maps.
190 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
The table below shows the acres associated with the slope break outs for areas 35% slope and above that have been identified for commercial timber harvest.
Table 90 Acres represented by slope Slope Acres 35-45% 2174 45-55% 902 55-70% 421 >70% 77
Resource Indicator and Measure 6 (Miles of road decommissioned) Road decommissioning reduces total overall roads length and road density. Roads generally result in more sediment movement and erosion than timber harvest units. Roads also intercept and redirect surface runoff, thus increasing peak flows. A reduction in road length and density restores the natural hydrologic regime. Roads that are not maintained can result in culverts plugging and washing out road fill material, can have surface erosion problems that result in impaired water quality.
Cumulative Effects
Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis The boundaries for soil resource impacts are the treatment areas and for hydrologic resources it is the 6th level HUC. Soil resources are evaluated on a treated area since repeated impacts to the same location can be detrimental. The 6th HUC is used for hydrologic resources since water and erosional process move down channel and downslope.
When assessing potential impacts to soil and hydrologic resources, short-term refers to 5 years or less while long-term refers to greater than 5 years. Soil compaction, can recover with time due to freeze thaw cycles as long as the compaction is not too deep. Vegetation (grasses and shrubs) can reestablish on bare ground and their roots can help break up compaction within a few years. Reducing compacted areas and reestablishing groundcover restores natural runoff and erosion processes.
Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Activities Relevant to Cumulative Effects Analysis Table 91. Resource Indicators and Measures for Cumulative Effects Resource Element Resource Indicator Measure
Water quality Sediment delivery 1. Road density in RHCA
Water quantity Water yield 2. Road density in RHCA
Riparian Function, and Channel Sediment delivery and stream 3. Acres RHCA/Riparian treated Mechanical Stability cover
Riparian Function, and Channel Sediment delivery and stream 4. Acres of RHCA/Riparian treated by Rx Fire Stability cover
Soil Stability Soil Erosion 5. Detrimental disturbance (acres or % area)
Water quality Sediment delivery 6. Miles road decommissioned
191 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Resource Indicator and Measures 1 and 2 (Road density in RHCA) Road densities are being reduced in the proposed project and were reduced in several of the previous projects. Reduction of total road length and road densities reduces sediment from roads and reduces changes in water runoff, and peak flows.
Resource Indicator and Measure 3 and 4 (Acres of RHCA/Riparian treated) Most of the previous treatments did not treat in the riparian areas. Bull Stewardship in 2006 was the exception and treated 197 acres of RHCA. The proposed project would treat within riparian areas, which would reduce fuel loads and restore the vegetation back towards the desired plant communities. The proposed project would also use prescribed fire in and near riparian areas to reduce fuel loads and restore plant communities.
Resource Indicator and Measure 5 (Detrimental soil disturbance) The regional soil standard is that the total amount of detrimental disturbed soil would be less than 20% of the activity area. Recent soils monitoring in the project area indicates that the total detrimental disturbed soils from past and ongoing activities are 6.5% which is well below the 20% standard. This indicates that the area soils have maintained their productivity and function. The proposed action is not expected to result in cumulative detrimental effects to soils that would exceed the 20% standard.
Resource Indicator and Measure 6 (Miles of road decommissioned) Some of the past projects have closed or decommissioned road that were determined not to be need for current or future land management activities. Roads intercept runoff and drainage and reductions in roads are generally good for watershed health and reduce sediment eroded and transported to streams.
The proposed project activities may delay recovery of vegetation in areas of direct ground impact, such as within skid trails and landings. This would be a short-term temporary effect over a small, dispersed area. Once the project is completed, regrowth of vegetation and recovery of effective groundcover, including down wood, would resume. The long term net benefits of the proposed action would improve overall watershed health and function and reduce the potential for a large unplanned fire with all the watershed and soils impacts that can result from a high severity unplanned fire. The impacts of the proposed harvest, thinning, and prescribed fire activities to effective groundcover are anticipated to be slight and temporary, and would not combine cumulatively with effects of past, ongoing, or foreseeable actions.
The extent of the project area that would be impacted by proposed logging, thinning and prescribed fire activities is expected to recover over time. Erosion risk would decrease, nutrient cycling would resume and natural fertility levels would become reestablished over most of the area. The majority of the project area would continue functioning to support and maintain long-term site productivity, except where there are detrimental conditions.
Detrimental soil conditions would remain on about six percent (that is the percent of the area that the most recent monitoring shows is still detrimentally disturbed after past logging).of the project area. The 6.5% area detrimentally disturbed is less than 1/3 of the allowable soils area that can be detrimentally disturbed and still meet the FS regional soil standards. This low percentage of soils impacted in an indicator of good land stewardship. Due to their productivity and resilience most soils would retain their capability, serving as a growing medium, storing and cycling nutrients and water, and supporting or regenerating a diverse forest cover.
192 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Compliance with LRMP and Other Relevant Laws, Regulations, Policies and Plans The proposed action would be compliant with LRMP standards and all relevant laws, regulations and policies related to soil productivity and watershed function.
Summary Under Alternative 1, No Action Alternative, no logging or prescribed burning would occur, and there would be no potential for negative impacts to soil or hydrologic resources related to these activities. However, without logging or prescribed fire, the extent of the canopy cover would likely continue to increase while shrub and herbaceous ground cover could continue to decrease Therefore, the ability of water to infiltrate the soil and recharge groundwater may continue to decrease over time as groundcover is further reduced, and the risk for decreased stream baseflows and increased peak streamflows and erosive overland flow would continue.
Under Alternative 1, uncharacteristically high fuel loads and their risk of creating high intensity wildfires would remain (DeBano et al. 1998). If a high intensity wildfire were to occur, there could likely be negative impacts to both soil and hydrologic resources.
Implementation of Alternative 1 would likely lead to continued conifer encroachment into meadows and RHCAs, which could lead to a reduction in shrub and herbaceous ground cover and a subsequent decrease in soil water infiltration. This alternative could move the area further away from the desired future condition.
Under the Proposed Action, some short term impacts to soils and watershed function could occur. Based upon the soils monitoring, these impacts are well below the regional soil standard for detrimental disturbance. This alternative could improve watershed and riparian conditions for the long term. This alternative moves the area towards the desired future conditions.
193 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Cultural Resources This report fulfills requirements under NEPA, is intended to discuss the potential effects both beneficial and detrimental, that the project may have on cultural resources in the project area.
Cultural resources (also known as heritage resources) include structures, sites, roads, trails, areas, and objects of scientific, historic or social value. They are irreplaceable, nonrenewable features documenting past human use on our nations lands. Within the National Forests, these sites document the prehistoric and historic life-ways of the American Indian, the routes and actions of the early explorers, trappers, and settlers, the industrial activities of logging, mining, and stock grazing, community resource use, the history of forest recreation, and National Forest administration. Any ground-disturbing activity, including the proposed action or its alternative, has the potential to damage the significant important data, features, historic qualities, and natural settings of these sites unless adequate protections or mitigations are undertaken.
In addition to NEPA the Forest Service is required by additional laws to take into consideration the potential effects to cultural resources. Federal laws pertaining to cultural resource protection include Section 110 and 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended (Public Law 89-665; 16 USC 470-470w-6), the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 (Public Law 91- 190; 42 USC 4321-4347) and applicable regulations (36 CFR part 60, 296 and 800). All alternatives of the CMH Project comply with all applicable laws and regulations pertinent to cultural resources.
Heritage Resource Concerns Cultural resources are inherently finite, and do not recover from detrimental disturbance. Therefore efforts must be made to minimize or avoid disturbance to known resources. Ground disturbance is the main factor with the potential to disturb heritage sites. Proposed restoration activities in this project that have the potential to disturb heritage sites are:
Commercial Harvest
Proposed commercial harvest activities include traditional ground based, harvester-forwarder, and cable logging systems. Direct impacts to cultural resources using these methods include tree falling, use of heavy machinery, and yarding. Tree falling could damage sites by the physical action of large trees landing on sites, gouging tree limbs into the ground surface. Use of rubber tired and tracked equipment and yarding (dragging trees) to landings could also cause damage to sites in the form of soil displacement, compaction and displacement or damage to artifacts. Rubber tired logging and excavating equipment focuses the weight of the machine on just four points which compacts soil more than tracked machinery. Tracked machinery spreads out the weight of the equipment over a larger area reducing soil compaction but causing more soil displacement than rubber tired equipment. Indirect impacts include increased traffic near site locations, exposure both to the elements, and the creation of vegetation “islands” because of the “Flag and Avoid” method to protect sites from direct impacts. Un-cut “islands” may draw attention from woodcutters, recreationists and even to cattle seeking shade.
Non -Commercial Treatments (mechanically and by hand)
Mechanical non-commercial treatments that have direct impacts to cultural resources include tree falling and use of heavy machinery. Impacts would mirror those described in the previous paragraphs.
Non-commercial treatments conducted by hand is an undertaking that has little to no potential to cause direct effects to historic properties according to Appendix A of the 2004 Programmatic Agreement between the US Forest Service (Region 6), the Advisory council on Historic Preservation, and SHPO.
194 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Indirect impacts include exposure due to increased traffic near site locations and the elements, and the creation of “vegetation islands” because the Forest practices the “Flag and Avoid” method to protect sites. As previously mentioned, un-cut “islands” draw attention from woodcutters, recreationists and even livestock seeking shade.
Material derived from the non-commercial treatments maybe piled and burned or lop and scattered. Pile burning can directly impact cultural resources if the material is piled on a site. When the pile is ignited, the ground where the pile meets the soil experiences intense temperatures. As previously noted, high temperatures consume or alter artifacts. Lop and scatter leaves debris on the ground. An indirect potential impact of increasing the fuel load would be an increase in fire temperatures during a wildfire.
Temporary Road Construction and Road Maintenance
Temporary road construction and road maintenance, such as installation and cleaning of ditches and culverts, construction of water bars, earthen berms and/or cross ditches, in undisturbed ground; has the potential to directly damage sites. Damage occurs when moving material, compacting soil and leaving the area susceptible to erosion. Surface and subsurface artifacts could be displaced and/or crushed by heavy equipment and traffic. Site context and integrity are also threatened. A negative indirect effect may be temporarily increasing public access that may lead to vandalism and/or looting.
Temporary Roads, Landings and Skid Trail Rehabilitation
Temporary roads and skid trails would be used for only a short duration and decommissioned following vegetation treatments. Temporary road rehabilitation consists of recontouring the road to match the slope and closing the road entrances with large water bars/or other barriers. Recontouring the road requires the use of heavy equipment that has the potential to directly damage sites if equipment moves into undisturbed ground. Impacts would mirror those described in the previous paragraph.
Road System Management
Road system management activities include road decommissioning, road closures, and potential motor vehicle use map (MVUM) amendments. Of the three management activities, only road decommissioning has the potential to cause direct effects to cultural resources. Road decommissioning can take a variety of forms from simply removing road identification signs; constructing a barrier, removing culverts, and ripping the road surface; to full re-contour of the road prism. A positive indirect effect of all three road management activities would be decreased access to cultural sites that may lead to a decrease in vandalism and looting. A negative indirect effect would be a decrease in tribal access. Coordination between heritage and road management personnel to ensure that barrier construction and ripping doesn’t occur within a site would prevent direct impacts.
Prescribed Fire
Direct effects of prescribed fire could include site damage associated with fireline construction and potentially excessive heat. Fireline construction, whether by hand or mechanical methods could displace or physically alter surface and subsurface artifacts and other site characteristics such as site context and integrity. Fireline construction may reveal that the site was larger than its surface manifestation. High temperatures generated by heavy fuel loads, and/or unfavorable burning conditions, could damage sites by consuming or altering artifacts such as glass, metal, wood or lithics. Low intensity fires – such as those lower than 212°F at a depth of 1-2 cm – have less adverse effects on many cultural resources than high intensity fires – lower than 662-842°F at 1-2 cm and greater than 212°F at 5 cm (Fowler 2008). Obsidian hydration rinds are compromised at 400-650°F (Green et. al. 1997). Cherts are physically
195 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
altered at 350-550°F and basalt fractures around 400°F. Fire also causes potlidding and discoloration to groundstone (Deal 2002). Indirect effects may include tree mortality of culturally altered trees (arborglyph trees) and increased erosion due to loss of vegetation cover.
Negative indirect effects of re-introducing fire maybe increased damage from erosion and artifact exposure. A positive indirect effect could be the restoration of the visual context of the site and possible revitalization of ethnobotanical flora.
Stream Restoration
Proposed stream restoration activities include streambank stabilization, such as repairing headcuts and incised stream channels, culvert replacement, and planting willows. Stream stabilization is usually achieved by re-contouring the stream banks using heavy equipment. The use of heavy equipment has the potential to directly damage sites. Damage occurs when moving material, compacting soil and leaving the area susceptible to erosion. Surface and subsurface artifacts could be displaced and/or crushed by heavy equipment and traffic. Site context and integrity are also threatened.
Removing and replacing non-historic culverts located entirely within the road prism has little to no potential to affect cultural resources according to Item No. 27, in Appendix A of the 2004 Programmatic Agreement between USDA-Forest Service (Region 6), Oregon SHPO and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. A direct effect may occur if the excavator digs deeper than the road prism into undisturbed strata uncovering a previously unknown buried cultural resource.
Planting willows requires no site preparation and planting in disturbed areas such as eroded stream banks is considered to have little to no potential to affect cultural resources according to Item No. 2 and 3, in Appendix A of the 2004 Programmatic Agreement between USDA-Forest Service (Region 6), Oregon SHPO and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.
Measure of potential effects to Heritage Resources • Number of known sites within boundaries of proposed activities.
Affected Environment
Existing Condition Ethnographically, the CMH project area lies within the territory of the Northern Paiute, formally known as the Oregon Snakes, Western Bannock or Paviotso. More specifically, the project area lies along the boundary between the Goyatoka or Yahuskin (Crawfish-eaters) and Gidutikadu (Groundhog-eaters) or Kidutokado (Woodchuck-eaters) bands of the Northern Paiute (Kelly 1932, Stewart 1939). The Northern Paiute constitute many groups of people that are linked together by their Western Numic language, a branch of the Uto-Aztecan language family. The Northern Paiute were seminomadic. Their lifeways followed a seasonal round of hunting, gathering and fishing (Fowler and Liljeblad 1986, Kelly 1932).
Euro-American contact in the vicinity of the project began with Peter Skene Ogden, Chief Trader of a Hudson’s Bay Company Snake Brigade, who camped at the south end of Warner Valley on May 21, 1827. Of the early expeditions, only Ogden experienced contact with the natives of Warner Valley; and then, only because they raided his horses (Weide 1968).
Later John Work became Chief Trader after Ogden. Work camped on the shore of Lake Abert in 1832. Work was then followed by Pierson B. Reading in 1843, who also camped next to Lake Abert. Two months later, John C. Fremont traveled from the northwest to Lake Abert, and then crossed over the hills
196 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
just north of the Warner Range into Warner Valley. Fremont never saw a native in the vicinity, but followed well beaten paths and noted fresh tracks. In addition, he noted a Native camp next to Hart Lake, which he named Christmas Lake (Minor et. al. 1979 and Weide 1968).
The Warner Mountains were named for Captain William Horace Warner of the US Army Corp of Topographical Engineers. Captain Warner was killed by Natives in 1849 while seeking to find and map an immigrant and military road, as well as a railroad, following Oregon’s southern state boundary (Weide 1968).
In 1866, the army established a camp on Hart Mountain, known as Camp or Fort Warner, to counter growing tensions between the Natives and Euro-American immigrants. After a harsh winter, the army rebuilt the fort one year later at Honey Creek. The site of the new Fort Warner (35LK1836) lies next to the northeastern boundary of the project area (Figure 40). It was occupied from 1867 to 1873 (French 1905).
Figure 40. Forest Service monument dedicated to the site of the new Fort Warner.
The Yahuskin, now federally recognized as part of the Klamath Tribes, ceded the Silver-Summer-Abert Lakes regions over to the United States Government in the 1864 Treaty of Klamath Lake (Voegelin 1955). The Gidutikadu, now federally recognized as Fort Bidwell Indian Community of the Fort Bidwell Indian Reservation, never signed a treaty with the US Government. In 1868, Alfred Meacham, Oregon Superintendent of Indian Affairs, held council at the new Fort Warner with the Northern Paiute from Warner Valley, where the latter agreed to settle on the Klamath Reservation. However, some of them returned to Warner Valley in 1870. Eventually, some members of the Gidutikadu settled at Fort Bidwell in Surprise Valley, Nevada, as well as on the Klamath Reservation (Minor et.al. 1979).
Euro-American settlement in the vicinity of the CMH project began in the late 1860s. David R. Jones, who had settled in Warner Valley in 1867, supplied hay to new Fort Warner and M. McShane settled on Crooked Creek in 1869 (Minor et. al. 1979). What attracted folks to the area was the livestock (cattle and sheep) grazing potential. The significance of past sheep ranching is reflected by the numerous arborglyph sites located in the Warner Mountains. Arborglyphs are designs carved into the soft bark of aspen trees.
197 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
However, by 1946, cattle replaced sheep as the primary range animal on the Fremont Forest (Silvermoon 1985).
Settlement was impacted by the development of the Oregon Central Military Wagon Road. Congress granted lands to the state of Oregon in 1864 to help in the construction of the road which started in Eugene and eventually wound its way to Warner Valley, generally following the present route of State Highway 140 as it crosses the Warner Mountains. The granted lands were all the odd numbered sections, three miles on either side of the road (Beckham 1981).
Although, the grazing potential of the area attracted most of the settlers, a few folks tried their luck with mining. A mining district, called the Lost Cabin District (known also as Coyote Hill or Camp Lofuts) was established in 1906 just north of the town of Plush (Minor et. al. 1979).
The Fremont National Forest was conceived in 1908 from the Goose Lake and Fremont Forest Reserves, which were created from public lands in 1907. The Goose Lake Forest Reserve was proposed in 1903 and then established in August 1906. The Reserve “extended from the Warner Mountains north of the California line, and the area surrounding Dog Lake north to the line between the Klamath Indian Reservation and the town of Paisley” (Bach 1981). At the time, the Fremont Forest was divided into five districts, one of which was Warner (Bach 1981). It wasn’t until 2003, that the Winema and Fremont combined administratively (Tonsfeldt and Gray 2009).
By 1909, the Forest Service had started to build its administrative infrastructure. A guard station had been built on Salt Creek in 1909 as well as two miles of telephone line (Bach 1981). Aspen guard station was built in 1930. Lookouts were also established, such as the Abert Lookout which was constructed in 1934 (Figure 41).
Figure 41. Abert Lookout (1934-1969).
Logging in Lake County started with a mill erected at new Fort Warner (Bach 1981). In 1924, students from the School of Forestry in Corvallis (known today as Oregon State University) cruised timber in the
198 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
north end of the Warner Mountains. They were one of the first to work with Abney level and tapes instead of aneroid barometers (Bach 1981). The next year, a forester from the Rogue River was sent to do a cruising job for the Crooked Creek Lumber Company (Bach 1981). The Crooked Creek Lumber Company established a mill on Crooked Creek in 1926 and secured the first large timber sale on the Fremont that same year. The sale was for 37 million board feet of timber from 3,400 acres within the Crooked Creek watershed (Bach 1981). Despite all the logging activity, logging did not begin to outpace grazing on the Fremont until the 1940s (Bach 1981, Silvermoon 1985).
In 1950, under the 1944 Sustained Yield Forest Management Act, the Lakeview Federal Sustained Yield Unit was established to promote economic stability of the communities of Lakeview and Paisley. The Unit allowed for 50 MMBF of forest timber to be harvested within the unit. The timber would only go to Paisley and Lakeview mills. This was the second unit established under the act and today is one of the few remaining. The annual allowable cut was increased in 1957 to 53 MMBF (Bach 1981).
Organized skiing first started at Warner Canyon Ski Hill in approximately 1938. Facilities at the site were upgraded and expanded in 1950 (Bach1981). Then in 1989, most of the land that comprises the ski hill changed hands from the Forest Service to Lake County (Warner Canyon Ski Hill Land Exchange Act of 1997).
Project Area Current Conditions The north end of the Warner Mountains is sandwiched between two very archaeologically rich lowlands, Warner Valley to the east and Lake Abert to the west. Extensive archaeological research, incorporating excavation, has occurred since the 1960s in both the Warner Valley and around Lake Abert by the University of Nevada- Reno and the University of Oregon. However, the first archaeological research conducted in the vicinity of the project area was the recording of petroglyphs and pictographs by Luther Cressman in 1937. His research included rock art located along the base of Abert Rim (Cressman 1937). Cressman also conducted the first archaeological excavations in the region at the Paisley Fivemile Point Caves (35-LK-3500), known today as the “Paisley Caves” (Cressman 1940 and 1942). The Paisley Caves are located approximately 25 air miles northwest of Abert Rim. Recent archeological investigation at Paisley Caves has shown that Native Americans lived in the vicinity 14,300 years ago (Barnard 2008).
Mostly cultural compliance and mitigation project survey has been conducted on Forest Service lands located at the north end of the Warner Mountains. A literature review found that 36 cultural surveys and one excavation have been conducted within the project area. Only two of the cultural projects were noncompliance and mitigation projects. These were an arborglyph inventory and an excavation at Fort Warner that were conducted as Forest Service Passport in Time projects. The Passport in Time program is a volunteer archaeology and historic preservation program designed to preserve the nation’s past with the help from the public.
In all, these past surveys recorded 112 sites. Of these, 34 are prehistoric, 75 are historic and 3 are multicomponent. Lithic scatters represent 47% of the prehistoric sites, whereas, arborglyphs represent 73% of the historic sites.
In addition to the literature review, a cultural resource inventory was designed to ascertain the current condition of the heritage resources within the CMH project. The inventory was designed to cover high probability areas and visit known sites.
A total of 1,466 acres of high probability survey areas and 30 known sites were highlighted for inventory. Once the high potential areas and known sites were defined on a map, the work was divided. A portion of the work, 801 acres and 13 known sites were covered by contract. The remaining work, 665 acres and 17 known sites, were covered in-house. A total of 23 new sites were found.
199 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Environmental Consequences
Methodology The potential for project-related effects to heritage resources will be assessed on the basis of the number of known heritage sites within the area proposed for project activities.
Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis The spatial context for direct, indirect, and cumulative effects is the extent of the CMH project activities. The temporal context is the expected duration of project activities – around ten years.
Alternative 1 – No Action There are no direct effects of choosing the no action alternative. Current conditions on known sites that are within project activity areas would not be changed by project activities. However, the project area would not remain static over time. Like all features on the landscape, cultural resource sites and artifacts are susceptible to the ravages of time and weather.
Cumulative Effects Because there would be no project activities there would be no project-related cumulative effects to cultural resources.
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action There are 135 known sites (112 previously recorded and 23 newly recorded) within the proposed CMH Project. With the required mitigation measures in place, no direct effects to heritage sites are anticipated.
Cumulative Effects There are no cumulative effects to cultural resources from land management activities on NFS lands, as all projects proposed and implemented must adhere to laws and regulations for cultural resource protection. It is common practice for this to be achieved through avoidance of sites during management activities. As such, the incremental contributions NFS land management activities provide would not be cumulatively measureable.
200 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Non-Forested Vegetation This report provides a description of upland, meadow and riparian non-forested vegetation resources including existing and desired conditions for the CMH Project. Analyses of direct, indirect and cumulative effects to non-forested vegetation are included.
The CMH Project Area is on the western portion of the Klamath Ecological Province. Landscapes express characteristics typical of that province. Land management activities have expanded juniper cover across much of the west, including Lake County. Grasslands are restricted to bottomlands with the vegetation influenced by degree and duration of moisture profiles. Associated soils of the drier vegetation types include the Modoc series while more mesic plant communities are associated with the Gooselake, Klamath and Lakeview series. Moderately mesic vegetation is associated with the Whitworth and Yocum soil series. The climate in the project area is characterized by hot, dry summers and cold winters. Precipitation averages 18 to 20 inches per year, with most occurring as snowfall during the winter months. Maximum summer temperatures may get into the 90s with winter lows getting below zero. The growing season is generally from late April through September, with a chance for frost in every month of the year. (Anderson, et al., 1998, pg. 63)
Resource Indicators and Measures No key issues were raised concerning non-forested vegetation. There are two elements from the purpose and need that are addressed through the Resource Indicators and Measures being used:
1. Reduce accumulated fuel levels, brush densities and other components that contribute to fire intensity and spread and a need to reintroduce fire on the landscape. 2. Revitalize non-forested vegetation habitat including aspen stands, meadows, and RHCAs that have been altered by conifer and juniper encroachment.
Table 92 provides a display of the resource indicators and measures for the proposed alternative on non- forested vegetation resources. They are discussed in the analysis with the following measures in mind.
• Acres non-forested plant associations treated (mechanically and by hand) for conifer/ juniper encroachment to promote or maintain plant community function • Acres non-forested plant associations treated for conifer/ juniper encroachment to provide a more natural mosaic of seral states • Potential miles of streams restored that would improve non-forested sites
Table 92. Non Forested Vegetation - Resource indicators and measures for assessing effects Resource Resource Measure Source Element Indicator FNF-LRMP 1989. Management Area Plant Community Conifer/Juniper Acres Treated for 15 S&G, Forest Management Function Encroachment Encroachment Direction Ch. 4; FNF-LRMP Amended to include INFISH FNF-LRMP 1989. Management Area Plant Community Conifer/Juniper Acres Treated for 15 S&G, Forest Management Seral Status Encroachment Encroachment Direction Ch. 4; FNF-LRMP Amended Mosaic to include INFISH Plant Community Acres Potentially Treated with FNF-LRMP 1989. Forest Fire HRV Function Rx Fire Management Direction Ch. 4
201 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 92. (Continued) Non Forested Vegetation - Resource indicators and measures for assessing effects Resource Resource Measure Source Element Indicator Plant Community Acres Potentially Treated with FNF-LRMP 1989. Forest Seral Status Fire HRV Rx Fire Management Direction Ch. 4 Mosaic FNF-LRMP 1989. Management Area Plant Community Miles stream with Stream Restoration 15 S&G; FNF-LRMP Amended to Function Riparian/Meadow improved include INFISH
Plant Community FNF-LRMP 1989. Management Area Miles stream with Seral Status Stream Restoration 15 S&G; FNF-LRMP Amended to Riparian/Meadow improved Mosaic include INFISH
Methodology Determining Acres Geospatial data as well as professional knowledge and familiarity with the project area resulted in the determination of the actual type of non-forested plant associations and acres of each represented in this analysis. For this analysis, the CMH Project Area has been mapped at an existing vegetation cover according to the R6 Ecological Classification (Ecoclass). The mapping was completed using existing maps. Acres and location of Meadow, Low sagebrush/fescue/squirreltail, Low sagebrush/fescue and Alpine low sagebrush/fescue plant associations were identified using a GIS layer identifying ecoclasses within the project area. The GIS layer was created using; Plant Associations of the Fremont National Forest (Hopkins, W.E. 1979). The acreage represented in this report as Meadow is slightly lower than the actual acres of meadow /riparian plant communities in the project area. This is in part due to the current GIS map layer available as it is a coarse landscape interpretation. Discrepancies to be noted:
• The majority of Juniper/low sagebrush/fescue acres mapped represents encroached Low sagebrush/fescue plant associations. Those acres are included in discussion with the Low sagebrush/fescue association description. • Low sagebrush/fescue, Low sagebrush/fescue/squirreltail and Big sagebrush/bunchgrass associations are present in the area but not all are mapped. They have been included grouped for purposed of representative acres. • Acres identified as undefined grasslands are included in discussion as Alpine low sage/red fescue. • Aspen plant associations, although not mapped, occur throughout the project area. Acres were derived from fieldwork completed by the wildlife program. Aspen acres are based on work by Bryan Yost, Fremont Winema NF - SE Zone Wildlife Biologist and details regarding his approximation can be found in the wildlife report for CMH. • Acres shown as Meadow include the following types – Bluegrass-dry meadow, Hairgrass-sedge- moist meadow and Sedge – wet meadow. Acres are represented as Meadow as there was no distinction between them within the mapped acres of the project area. Descriptions of each type are included as they do all exist within the project area. • Specific riparian vegetation associations within the analysis area have not been further delineated. These sites include a mix of many of the vegetative components described in the meadow associations as well as established components of willow communities. Determining Existing Condition Several types of datasets are available for assessing the condition of non-forested associations within the project area. Forest Service evaluations to determine current condition include line intercept transects rated using Guidelines for Forage Resource Evaluation within the Fremont National Forest (Hopkins,
202 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
W.E. 2000), R6-NR-ECOL-TP-05-00 and Riparian Classification and Status Guide for the Fremont National Forest/Lakeview, Bureau of Land Management (Riegel, G. in draft). All monitoring sites that fell within a section that was totally or partially within the project area was included in the analysis for non- forested vegetation condition and trend.
Data available includes Riparian Classification and Status Plots (effectiveness monitoring that assesses long-term condition and trend of riparian/meadow plant communities) and Parker Three Step Plots (established to determine forage condition).
Affected Environment Non-forested lands account for approximately 34% of the lands within the CMH Project area. These nonforested plant associations provide forage and other habitat elements for wildlife and livestock. They also play a role in the overall function of the watershed.
Non Forested Plant Association Descriptions Descriptions of the Meadow, Low sagebrush/fescue. Low sagebrush/fescue-squirreltail, Big sagebrusgh/bunchgrass and Alpine low sagebrush/fescue plant associations are based on Hopkins, W. E. 1979. Descriptions of the aspen associations are based on Kovalchik, B. L. 1987.
Table 93. provides acreage approximations of each. Normal variations within the systems can cause fluctuations in plant species diversity and composition. This is especially true for the riparian and meadow communities that have transitional zones, from the riparian areas to the uplands. Variations site- to-site and often year-to-year are normal and occur as a response to changing environmental conditions and site characteristics.
Table 93. Non-forested plant association acres on USFS lands within the Crooked Mud Honey Project Area, Lake County, Oregon.
Non Forested Plant Association Acres Meadow (225-MX) 3,231 Low sagebrush/fescue (SD-19-12) Low sagebrush/fescue-squirreltail (SD-19-13) 14,113 Big sagebrush/bunchgrass (SD29-12) Alpine low sagebrush/red fescue (SS-41-21) 270 Aspen 2,500 TOTAL ACRES 20,923
Meadow and Riparian Meadow Associations Approximately 3,231acres within the project area are classified as Meadow (MX-225). Meadows within the project area can be divided into three plant distinct plant association types as described by Hopkins, W.E. 1979: Bluegrass-Dry Meadows, Hairgarsss-Sedge Moist Meadows or Sedge-Wet Meadows. The available GIS mapping data for the CMH Project area does not distinguish these, they are represented as Meadow (MX-225).
Meadows (transitional areas) occur on sub-irrigated sites that lie between the riparian and upland. These areas are associated with deeper alluvial deposits on relatively flat terrain. Meadows, along with non- forested riparian areas, are the most productive forage sites, with production potentials ranging from 1,000 to 2,500 lbs. per acre. Forage production is influenced primarily by seral status of the plant
203 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
association. Meadows and non-forested riparian areas account for a high percentage of the vegetative species diversity.
Non-forested Riparian Areas Non-forested riparian areas within the project area are found within the meadow acres mapped. Because of their close proximity to water, plant species within riparian zones differ significantly from those of adjacent associations. A variety of sedges (Carex spp.), shrubs such as thinleaf alder (Alnus incana) and willow, and aspen (Populus tremuloides) are found in riparian areas within the analysis area. Gomorphology of the site, including stream channel type and soils, can influence the species composition of an area. Riparian areas occupy a small percentage of the watershed, but are an extremely vital component of the landscape, especially in arid eastern Oregon (Elmore, W. and R.L. Beschta 1987). Riparian vegetation found in these areas buffers the aquatic system from potential impacts and disturbances caused by land management activities and natural events.
Non-forested riparian contribute to the overall health and function of the watershed by providing water retention and recharge, sediment filtration, stream channel stabilization, and mechanisms to reduce erosion and provide for essential soil processes (Lowrance, R. et al. 1986, Schlosser, I.J. and J.R. Karr 1981). Riparian plants play a significant role in retaining water received from the uplands. Plant stems provide roughness and resistance to dissipate floodwater energy and act as a filter to trap sediment transported by the stream and to the stream. Captured sediment provides microsites for the germination and establishment of new plants within riparian areas. Strong root systems also provide resistance to a stream’s erosive power, holding the soil mantle together, which minimizes stream bank erosion. By collecting sediment and stabilizing stream banks, riparian plant species act to maintain the integrity of riparian areas and elevate or maintain water tables. Increased subsurface flow, resulting from water storage in the riparian area, may be greater than the amount of water used by willow, cottonwood, alder, sedge, and (Elmore, W. and R.L. Beschta 1987). In addition, low-gradient areas with willow attract beaver, resulting in impoundments that expand riparian zones and hold water, further ensuring stream flow during summer months (Olson, R and W.A.Hubert 1994).
One of the many functions of riparian plants is to stabilize banks through root mass. Manning et al. (1989) documented that sedge and rush species produced significantly more root mass than dry-land grasses, making these plants conducive to high bank stability. The stems of these herbaceous and shrub species provide roughness and resistance to high flows, which allows for sediment trapping and bank building (Elmore, W. and R.L. Beschta 1987). Under these conditions, water is stored during the wet season and slowly released to the stream during the summer months. Further, in an area where sheets of ice form on the stream surface during the winter, riparian vegetation helps protect the banks from erosion as ice breaks-up during spring thaw (Platts, W.S. 1991).
Sagebrush Sagebrush associations are home to unique plant and wildlife species, and are very important to the overall ecological health of much of eastern Oregon. Many birds and mammals depend on sagebrush ecosystems in the western United States for survival. The loss of sagebrush ecosystems are negatively affecting many of the more than 350 species of plants and animals that depend on sagebrush ecosystems for all or part of their existence (USGS 2002). These species include Greater Sage-Grouse as well as Pygmy Rabbit, Mule Deer, and Golden Eagles. Other examples of sagebrush dependent species include sage sparrow, ferruginous hawks, Brewer's sparrow, sage thrasher, sagebrush vole, and many botanical species. Birds breeding in sagebrush landscapes in the Intermountain West have been faced with radical and rapid changes in their habitats. Sagebrush habitats are among the most imperiled ecosystems. Populations of shrubland and grassland birds have had the greatest rate of declines of any group of birds, and many species receive special conservation status.
204 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Aspen Aspen associations are present throughout the project area. They are especially critical to birds and other wildlife. Although small in area, they provide a critical source of diversity within the landscape. They generally occur at elevations ranging from 3,600’- 7,000’on the Fremont Winema National Forest. These associations can lie near a water source as well as on the margins of well drained basins, floodplains and toeslopes. Surface horizons range from fine sandy loam to clay loam. Quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides), blue wildrye (Elymus glaucus), common snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus) and Kentucky bluegrass all add to the species composition of the sites. Quaking aspen are the dominant tree in this type. Estimate herbage production ranges from 500 – 3000 lbs/acre.
Existing Conditions Meadow and Non-Forested Riparian Current conditions vary from site to site and many factors influence conditions. In general, meadow and non-forested riparian vegetative conditions in the project area are functional and show signs of recovery. They meet Fremont LRMP Standards and most sites are at or moving toward Potential Natural Community (PNC). However, many still do exhibit conditions that indicate past and current influences on functionality and species diversity.
Most of the streams in the area have experienced some degree of down-cutting in the past. Channel degradation and down-cutting may be a result of past grazing practices and/or loss of beaver activity. This has resulted in terraces that are no longer connected to the active floodplain and loss of streamside riparian habitat. While most sites are functioning in regards to their ability to withstand disturbance events along the floodplain, there is still quite a bit of disconnect between the terrace and floodplain and areas are actively aggrading. This disconnect has also resulted in a loss of streamside non-forested riparian and meadow vegetation. The recovery of non-forested riparian function is then limited to the areas that are connected to the newly developing floodplain. The more recent decrease in water availability and subsequent disconnect between vegetation and water tables can in part be accounted for as upland forested sites become overstocked and juniper and pine encroach into non-forested sites. This is more significant in the Bluegrass-dry meadow sites and is not as significant in the Hairgrass-sedge-moist meadow and Sedge-wet meadow sites.
With the exception of dry meadows dominated by Kentucky bluegrass, plant composition in the meadows and non-forested riparian areas consists of those plant species expected. However, they are not necessarily at the percent composition desired. While there are functioning non-forested riparian and meadow sites, they are not as extensive as historically so. This is similar to conditions on much of the Fremont Winema National Forest. Site visits and review of historical photos show some encroachment of juniper and pine into meadow communities, but not at the density seen at lower elevations.
Meadow Associations There are eleven Forage Condition and Trend plots within meadow associations throughout the CMH project area.
Table 94. displays the interpreted similarity to PNC for meadow plant associations as classified by Plant Associations of the Fremont National Forest, Hopkins 1979.
205 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 94. Meadow Association Similarity to PNC in CMH Project Area. Most Recent Data Plant Association Similarity to PNC Collected
Bluegrass-dry meadow 1980 LOW
Hairgrass-sedge-moist meadow 1966 MODERATE
Sedge-wet meadow 1965 MODERATE/HIGH
Bluegrass dry-meadow The Bluegrass-dry meadow type is most disconnected from perennial water under ideal conditions; it is also the most susceptible to disturbance, and anything that decreases water availability. Professional observations, as well as data available, indicate these sites are currently dominated by Kentucky bluegrass, a highly palatable species that tolerates disturbance. This move toward a homogeneous species composition resulted in decreased functionality. In many areas the presence of Kentucky bluegrass will perpetuate even when the area has gone through some type of natural recovery and/or restoration as the species is highly resistant to disturbance.
Both species composition and overall cover contributed to a forage rating of poor at all the established sites. Desirable forage species made up less than 40% of the composition in all of the areas. Hits on forage plants were low in all areas with litter making up over 50% of the ground cover attributes in two of the three transects. Bare ground was the second most frequent ground attribute in 1980. Increasers in two of the three locations made up the majority of the overall plant species composition.
As other meadow types more reliant on water table consistency decrease in acres, the Bluegrass-dry meadow association often experiences more changes in species composition rather than actual loss of area.
Hairgrass - moist meadow Overall, the historic forage condition between 48 and 54 years ago was fair. One site was rated as good in 1962; this was an increase in forage condition from the previous data analysis in that area. In the areas with fair forage condition, low composition of forage species and high percentage of litter were the main factors in the ratings. Desirable forage plant species did not make up an adequate amount of the plant composition in 4 out of five transects. Plant cover was low.
Sedge – wet meadow The historic forage condition was generally fair or good over the project area. Primarily, desirable species composition and cover were lacking. Increasers (undesirable species that are indicative of disturbance) in three of the four locations made up the majority of the overall plant species composition. In two of the four locations litter made up the majority of the ground cover with bare ground being the second most frequent ground attribute when data was collected in 1965. Current conditions vary from site to site and are a result of past grazing practices and loss of beaver activity. The more recent decrease in water availability can in part be accounted for as upland forested sites become overstocked and juniper and pine encroached into non-forested sites, but this is not as significant as in the Bluegrass-dry meadow sites. Professional observations indicate the wet meadow sites that are still intact in the CMH Project Area are in good condition regarding forage and function. Overall, moist meadow cover is probably not at its potential for the project area.
206 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Non-forested Riparian Ecotypes There are three Riparian Classification and Status plots within riparian ecological types throughout the CMH project area that provide data for three riparian ecological types (Table 95). These include the Mesic gramanoid type, Carex nebreacensis type and Cold Salix/Carex aquatilis type.
Table 95. Interpreted similarity to PNC for non-forested riparian ecotypes. Ecological Type Data Collected Similarity to PNC
Mesic graminoid 2006 MODERATE
Carex nebrascensis 2006 MODERATE
Cold Salix/Carex aquatilis 2006 MODERATE
Riparian classification and status (RCS) data are available for two ecotypes in the CMH Project Area. The classification and status presented are based on the most accurate classification key and status score cards to date. Although these are not the final key and scorecards, it is not anticipated that the ecotypes presented will change.
Existing Conditions Sagebrush Current conditions vary from site to site and many factors influence conditions. In general, sagebrush conditions in the project area are functional. They meet Fremont LRMP Standards and most sites are at or moving toward Potential Natural Community (PNC). However, many still do exhibit conditions that indicate past and current influences on functionality and species diversity. Overall the majority of sites sagebrush communities in the CMH project area exhibit moderate to high similarity to PNC in regards to shrub cover. Similarity to PNC is becoming homogeneous leading to a lack of seral state diversity. Many wildlife species depend on sagebrush habitat at various similarities to PNC. Across the project area the sagebrush plant associations are homogeneous with little to no variation in similarity to PNC. Habitat elements and forage quality and quantity do not vary significantly across the project area.
Habitat occupied by the sagebrush association is declining and becoming increasingly fragmented at an alarming rate because of conifer encroachment, exotic annual grass invasion, and anthropogenic development. This is causing range-wide declines and localized extirpations of sagebrush associated fauna and flora (Davies, K.W. et al 2011). Specific to non-forested vegetation, it is noted that less than 1% of the Lake County part of the province was historically covered with juniper.
Expansion of juniper since the late 1800s has been into more mesic environments where this invasive species has dramatically increased from its historic range. Over the last 100 years, western juniper has advanced into mountain big sagebrush and low sagebrush communities at varying degrees due to factors such as interrupted fire cycling and climatic conditions (Miller, R.F. et al 1997). Decreases in fine fuels, such as bunchgrasses, in part due to historically intense grazing, inhibited the role of fire and altered plant community structure. A reduction in competition from herbaceous plants allowed sagebrush to dominate and juniper to encroach. Decades of fire suppression has enabled encroachment of conifers including juniper in sage steppe and non-forested ecosystems. Although not as significant as in other areas of the Fremont Winema NF, there is expansion of juniper and conifer into these associations and a subsequent loss of habitat elements.
Juniper and conifer encroachment is occurring and is highly variable at a site specific level within the project area. It is not as extensive as at lower elevations. Ground cover includes more litter, mainly due to decreases in stocking rates of livestock. Plant species composition is virtually unchanged from the most recent data collection. Forage quantity and quality found in these associations are not at the desired level
207 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
as most of the sites understory species are being out competed by shrubs and in some cases encroaching juniper and conifer.
There are six Forage Condition and Trend plots within sagebrush associations throughout the CMH project area.
Table 96. displays the interpreted similarity to PNC for sagebrush plant associations as classified by Plant Associations of the Fremont National Forest, Hopkins 1979.
Table 96. Sagebrush Similarity to PNC in CMH Project Area. Most Recent Data Plant Association Similarity to PNC Collected
Low sagebrush/fescue Low sagebrush/fescue-squirreltail 1980 MODERATE/HIGH Big sagebrush/bunchgrass Alpine low sagebrush/red fescue 1965 HIGH
Low sagebrush/fescue, Low sagebrush/fescue-squirreltail, and Big sagebrush/bunchgrass Overall the majority of sites categorized as sagebrush communities in the CMH project area exhibit high similarity to PNC. Within the project area there are sites where the similarity to PNC is low and moderate, but these sites are generally in areas where fire has been excluded or past disturbance is not allowing sites to move toward recovery.
Alpine low sagebrush/red fescue The Alpine low sagebrush/red fescue sites are not dependent on periodic fire to mitigate juniper and conifer encroachment and encroachment does not tend to be an issue. Throughout the project area these sites are in good condition and close to PNC.
Existing Conditions Aspen Current conditions vary from site to site and many factors influence conditions. There is no data available for aspen plant associations in the project area. Professional knowledge and site visits indicate aspen vegetative conditions in the project area are losing function due to conifer encroachment. Loss of multi age class structure and understory species are the biggest issues in the project area.
Environmental Consequences
Alternative 1 – No Action No direct, indirect or cumulative effects will result from the No Action Alternative. Juniper and conifer encroachment would continue to expand into the non- forested plant associations. Prescribed fire would not be introduced and stream restoration would not occur
Encroachment of woody species threatens the biological diversity of nonforested ecosystems in many regions of the world (Van Auken, O.W. 2000). No treatment of juniper and conifer encroaching on non- forested vegetation types and no prescribed fire introduced and no meadow/riparian restoration would result in continued encroachment and condition decline in acres of non-forested plant association types. Progressions to tree dominated sites would continue. This would reduce overall species and seral state diversity, as well as decrease resiliency and function of non-forested associations across the project area. Consequences include effects to soil properties (Griffiths, R.M. et al. 2005), vegetation structure and
208 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
productivity (Hobbs, R.J and H.A. Mooney 1986) and native plant diversity (More, N.M and D.W. Huffman 2004). As encroachment continues and becomes more wide spread across the project area and more extensive at a site, restoration becomes more difficult and a shift to a new state could occur (Briggs, J.M. et al 2002). Reintroduction of fire also becomes less available as a of a management tool for restoration (Laycock, W.A. 1991). Conversion of non-forested plant communities to forested types decreases productivity and species diversity at a landscape scale. Riparian and meadow sites respond to encroachment by shifting from mesic to xeric plant species, resulting in a decrease in ground cover and litter accumulation, and increases in bare ground. Allowing conifers to continue encroaching into historic meadow sites could eventually lead to loss of native plant species, productive soil characteristics, and ground cover, as the ecological threshold approaches woodland phase (Laycock, W.A. 1991). In addition, as the stages of conversion from non-forested to forested communities progress, management opportunities to restore meadow communities decrease.
Meadow and non-forested riparian sites would continue to convert to forested types and there is a risk of eventual loss of meadow plant associations. Loss of species adapted to open environments and colonization of understory species adapted to shade are two potential consequences. (Haugo, R.D. and C.B. Halpern 2007) documented significant changes in dominant species composition as well as declines in cover in meadow communities with conifer encroachment.
Sagebrush plant associations would result in a continued increase in sagebrush cover and declines in herbaceous species abundance and vigor. As shrub steppe communities are converted to juniper woodlands, community structure, composition, function, disturbance patterns, and wildlife habitat are altered. As shrubs decline the probability of a fire intense enough to kill large juniper trees rapidly decreases. As described by Neil W. West (1999) without encroachment being treated movement into Phase 2 would result in trees dominating microclimates and soils across the major fraction of the matrix (including interspace) in the sagebrush associations. Phase 2 may be defined as the point where trees begin to influence the interspace causing changes in community structure (e.g. decline in shrubs) and community processes such as fire and water movement.
Aspen plant associations would support continued expansion of forest communities into non-forest community types and risk loss of these plant associations within the project area. Biomass of understory can be suppressed with conifer canopy cover 01 10% - 20% (Stam, B.R. et al. 2008).
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action The temporal bound for effects to non-forested vegetation can vary by plant community type and site potential, but should generally fall within 10 years of implementation of treatment of encroaching species, prescribed fire and/or meadow/riparian restoration treatments.
Direct & Indirect Effects Conifer Encroachment
Beneficial indirect effects of conifer thinning would be expected on non-forested vegetation within one to ten years following treatment. Indirect effects of juniper and conifer removal from non-forested plant associations would include immediate benefits including maintenance of plant species composition and cover necessary for function and retention of non-forested plant associations. Removal of encroaching forest species would increase light, water and nutrients available for non-forested plant species. Improved plant establishment, growth and vigor would be expected in all non-forested plant associations where encroaching conifers are removed.
209 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Direct effects to non-forested plant associations may include potential consumption of living and senescent biomass during fuels treatments. Following burning of non-forested vegetation, loss of plant cover and an increase in bare ground may occur for one to three years. Beneficial effects would be expected within three to five years following fuel treatment, as early and mid-seral plants establish on burned sites (Wrobleski, D.W. and J.B. Kauffman 2003). Areas with a perennial species component still intact may see an increase in vegetative growth and vigor as early as the following growing season due to improved soil moisture, light conditions and removal of dry plant material from the plant crowns. Effects to species composition, abundance, and cover would improve overall plant community function within three to ten years following burning as early and mid-seral species give way to successional processes. Indirect effects of low severity burning to herbaceous vegetation are improved vigor and seed viability of perennial bunchgrasses (Dyer, A.R. 2002). Thick litter layers that can prevent soil-seed contact and reduce germination and seedling survival are removed with fuel treatments in all plant community types (forest, woodland, shrubland, grassland, and meadow), providing improved germination and establishment of new plants. However, burning should occur in an incomplete or patchy manner to avoid eliminating seed sources for non-forest vegetation for large areas and creating a need to seed areas with no vegetation left to produce seed.
Indirect effects associated with stream restoration, RHCA treatments, and spring enhancements include possible increase in water availability and retention in these hydrologically important areas. Water absorption and storage capacity would increase as forested canopy cover decreases. Evapotranspiration rates would decrease as canopy cover is reduced because less precipitation would be intercepted by overstory vegetation. Increases in ground cover and herbaceous species would be beneficial to water storage and flow regulation. Mid and late seral non-forested plant species would benefit from improved hydrologic function of the watershed.
Cumulative Effects Spatial and temporal scales determined for cumulative effects for non-forested vegetation varies depending on plant association type, biogeographic range of plant associations and site potential. This is related to differences in timeframes and scale for natural disturbance (fire, insects, disease, grazing, etc.) and recovery rates within different plant communities. Grassland and meadow types generally have a 5- 25 year scale, while shrub communities are highly variable ranging from 10-250 years.
Cumulatively, implementing Alternative 2 in the CMH Project area combined with past, present and reasonably foreseeable action, could affect non-forested plant community resiliency to potential disturbances and activities. Recovery rates for degraded areas and site potential could increase. Heterogeneity of seral states across plant communities decreases the potential for negative wildfire effects by providing a mosaic of seral states. Decreased conifer encroachment and subsequent upward trends in non-forested plant communities would increase resiliency to livestock grazing. Prescribed fire could increase the acres of primary rang used by livestock which could result in better distribution and decrease in negative effects to specific sites caused by concentrated grazing.
Consistency with the Forest Plan and Other Regulatory Direction All proposed activities analyzed in this non-forested are consistent with the Fremont National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan and other direction listed in the Regulatory Framework for non-forested vegetation
210 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Range Management
Resource Indicators and Measures No key issues were raised concerning permitted grazing.
There are two elements from the purpose and need that are addressed through the Resource Indicators and Measures being used:
1. Reduce stand densities to improve vigor and increase resilience to disturbance from insects and wildfire, and move stands toward a sustainable late old structure (LOS) condition. 2. Reduce accumulated fuel levels, brush densities and other components that contribute to fire intensity and spread and a need to reintroduce fire on the landscape. 3. Revitalize non-forested vegetation habitat including aspen stands, meadows, and RHCAs that have been altered by conifer and juniper encroachment.
Table 97. provides a display of the resource indicators and measures for proposed alternatives on range vegetation resources, primary and transitory forage. They are discussed in the analysis with the following measures in mind.
• Transitory range treated (mechanically and by hand) for overstocked conifer conditions to promote or maintain plant community function • Primary range treated (mechanically and by hand) for conifer/ juniper encroachment to promote or maintain plant community function • Primary and Transitory range treated with Rx fire to provide a more natural mosaic of seral states • Streams restored that would improve range resources
Table 97. Permitted Grazing - Resource indicators and measures for assessing effects Resource Element Resource Indicator Measure Source
Improved Range Reduction in Stand Acres Treated FNF-LRMP 1989. Forest Resource Condition Density/ Increase in LOS Management Direction Ch. 4; FNF- - forage Condition LRMP Amended to include INFISH
Improved Range Conifer/Juniper Acres Treated FNF-LRMP 1989. Forest Resource Condition Encroachment Management Direction Ch. 4; FNF- - forage LRMP Amended to include INFISH
Improved Range Fire HRV Acres Potentially Treated FNF-LRMP 1989. Forest Resource Condition with Rx Fire Management Direction Ch. 4 - forage
Improved Range Stream Restoration Miles stream with FNF-LRMP 1989. FNF-LRMP Resource Condition Riparian/Meadow Amended to include INFISH - forage improved
211 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Methodology Determining Acres
Geospatial data was used to determine acres of each allotment represented in this analysis. Discrepancies to be noted:
• Some fence lines in the area may not be accurate. Some allotment boundaries were digitized based on hand drawn mapping exercises.
Affected Environment Permitted Grazing Lands within the USFS boundary in the CMH Project Area have been grazed since before the early 1900’s. Early in the 20th century, the primary livestock using the area consisted of both sheep and cattle, but horses and possibly other livestock were present on both USFS and private lands within the analysis area. Currently, cattle are the only permitted livestock that graze within the analysis area. Trespass of non- permitted livestock has not been an issue. Grazing levels have decreased considerably since the early part of the century. Changes in both numbers and allowable use began as early as the 1940’s. In the late 1950’s and early 1960’s, Condition and Trend transects were established on the allotments. During the 1960’s, pastures and grazing systems were incorporated into many of the allotments on the Fremont Forest. Most season long grazing systems were eliminated. Allotment specific details can be found in the 2210, 2230 and 2240 files at the Lakeview Ranger District.
The CMH Project area includes portions of six active grazing allotments; Abert Rim, Honey Creek, McDowell, Porcupine, Squaw Butte and Whitepine. A total of 43,793 acres of the project area are within active grazing allotments. Table 98 shows the total National Forest System (NFS) acres in these allotments within the project area. This information was gathered using available Forest Service GIS information.
Table 98. Allotment acres within the project area by grazing allotment. NFS Land Acres of Allotment Allotment NFS Land Acres of Allotment Allotment Name within Project Area Name within Project Area
Abert Rim 4,814 Porcupine 11,059
Honey Creek 9,224 Squaw Butte 3,889
McDowell 4,601 Whitepine 10,206
Livestock typically graze on NFS lands within the project area from mid-June through late November. These allotments include infrastructure, both fences and water developments (spring developments, troughs, stock ponds, or water hauling sites) that are used to manage distribution, timing, and duration of livestock grazing within portions of the project area.
Existing Conditions Allotment management in the project area continues to increase in difficulty. This is in part due to plant community function moving farther away from historic conditions. Most notably in the project area, site productivity and palatability are in decline. This is a result of changes in plant community and watershed function due in part to lack of historic fire intervals. Primary forage plant community sites become
212 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
decadent and unpalatable which results in a decrease in primary range. Transitory range also continues to decline in productivity. Increased canopy cover results in less resources available to understory species. This limits the production in understory plant communities and can potentially lead to a complete loss of the understory.
Critical habitat for endangered species increases in regulations and an overall change in the way permitted livestock grazing is viewed by many nationally means an increased need to meet more stringent standards.
Environmental Consequences
Alternative 1 – No Action
Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects- Permitted Grazing No direct, indirect or cumulative effects would result pertaining to permitted grazing with the No Action Alternative in the CMH Project area. Grazing would continue to be administered under the terms and conditions of grazing permits issued as authorized by 36 CFR 222.4 (2009) and FSH 2209.13 (2005).
Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects- Rangeland Resources/Allotment Management There would be no direct affects to the rangeland resources or allotment management from the No Action Alternative. Depending on the area, any tree mortality that results from overstocked stand conditions could damage allotment infrastructure increasing the possibility of unauthorized use.
Range forage resources in secondary sites may continue to decline in quantity and quality resulting in a decrease of primary range. This may result in a decrease of distribution of cattle and a need for increased active management. Transitory forage production sites, conifer plant associations, would not be treated. Juniper and conifer encroachment would continue to expand into the primary forage production sites, non- forested plant associations. Indirectly, a decline in forage quality and quantity is possible. Limited understory in areas with mature trees and closed canopies present limited opportunities for both livestock and wildlife grazing opportunities (Adams 1975). Allotment management may be affected as forage quality and quantity declines, resulting in the need for more on the ground management by permittes to ensure needed livestock distribution.
Cumulatively, taking no action (or preventing natural disturbance) in the CMH Project area combined with past, present and reasonably foreseeable action, could affect non-forested plant community extent and function. Recovery rates for degraded areas and site potential could decrease or become static. With continued conifer encroachment actual condition may trend downward as non-forested species are replaced by upland species. Once non-forested vegetation is reduced and no longer functioning as a non- forested community type, should large scale wildfire occur in and around the project area, non-forested plant community recovery would be slow and may require some input (seeding or planting) to establish. An event such as this may negatively impact the livestock management in the area as forage base is reduced or eliminated for prolonged periods of time.
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action
Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects- Permitted Grazing There are no direct, indirect or cumulative effects pertaining to permitted grazing with Alternative 2 in the CMH Project area. Grazing would continue to be administered under the terms and conditions of grazing permits issued as authorized by 36 CFR 222.4 (2009) and FSH 2209.13 (2005).
213 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Direct and Indirect Effects - Allotment Management The quality and quantity of rangeland resources considered primary available forage could be directly affected by implementing Alternative 2. The analysis of these non-forested sites can be found in the Non- Forested Vegetation report. Many areas throughout the project area are showing signs of plant senescence and an increase in seral state homogeneity. This results in a decrease in palatability of plants that should be part of the available forage throughout the project area. The underuse of some areas often leads to an overuse of other areas by permitted livestock. An introduction of prescribed fire could result in increases in primary range as cattle use is increased in previous underutilized areas. Cattle have been shown to have an attraction to recently burned sites with an increase in use on those sites (Vermeire et al 2004). This increase use translates to increased primary range as cattle use previous underutilized areas. Increasing the palatability of these underutilized areas may reduce the likelihood of permitted livestock congregating and overusing any one area.
Transitory forage may increase as dense forest stands are thinned. Opening of forest canopies may increase abundance of forage species and support forage utilization in areas characterized as transitory range. There is an increase in understory production in conifer stands with more open overstories. As forested stands silviculture treatments that decrease canopy cover, transitory range species and productivity increase.
Direct effects to allotment infrastructure are possible through damage of allotment and pasture fences and water systems by silviculture and fuels treatment.
An increase in herbaceous species in thinned and/or burned forested areas may reduce pressure on riparian areas, meadows and non-forested upland communities. Cattle gravitate into these areas without direct management to utilize new understory forage created by opening of the forest canopy. This could indirectly effect livestock management with a potential improvement of cattle distribution.
Additional permittee efforts such as riding and herding may be necessary in the short term, in order to introduce livestock to these new areas of available forage and in the long term to gather livestock that are distributed more widely across each pasture.
A potential indirect effect of fuels treatments may be a short term negative impact to the management of livestock distribution in areas that have been burned due to recovery time necessary for plant communities with major forage components and additional time spent on placement and distribution of livestock by permittees or their agents may be necessary to minimize immediate utilization of forage in newly burned areas as cattle are attracted to burned areas (Vermeire et al 2004). Grazing would continue to be administered under the terms and conditions of grazing permits issued as authorized by 36 CFR 222.4 and FSH 2209.13 and temporary modification to permits could occur through these authorizations if necessary to accumulate fine fuels to improve fire carry, protect resource condition, establishment, and recovery of understory forage following fire and prior to authorization of grazing.
A potential indirect effect of riparian enhancement is improved streambank protection from livestock trampling due to the input of large woody debris into these systems. Falling trees across or along streams can reduce livestock access to portions of the stream and reduce potential impacts from livestock movements along a streambank. However, the placement and number of trees should reflect knowledge of livestock behavior to avoid creating obstacles where livestock would get trapped along streambanks.
Cumulative Effects - Allotment Management Cumulatively, implementing Alternative 2 could result in allotment management that would be more successful in the face of potential disturbances and activities. Thinning conifer stands could ease the
214 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project passive movement of cattle which could increase the success of management and meeting standards across the units. If wildfire did occur in or adjacent to the project area, moving cattle could be safer and more efficient. There is also a potential the severity for the fire would be decreased inside the project area which in turn could decrease allotment management needs. Prescribed fire in the future would be less of an impact to allotment management with thinned conifer stands.
Any unforeseen effects to permit administration which come as a result of implementation of the proposed actions may be mitigated without further NEPA analysis using the above handbook direction for Range Permit Administration. FSH 2209.13, allows for the modification of Term Grazing Permits any time during the 10 year term to:
• Respond to permittee request. • Increase or decrease livestock numbers or period of use. • Change the kind or class of livestock or area to be grazed. • Change or include an Allotment Management Plan. • Modify other terms and conditions of the permit, including provision for construction, reconstruction, and/or maintenance of range improvements. • Comply with laws, regulations, or other resource needs. • Devote lands to another public purpose when no changes in permitted numbers or season of use are anticipated.
Consistency with the Forest Plan and Other Regulatory Direction All proposed activities analyzed in this report are consistent with the Fremont National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan and other direction listed in the Regulatory Framework for Rangeland Resources as they apply to Permitted Grazing.
215 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Botany and Invasive Plants A Botany Report was prepared for the CMH Project to consider potential effects on threatened, endangered, candidate, and sensitive plants and fungi, and invasive plant species. To improve conciseness, this EA summarizes and references information that is available in greater detail including a tabular format biological evaluation available in the project record. The Botany Report for the CMH project contains a 13-page table, which displays species name (common and scientific), range, local habitats, presence of suitable or occupied habitat in the planning area and a determination of effects for 73 different vascular plants, bryophytes, fungi or lichens with suspected or documented habitat on the Fremont-Winema NF.
No issues relating to threatened, endangered, candidate, and sensitive plant and fungi species, or invasive plant species were identified for the project. No plant species are listed as threatened or endangered in Lake County, Oregon. The primary concern for Region 6 Sensitive plant and fungi species is ground disturbance in occupied and potential habitat. Concerns for invasive plant introduction include the total amount of ground disturbance.
Methodology and Information Sources Sensitive Plant Species The 2014 Fremont-Winema sensitive plant GIS layer, Fremont Eco-class GIS layer (Hopkins 1979), Fremont Soil Resource Inventory (SRI) GIS layer, Fremont MA15 (Riparian Vegetation) layer, and the Forests’ Natural Resource Information System (NRIS) Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Plants (TESP) layers were used in conjunction with the project boundary layer to determine the presence of occupied and potential habitat on NFS lands in the project area. This review showed 5 sensitive vascular plants with occupied habitat. The Fremont Eco-class, MA15, and SRI GIS layers showed potential habitat for 14 additional vascular plant species and 2 fungi species on National Forest System lands.
To compare the effects of the alternatives, occupied and potential sensitive species habitat was overlain with areas proposed activities for each alternative.
Invasive Plants The 2014 invasive plant GIS layer was used in conjunction with the project boundary layer. This review showed 489 invasive plant sites located within the project area. Because some infestations overlap both NFS and private lands and there is potential for spread across ownership boundaries, all known infestations were considered in the analysis.
Timber harvest and prescribed burning were considered to be major ground disturbing activities and were used to compare alternatives. Known infestations were overlain with areas proposed for timber harvest and prescribed burning under each action alternative to determine the acres of infestation that would be disturbed.
Incomplete and Unavailable Information Information regarding the abundance and distribution of sensitive species and invasive plants in the project area is incomplete. Only portions of the project area have been surveyed in the past.
Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis The area of analysis for sensitive species and invasive plants includes potential and occupied habitats on NFS lands in the project area, as described under existing condition. The short-term timeframe for analysis was considered to be 5-10 years. During this time, shrub and herbaceous vegetation cover is likely to be altered by the proposed activities. If new invasive plant infestations develop within the
216 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
project area as a result of ground disturbance, the majority of these sites would be discovered during the first 10 years, although new infestations can arise at any time. The long-term timeframe was considered to be more than 10 years.
Affected Environment
Existing Condition The project area is located in southern Lake County, Oregon approximately 20 miles northeast of the town of Lakeview. It encompasses approximately 51,525 acres of National Forest System (NFS) land and 632 acres of private lands, extending from Abert Rim on the north, south to Highway 140. Included in the NFS land are approximately 5,387 acres of the Drake-McDowell IRA. The project area includes lands in the Crooked Creek, Deep Creek, Honey Creek, and Thomas Creek Watersheds, all of which are within the Goose Lake Subbasin. Elevations range from 5,100 feet at the Mill Creek Trailhead to 8,335 feet at the summit of Drake Peak.
The area consists mainly of dry ponderosa pine, white fir, or lodgepole pine mixed conifer forests with early to mid-seral stand structures. The remainder of the project area consists of: juniper woodlands, scablands characterized by low sagebrush, bunch grasses, and scattered junipers; sage meadow scablands characterized by low sage brush, bunch grasses, and rock; subalpine whitebark pine stands, characterized by high elevation lodgepole and whitebark pine, white fire and sparse subalpine vegetation; rock outcrops characterized by sparsely vegetated gravelly steep slopes and flats; perennial, intermittent, and ephemeral drainages; aspen stands; dry, moist, and wet meadows; springs; and small lakes, reservoirs and ponds (often man-made) are also present.
Federally Listed Threatened, Endangered, Candidate, and Sensitive Species The US Fish and Wildlife Federally listed, Proposed, and Candidate plant species list (USDI Fish and Wildlife Service 2013) and the 2011 Region 6 Sensitive Species Plant List (USDA Forest Service 2011a) were reviewed for this project.
No plants are listed as Threatened or Endangered in Lake County, Oregon. Whitebark pine (Pinus ablicaulis) is listed as a Candidate species. Candidate species are taxa for which the US Fish and Wildlife Service has sufficient biological information to support a proposal to list as endangered or threatened. Habitat for whitebark pine does occur in the project area. Until this Candidate species receives a listing status, it will be analyzed as a sensitive species for this project. Therefore, Threatened and Endangered plants will not be considered further in this document.
Region 6 Sensitive Plants and Fungi
The 2011 Region 6 Sensitive Species Plant List (USDA Forest Service 2011a) was reviewed for this project. Sensitive plant and fungi species documented or suspected to occur on the Fremont-Winema National Forests are documented in Table 1 of the Botany Report (located in the project record).
Field surveys for vascular plants have been conducted in various parts of the project area, with the most recent surveys in 2012. Approximately 599 acres of riparian habitat were surveyed between 2010 and 2012. No sensitive riparian species were found during these surveys. Approximately 21,279 acres of forested habitat were surveyed between 1991and 1999 for previously proposed and/or implemented activities within the project area. Five sensitive plant species have been located within the project area; native sedge (Carex vernacular), Warner Mountain bedstraw (Galium serpenticum var. warnerense), Shockley’s ivesia (Ivesia shockleyi), blue-leaved penstemon (Penstemon glaucinus), and whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis).
217 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Vascular Plants There are 2.9 acres of native sedge (Carex vernacular) within the project area on the rocky slopes of Drake Peak accounting for 100% of the population on the forest. There is less than 50 acres of suitable habitat for this species within the project area.
There are 595.3 acres of Warner Mountain bedstraw (Galium serpenticum var. warnerense) within the project area, accounting for 88% of the known population on the forest. There is approximately 4,500 acres of suitable habitat within the project area for this species.
There are 2.8 acres of Shockley’s ivesia (Ivesia shockleyi) within the project area, accounting for 100% of the known population on the forest. This species is found in a rocky, scree area at the edge of a large cliff on the NE slopes of Drake Peak at approximately 8,100 feet. There is less than 50 acres of suitable habitat for this species within the project area.
There are 1,956.2 acres of blue-leaved penstemon (Penstemon glaucinus) within the project area, accounting for 16% of the known population on the forest. There is approximately 23,300 acres of suitable habitat for this species within the project area.
There are approximately 8,400 acres of whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis) habitat on the forest and approximately 923 acres within the project area, accounting for 9% of the known population on the forest. There is less than 2,000 acres of suitable habitat within the project area for this species.
The project area contains potential suitable habitat for 14 additional R6 sensitive vascular plant species. The remaining vascular plants on the R6 list were considered unlikely to occur, either because suitable habitat is lacking, or because past surveys in/near the project area have not located any sites (Botany Report Table 1).
Most of the vascular plant species with potential habitat in the project area grow in open, seasonally moist meadows, drainages, lake, and spring/seep habitats. These include crenulate moonwort (Botrychium crenulatum), short seeded waterwort (Elatine brachysperma), disappearing monkeyflower (Mimulus evanescens), diverse-leaved pondweed (Potamogeton diversifolius), and Columbia cress (Rorippa columbiae). In 2010 and 2012, surveys for vascular plants were conducted in 599 acres of riparian and vernally wet habitats on NFS lands in the project area, including springs, seeps, ponds, meadows, and vernally moist scablands. No sites of these sensitive species were located; making it unlikely they occur in the project area. Based on species habitat requirements, a range of 89 to 637 acres of potential habitat for these five species is present within the project area.
Other vascular plant species with potential habitat in the project area include:
• 321 acres of suitable habitat for capitate sedge (Carex capitata) • 370 acres of suitable habitat for slender sedge (Carex lasiocarpa var. americana) • 23,323 acres of suitable habitat for Cordilleran sedge (Carex cordillerana) • 431 acres of suitable habitat for russet sedge (Carex saxatilis) • 7,786 acres of suitable habitat for green-tinged paintbrush (Castilleja chlorotica) • 17,261 acres of suitable habitat for Bolander’s spikerush (Eleocharis bolanderi) • 13,215 acres of suitable habitat for prostrate buckwheat (Eriogonum prociduum) • 12,980 acres of suitable habitat for green buckwheat (Eriogonum umbellatum var. glaberrimum) • 754 acres of suitable habitat for Oregon semaphore grass (Pleuropogon oregonus)
218 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Bryophytes and Lichens One field survey of approximately 12 acres of prime habitat in the White Pine Marsh area was conducted in 2011 for sensitive bryophytes and vascular plants. No sensitive bryophytes on the Fremont-Winema sensitive list were found during this survey. Additional surveys were not conducted for sensitive species of bryophytes or lichens due to the lack suitable habitat, or the project area being outside the range of these species. There are no known sites of sensitive bryophyte species in the project area.
Fungi The project area contains potential habitat for 2 sensitive fungi species, Hygrophorus caeruleus and umbrella false-morel (Pseudorhizina californica). Fungi surveys covering 149 acres were conducted in 2008 and 2009 within the project area. No fungi species on the Fremont-Winema sensitive list were found during these surveys.
Hygrophorus caeruleus is mycorrhizal and potentially associated with true fir and pine species. On the Forest it has been found in a variety of stand conditions, but usually where at least a few large diameter white fir are present. Sixty sites of Hygrophorus caeruleus have been found in white fir mixed conifer stands on the Fremont-Winema, with the majority of sites in late successional stands on the Winema side of the Forest. The nearest sites to the project area are 15 miles northwest in the vicinity of Cottonwood Meadows on Lakeview District. There are 1,010 acres of potential habitat for Hygrophorus caeruleus within the project area.
Umbrella false-morel is a saprobe, thought to be associated with well-decayed woody debris. Thirteen sites have been found on the Forest, with most sites located in late successional mixed conifer riparian areas on Klamath District. There are no documented sites of umbrella false-morel on the Fremont side of the Forest and the nearest sites to the project area are more than 90 miles away. There are 130 acres of potential habitat for umbrella false-morel within the project area.
Invasive Plants The majority of the survey work completed within the project area has been on roads. All Maintenance Level 2 and 3 roads and a significant portion of Maintenance Level 1 roads have been surveyed between 2004 and 2013. Additional survey work was conducted between 2009 and 2013 on approximately 4,000 acres of juniper scabland habitat for the North Warner Sage Shrub Restoration project located in the northeast portion of the project area. The 599 acres of riparian and vernally wet habitats surveyed between 2010 and 2012 for sensitive plants also included surveys for invasive plants in springs, seeps, ponds, meadows, vernally moist scablands, and along perennial and intermittent streams habitats.
The GIS information showed 489 invasive plant sites (523.1 acres) located within the project area. Table 99 shows a breakdown of the number of invasive plant sites by species and acreage within the project area.
219 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 99. Invasive Plant Species within the Project Area Species Number of Sites Total Acres Infested
Canada thistle 353 274.4
common toadflax 29 4.6
field bindweed 1 0.1
hairy white-top 5 0.5
lens-podded whitetop 3 0.4
Mediterranean sage 63 20
medusahead rye 12 24.4
musk thistle 6 193.4
oxeye daisy 1 0.1
perennial pepperweed 2 0.3
reed canarygrass 3 2.2
scentless false mayweed 1 0.1
Scotch thistle 1 0.1
spotted knappweed 2 0.2
St. Johnswort 4 0.5
sulfur cinquefoil 3 1.8
Total 489 523.1
Regulatory Framework and Desired Condition
Sensitive Plant Species The sensitive species program was developed to ensure that species do not become threatened or endangered because of Forest Service actions. As part of the NEPA process, forests are required to review programs and activities through a biological evaluation, to determine their potential effect on sensitive species. Forest Service Manual (FSM) 2670.32 states management “…must not result in loss of species viability or create significant trends toward federal listing” (USDA Forest Service, 2007). FSM 2670.5 states a viable population “…has the estimated numbers and distribution of reproductive individuals to ensure the continued existence of the species throughout its existing range within the planning area” (USDA Forest Service, 2007). On page 109 of the Fremont LRMP (US Forest Service, 1989), “Habitat for sensitive plants and animals shall be managed or protected to ensure that the species do not become threatened or endangered because of Forest Service actions….maintain or increase the status of populations and habitats.” The Region 6 Sensitive Species List was last updated in January of 2011 (US Forest Service, 2011a).
220 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Invasive Plants Forest Service policy for managing invasive species includes the following from FSM 2903.04 (USDA Forest Service, 2011c): “Determine the risk of introducing, establishing, or spreading invasive species associated with any proposed action, as an integral component of project planning and analysis, and where necessary provide for alternatives or mitigation measures to reduce or eliminate that risk prior to project approval.”
Executive Order 13112 of Feb. 3, 1999 (Federal Register: Volume 64, Number 25) directs federal agencies to prevent the introduction of invasive species, detect and respond rapidly to and control such species, not authorize, fund, or carry out actions that it believes are likely to cause or promote the introduction or spread of invasive species unless the agency has determined and made public its determination that the benefits of such actions clearly outweigh the potential harm caused by invasive species; and that all feasible and prudent measures to minimize risk of harm will be taken in conjunction with the actions.
The Record of Decision for the Pacific Northwest Region Invasive Plant Program Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants Environmental Impact Statement (USDA Forest Service, 2005) amended the Fremont and Winema Land and Resource Management Plans in 2005. This decision provides direction for invasive plant management in the form of: Desired Future Condition; Goals and Objectives; Prevention Standards; Treatment and Restoration Standards; and An Inventory and Monitoring Framework. Prevention Standard 1 states: Prevention of invasive plant introduction, establishment, and spread will be addressed in watershed analysis; roads analysis; fire and fuels management plans, Burned Area Emergency Recovery Plans; emergency wildland fire situation analysis; wildland fire implementation plans; grazing allotment management plans; recreation management plans; vegetation management plans and other land management assessments.
In April 2011, the Record of Decision was signed for the Fremont-Winema National Forest Invasive Plant Treatment EIS (USDA Forest Service, 2011b). This decision authorized integrated, effective manual, mechanical, herbicide, cultural, and prescribed fire treatments, along with active site restoration where needed, on both existing and newly discovered invasive plant infestations. The CMH Project contains no specific treatment of invasive plants on National Forest System lands. Regardless of which alterative is chosen for this project, invasive plants treatment is an on-going program under the analysis and decision issued from the 2011 Record of Decision (USDA Forest Service, 2011b).
Environmental Consequences
Alternative 1 – No Action The No Action Alternative would leave the planning area in its current state. Ongoing management practices such as road maintenance, fire suppression, recreation, and personal use firewood cutting would continue.
Sensitive Plants Crenulate moonwort, capitate sedge, slender sedge, russet sedge, short seeded waterwort, Bolander’s spikerush, disappearing monkeyflower, Oregon semaphore grass, diverse-leaved pondweed, and Columbia cress are not known to occur in the project area, but have suitable habitat within the project area. All 10 species prefer open, wet meadows, seasonally moist meadows, streambanks, drainages, lake, spring/seep, fen, and marshland habitats. Without proposed vegetation management activities, these habitats would be reduced in size by future conifer encroachment. Under Alternative 1, conifer encroachment would reduce the suitable habitat available for these species. Without proposed vegetation management activities, these habitats would be at an increased risk for wildfire.
221 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Cordilleran sedge is not known to occur in the project area, but could be present in mixed conifer forest. It is found in areas receiving bright indirect light and where leaf litter and duff are present (Wilson et al., 2008). The No Action alternative would leave the area in its current condition, which would provide continued habitat for this species.
Green-tinged paintbrush, prostrate buckwheat, and green buckwheat are not known to occur in the project area, but could be present in areas of potential suitable habitat. Under Alternative 1, conifer encroachment would continue to reduce the suitable habitat available for this species. In addition, these habitats would be at an increased risk for future high severity wildfire due to increases in fuel loads. A high severity fire could eliminate host plants over a large landscape, which could be detrimental in the long term.
The most likely threat to native sedge, Warner Mountain bedstraw, Shockley’s ivesia, is the threat of competition from other vegetation, which could lead to a decrease in viability of the species and/or an increase in future high severity wildfires. Fortunately, the habitat types associated with these species have proven to not be susceptible to competing vegetation.
Blue-leaved penstemon is an upland species occurring in mixed conifer and lodgepole pine forest, generally in areas with 40% or less canopy closure, including natural openings and previously logged areas (Wooley, 1993). Under Alternative 1, canopy closure would continue to increase from both existing trees and future trees, resulting in a reduction in occupied and suitable habitat. The increase in fuel loads associated with an increase in trees would increase the risk for future high severity wildfire. It is unknown how this species would respond to a high severity fire.
Whitebark pine is a higher elevation, shade-intolerant species that can thrive in poor soils and harsh, relatively dry conditions unsuitable for other species (Shoal et al, 2008). Due the recent mountain pine beetle epidemic on the forest, portions of the mature whitebark pine stands have been killed within the planning area. Under Alternative 1, conifer encroachment would continue to increase, resulting in a reduction in occupied and suitable habitat for whitebark pine. The increase in fuel loads associated with an increase in trees would increase the risk for future high severity wildfire. A high severity fire could eliminate mature trees over a large landscape, which could be detrimental in the long term.
Bryophytes and Lichens Alternative 1 would have no direct or indirect effects on bryophytes or lichens (Botany Report Table 1). The project area has no suitable habitat or is outside the range of these species, and there are no known sites of these species in the project area.
Fungi Hygrophorus caeruleus is mycorrhizal and potentially associated with true fir and pine species. On the Forest it has been found in a variety of stand conditions, but usually where at least a few large diameter white fir are present. Umbrella false-morel is a saprobe, thought to be associated with well-decayed woody debris. The No Action alternative would leave the area in its current condition, which would provide continued potential habitat for these species.
Invasive Plants Under Alternative 1, introduction and spread of existing invasive plants would not occur in the short term. Conifer encroachment would continue within the project area, causing an increased risk for future high severity wildfire due to increases in fuel loads. A high severity fire would create prime invasive plant habitat, which could be detrimental in the long term.
222 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action
Direct and Indirect Effects
Sensitive Plants and Fungi Alternative 2 would have no effect on sensitive species whose range does not overlap the project area, or for which there is no suitable habitat in the project area. A determination of no impact was made for these species (Botany Report Table 1). Species with occupied or potential habitat in the project area are discussed below.
Sensitive Vascular Plants Crenulate moonwort, capitate sedge, slender sedge, russet sedge, short seeded waterwort, Bolander’s spikerush, disappearing monkeyflower, Oregon semaphore grass, diverse-leaved pondweed, and Columbia cress are not known to occur in the project area, but could be present in open, seasonally moist meadows, drainages, and scablands. Proposed harvest and thinning (commercial and pre-commercial thinning, mountain mahogany, aspen, and juniper) would occur within these proposed habitats. Proposed harvest and thinning could occur around the edges of the scabland, but would not occur within the scabland itself. Scablands are features that would be protected on the sale area map (BMP T-4), and mechanical equipment is prohibited from entry into scabland habitat. Proposed harvest, thinning, and prescribed burning could keep encroachment away from these habitat types, thus ensuring long term habitat. Proposed harvest, thinning and prescribed broadcast burning has the potential to reduce future high severity fires. A high severity fire could alter the habitat along the edge of these habitats, but should not alter suitable habitat to a point where the impacts would be negative.
The proposed activities of meadow restoration treatments and RHCA thinning and restoration activities are anticipated to occur within suitable habitat for these 10 species. Mechanized proposed harvest and thinning could occur around the edges of the meadow, but would not occur within the meadow itself. Meadows are features that would be protected on the sale area map (BMP T-4), and mechanical equipment is prohibited from entry into meadow habitat. These proposed activities should help maintain an open meadow system, thus providing long term habitat. Since mechanized equipment would not be permitted, short term impacts to these 10 species would be from felling and potentially yarding trees.
The proposed hand cutting of encroaching conifers, followed in 1-3 years by burning of individual felled juniper, within sage steppe systems in the northern half of the Drake-McDowell IRA would only occur within the suitable scabland habitat for these species. Removing encroaching conifers and burning of individual felled juniper would help maintain suitable habitat in those scablands better than no proposed activities.
Prescribed broadcast burning (after treatment or as burn only) may occur within suitable open, seasonally moist meadows, and/or drainages. Prescribed burning in seasonally moist meadows and drainages are likely to burn at a low intensity. A low intensity fire could damage above ground components of these plants. However, a low intensity fire would not damage below ground plant structures and would therefore not damage viability of most plants. For this reason, a low intensity fire should not directly affect these 10 species.
Road closures and decommissioning would benefit these species by limiting access to suitable habitat, which would reduce the potential to introduce invasive plants into the vicinity. This project also proposes to construct approximately 5-10 miles of temporary roads outside the IRA. These proposed activities would not occur within suitable habitat for these 10 species. Therefore, these proposed activities should not directly or indirectly affect these species.
223 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Cordilleran sedge, green buckwheat, prostrate buckwheat, and green-tinged paintbrush are not known to occur in the project area, but could be present in suitable habitat within the project area. Proposed harvest and thinning (commercial and pre-commercial thinning, mountain mahogany, aspen, and juniper), prescribed broadcast and pile burning activities would occur. In the short term, these activities have the potential to alter suitable habitat by removing canopy cover and altering the amount of leaf litter and duff present as compared to no activities. In the long term, proposed harvest and thinning (commercial and pre-commercial thinning, mountain mahogany, aspen, and juniper), and prescribed broadcast burning has the potential to reduce future high severity fires. A high severity fire could eliminate a large portion of the forest canopy and could remove leaf litter and duff at a landscape scale, which could be detrimental to habitat in the long term. The potential for landings, skid trails, or burn piles to be located in habitat for these species is low, given the rarity of these species.
The proposed activities of meadow restoration treatments and RHCA thinning and restoration activities are not proposed to occur within suitable habitat for Cordilleran sedge, green buckwheat, prostrate buckwheat, and green-tinged paintbrush. Therefore, these activities would have no impact on suitable habitat for these species.
The proposed hand felling of encroaching conifers, followed in 1-3 years by burning individual felled juniper, within sage steppe systems in the northern half of the Drake-McDowell IRA would not occur within the suitable habitat for Cordilleran sedge, green buckwheat, prostrate buckwheat, and green-tinged paintbrush. Therefore, these activities would have no impact on habitat for these species.
Road closures and decommissioning would benefit these species by limiting access to suitable habitat, which would reduce the potential to introduce invasive plants into the vicinity. This project also proposes to construct approximately 5-10 miles of temporary roads outside the IRA. These proposed activities could potentially occur within suitable habitat for Cordilleran sedge, green buckwheat, prostrate buckwheat, and green-tinged paintbrush. Therefore, there is potential for limited negative direct or indirect effects to these species.
Native sedge is found in alpine and subalpine wet meadows, rocky slopes that receive snowmelt, and edges of headwater streams and lakeshores. The only known location on the forest for this species exists on the rocky slopes of Drake Peak, which falls within the Drake-McDowell IRA. Proposed activities outside the IRA include harvest and thinning (commercial and pre-commercial thinning, mountain mahogany, aspen, and juniper), and prescribed broadcast (after treatment or as burn only) and pile burning. These proposed activities have the potential to reduce future high severity fires as compared to no activities. A high severity fire could expose occupied habitat to latent heat and fire suppression activities, which could be detrimental to this species in the long term.
The proposed activities of meadow treatments, RHCA thinning and restoration activities are not proposed to occur within the IRA and therefore not within occupied habitat for native sedge. These activities would have no direct or indirect effects on occupied native sedge habitat.
The proposed hand felling of encroaching conifers, followed in 1-3 years by burning of individual felled juniper, within sage steppe systems in the northern half of the Drake-McDowell IRA would occur north of occupied habitat for this species. These proposed activities have the potential to reduce future high severity fires as compared to the no action of Alternative 1. A high severity fire could expose occupied habitat to latent heat and fire suppression activities, which could be detrimental to this species in the long term.
Road closures, road decommissioning and temporary road construction would have no direct or indirect effects on native sedge as they would occur outside of occupied habitat.
224 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Warner Mountain bedstraw occurs on 595.3 acres of rocky scree area and talus slopes within the project area. Occupied habitat exists both outside (87%) and within (13%) the Drake-McDowell IRA. Proposed activities within occupied habitat include harvest and thinning (commercial and pre-commercial thinning, mountain mahogany, aspen, and juniper), and prescribed broadcast (after treatment or as burn only) and pile burning. In the long term, these activities would be beneficial because they would open the forest canopy within and adjacent to occupied habitat as compared to no activities. These proposed activities have the potential to reduce future high severity fires as compared to the no action of Alternative 1. A high severity fire could expose occupied habitat to latent heat and fire suppression activities, which could be detrimental to populations of this species in the long term.
The proposed activities of meadow treatments, RHCA thinning and restoration activities are not proposed to occur within occupied habitat (either within or outside the IRA). Therefore, these activities would have no direct or indirect effects on occupied Warner Mountain bedstraw habitat.
The proposed hand felling of encroaching conifers, followed in 1-3 years by burning of individual felled juniper, within sage steppe systems in the northern half of the Drake-McDowell IRA would occur north of occupied habitat for this species. These proposed activities have the potential to reduce future high severity fires as compared to no activities-Alternative 1.
Road closures and road decommissioning would benefit this species by limiting access to occupied habitat, which would reduce the potential to introduce invasive plants into the vicinity. This project also proposes to construct approximately 5-10 miles of temporary roads outside the IRA. If construction of temporary road occurs within occupied habitat outside the IRA, a minimal amount of plants could be impacted due to mitigation measures.
Shockley’s ivesia is found in a rocky, scree area at the edge of a large cliff on the NE slopes of Drake Peak, which falls within the Drake-McDowell IRA. This is the only known location on the forest. Proposed activities outside the IRA include harvest and thinning (commercial and pre-commercial thinning, mountain mahogany, aspen, and juniper), and prescribed broadcast (after treatment or as burn only) and pile burning. These proposed activities have the potential to reduce future high severity fires as compared to no activities. A high severity fire could expose occupied habitat to latent heat and fire suppression activities, which could be detrimental to this species in the long term.
The proposed activities of meadow treatments, RHCA thinning and restoration activities are not proposed to occur within the IRA and therefore not within occupied habitat. These activities would have no direct or indirect effects on occupied Shockley’s ivesia habitat.
The proposed hand felling of encroaching conifers, followed in 1-3 years by burning of individual felled juniper, within sage steppe systems in the northern half of the Drake-McDowell IRA would occur north of occupied habitat for this species. These proposed activities have the potential to reduce future high severity fires as compared to the no action of Alternative 1. A high severity fire could expose occupied habitat to latent heat and fire suppression activities, which could be detrimental to this species in the long term.
Road closures, road decommissioning, and construction of temporary roads would have no direct or indirect effects Shockley’s ivesia as they would occur outside of occupied habitat.
Blue-leaved penstemon occurs in the project area. Occupied habitat usually occurs in forested areas with less than 40% canopy closure. All occupied habitat exists outside the Drake-McDowell IRA. Proposed activities within occupied and suitable habitat include harvest and thinning (commercial and pre- commercial thinning, mountain mahogany, aspen, and juniper), and prescribed broadcast (after treatment
225 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
or as burn only) and pile burning. Prescribed broadcast burning would be permitted within occupied habitat because a low intensity fire has been found to promote existing plants (Wooley, 1993). In the long term, these activities would be beneficial because they would open the forest canopy within occupied habitat and have the potential to reduce future high severity fires as compared to the no action of Alternative 1. In the short term, these proposed activities could potentially impact individual plants because of damage from equipment and burning. In the long-term, a high severity fire could eliminate occupied habitat over a large landscape, which could be detrimental in the long term.
The proposed activities of meadow restoration treatments, RHCA thinning and restoration activities are not proposed to occur within occupied habitat for blue-leaved penstemon. Therefore, these activities would have no direct or indirect effects on occupied habitat.
The proposed hand felling of encroaching conifers, followed in 1-3 years by burning of individual felled juniper, within sage steppe systems in the northern half of the Drake-McDowell IRA would occur north of occupied habitat for this species. These proposed activities have the potential to reduce future high severity fires as compared to the no action alternative. A high severity fire could eliminate suitable habitat over a large landscape, which could be detrimental in the long term.
Road closures and road decommissioning would benefit this species by limiting access to occupied habitat, which would reduce the potential to introduce invasive plants into the vicinity. Temporary road construction could occur within occupied blue-leaved penstemon habitat, which would reduce the amount of suitable habitat. Therefore, there is the potential for some negative direct or indirect affects to this species.
Whitebark pine trees occur on approximately 923 acres within the project area. Occupied habitat exists both outside (53%) and within (47%) the Drake-McDowell IRA. Proposed activities within occupied habitat outside the IRA include harvest and thinning (commercial and pre-commercial thinning). Proposed harvest and thinning activities within occupied habitat would reduce conifer competition, resulting in better growing conditions for whitebark pine (Shoal et al, 2008). Reducing conifer competition would benefit current and future populations. The following mitigation measures would apply to these activities:
• All live, mature whitebark pine trees would be protected from cutting during proposed harvest and thinning activities.
• Within occupied habitat, the Eastside Botanist would be consulted on the placement of temporary roads, skid trails, and landings to ensure no live, mature whitebark pine trees and minimal seedlings and saplings are impacted.
• Within occupied whitebark pine habitat, mechanized equipment tracks and tires may be excluded from small portions of the proposed units to reduce damage to five-needled pine seedlings and saplings.
With the three mitigations above in place, the proposed harvest and thinning activities would have no direct or indirect effects on live, mature whitebark pine trees and minimal direct or indirect effects to seedlings and saplings outside the IRA.
Proposed activities within occupied habitat outside the IRA include prescribed broadcast (after treatment or as burn only) and pile burning. Prescribed burning in areas with no live, mature trees and where seedling and sapling regeneration is poor, could stimulate regeneration and reduce vegetative competition (Shoal et al, 2008). Prescribed burning in areas with no live, mature whitebark pine trees and where
226 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
regeneration is poor would be beneficial to this species. The following mitigation measures would apply to these activities:
• Within occupied whitebark pine habitat, the Eastside Botanist would be consulted on the placement of fire line and burn piles to ensure no live, mature whitebark pine trees and minimal seedlings and saplings are impacted.
• Within occupied whitebark pine habitat, proposed prescribed broadcast burning would be permitted if there were no live, mature trees remaining and regeneration of seedlings and saplings is poor. Jackpot pile burning may be permitted within occupied habitat after cutting of conifer encroachment occurs. Pile size and placement shall be determined such that no latent heat would negatively harm live, mature trees.
With the above mitigations in place, prescribed burning and pile burning would have no direct or indirect effects on live, mature whitebark pine and minimal direct or indirect effects to seedlings and saplings outside the IRA.
The proposed activities of harvest and thinning (commercial and pre-commercial) and prescribed broad cast (after treatment or as burn only) and pile burning all have the potential to reduce future high severity fires within the project area as compared to the no action alternative. A future high severity fire could reduce or eliminate the live, mature whitebark pine trees and regeneration in the form of seedlings and saplings. A future high severity fire could be detrimental to whitebark pine populations outside the IRA, especially with the mortality already suffered due to the mountain pine beetle infestation.
The Land Managers Guide to Whitebark Pine Restoration in the Pacific Northwest Region provides five reasons for planting, which is the primary focus of the restoration strategy (Shoal et al, 2008). These five reasons are:
1. To restore whitebark pine to areas where its populations have been reduced by the impacts of natural and anthropogenic agents (Blister rust, mountain pine beetle, fire, climate change);
2. To increase the numbers of living whitebark pine on the landscape and to provide future seed sources, especially in areas where local seed sources have been identified;
3. To diversify stand demographics in older stands with little to no natural regeneration;
4. To provide additional material to the process of natural selection for resistance to white pine blister rust; and
5. To provide additional material to increase the resilience of the species in its adaptation to changing climate.
In occupied whitebark pine habitat outside the IRA, planting is proposed in occupied habitat based on the five reasons presented above.
Planting within whitebark pine habitat would help promote and ensure the future survival of each population outside the IRA within the project area.
The proposed activities of meadow restoration treatments, RHCA thinning and restoration activities are not proposed to occur within occupied habitat for whitebark pine. Therefore, these activities would have no direct or indirect effects on occupied habitat.
227 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
The proposed hand felling of encroaching conifers, followed in 1-3 years by burning of individual felled juniper, within sage steppe systems in the northern half of the Drake-McDowell IRA would occur north and east of occupied habitat for this species. These proposed activities within the IRA have the potential to reduce future high severity fires as compared to no activities-Alternative 1. The whitebark pine tree populations within the IRA would also benefit from the proposed activities outside the IRA. The proposed activities outside the IRA would reduce the potential for a future high severity fire both outside and within the IRA. A future high severity fire could burn into occupied habitat could cause mortality in the remaining live, mature trees and cause mortality in the seedlings and saplings that have regenerated. A future high severity fire would be detrimental to these populations in the long term.
Road closures and road decommissioning would benefit this species by limiting access to occupied habitat, which would reduce the potential to introduce invasive plants into the vicinity. This project also proposes to construct approximately 5-10 miles of temporary roads outside the IRA. These proposed activities could occur within occupied whitebark pine habitat outside the IRA. With the mitigation measures in place, no live, mature trees would be removed for temporary roads, and minimal seedlings and saplings would be impacted by temporary roads. Therefore, these proposed activities would have no direct or indirect effects on live, mature whitebark pine trees and minimal direct or indirect effects to seedlings and saplings outside the IRA.
Bryophytes and Lichens Alternative 2 would have no direct or indirect effects on bryophytes or lichens (Botany Report Table 1). The project area has no suitable habitat or is outside the range of these species, and there are no known sites of these species in the project area.
Fungi Alternative 2 may have direct and indirect effects to Hygrophorus caeruleus and umbrella false-morel. Alternative 2 proposes timber harvest and thinning (commercial and pre-commercial thinning, mountain mahogany, aspen, and juniper), prescribed broadcast (after treatment or as burn only) and pile burning, meadow restoration treatments, RHCA thinning and restoration activities in mixed conifer stands. Ground disturbance caused by logging could directly damage fungal mycelia and the woody debris substrate of umbrella false-morel. Indirectly, these activities have the potential to change site conditions by removing shade from standing dead trees, reducing litter and woody debris accumulation, compacting soil, and affecting the composition and chemistry of soil biota (see Dewey, 2012 and Ferriel and Grenier, 2013). No action would leave the current habitat intact, whereas Alternative 2 could result in a decline in habitat quality, due to loss of host trees, loss of shade, and drier conditions. Because these fungi are rare, the potential for them to be impacted by Alternative 2 is low.
The proposed hand felling of encroaching conifers, followed in 1-3 years by burning of individual felled juniper, within sage steppe systems in the northern half of the Drake-McDowell IRA would occur north of occupied habitat for this species. These proposed activities have the potential to reduce future high severity fires as compared to the no action alternative. A high severity fire could expose occupied habitat to latent heat and fire suppression activities, which could be detrimental to Hygrophorus caeruleus and umbrella false-morel in the long term.
Road closures and road decommissioning would benefit these species in two ways as compared to no activities. First, it would limit access to suitable habitat, which would reduce potential trampling and harvesting. Second, it would reduce the potential to introduce invasive plants into the vicinity. This project also proposes to construct approximately 5-10 miles of temporary roads outside the IRA. It is possible these activities could occur within suitable habitat for these two species. These activities would
228 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
result in a decline in habitat quality loss of host trees, loss of shade, and drier conditions. Therefore, these activities would have negative direct or indirect effects on suitable habitat for either species.
Invasive Plants In the short term, Alternative 2 would affect the potential for invasive plant infestation in the project area in two main ways as compared to the no action alternative. First, ground disturbing treatment activities, such as timber harvest and thinning (commercial and pre-commercial thinning, mountain mahogany, aspen, and juniper), prescribed broadcast (after treatment or as burn only) and pile burning, meadow restoration treatments, RHCA thinning and restoration activities would disrupt establishment of native ground cover species, and reduce accumulation of woody debris and litter. This would result in more bare ground susceptible to infestation for a longer period of time than would occur in undisturbed areas. Second, increased activity and traffic would heighten the chance for introduction of invasive plant seeds from vehicles and equipment. The potential for invasive plant infestation would therefore increase proportionate with the amount of ground disturbing activity. The activities proposed in Alternative 2 however, would reduce the future risk for a high severity fire. Decreasing the risk of high severity fire would reduce the potential to create invasive plant habitat.
Road closures and decommissioning would reduce the opportunity for invasive plant introduction throughout the project area. Proposed construction of approximately 5-10 miles of temporary roads outside the IRA would increase the amount of open disturbed habitat available for infestation.
To reduce the risk of invasive plant introduction and spread under Alternative 2, several prevention measures would be applied. These include cleaning of off-road equipment prior to entry onto the Forest, inspection of fill and gravel used in road reconstruction, and coordination of road maintenance with invasive plant management.
Cumulative Effects Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Activities Relevant to Cumulative Effects Analysis
The residual impacts of past actions in the project area have resulted in the distribution of sensitive species habitat and invasive plant infestations described in the existing condition. On-going and future foreseeable activities may have effects on sensitive species and invasive plant introduction that would overlap with the effects of alternatives. The following activities were considered in cumulative effects analysis.
Vegetation Management
Past vegetation management activities in the project area consisted of commercial harvests, prescribed burning, wildfires, planting, and pre-commercial thinning. The project area is estimated to have timber harvest entries from the late 1970s to early 1990s. Activities included a combination of commercial thins followed by pre-commercial thinning (PCT), clear cuts (followed by planting), seed tree cuts, and shelterwood cuts. Since the early 1980s, prescribed fire within the planning area consist of burning piles and small acreage (<100 acre) prescribed fires. The last wildfire activity in the project area was the 2004 Grassy Fire that burned approximately 4,200 acres. On NFS lands within the Grassy Fire, approximately 590 acres were harvested and approximately 760 acres were planted with ponderosa pine. The most recent harvest activities are the result of the Bull Stewardship project signed in 2005 (1,369 acres). This project consisted of commercial and non-commercial harvest and aspen improvement. The most recent activities have been the result of the North Warner Sage Shrub Project with thinning and burning occurring from 2009 to 2014. In the project, approximately 3,200 acres were treated by cutting juniper and other small confers for sage grouse habitat enhancement.
229 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
On Abert Rim and Drake Peak, mortality has been very high in the larger, older whitebark pines due to infestation by the mountain pine beetle over the past decade. On Drake Peak, the mountain pine beetle populations were first detected around 2002 and grew to their highest level around 2008, declining thereafter and practically disappearing in 2012. The whitebark pines on Abert Rim had a similar history. Although the mortality of large trees has been extreme, there are some surviving smaller trees and regeneration can be found in some areas. Throughout the planning area, the level of tree mortality due to mountain pine beetle has been extreme in the lodgepole pine vegetation types. Beetle populations grew every year beginning around 2001, and began to drop off in 2010, leaving most of the stands with very few surviving trees. These high beetle populations in lodgepole pine may have been the source of the outbreak within the higher-elevation whitebark pine.
Road Construction and Road Maintenance
Over 290 miles of road exist in the project area. Road construction may have reduced the amount of potential habitat present for some sensitive species. Additionally, road construction created disturbed corridors for invasive plant colonization. Both road maintenance and vehicle traffic may transport seeds and can contribute to invasive plant spread along roads. To reduce this risk, LRMP prevention standards now require coordination of road maintenance with invasive species management, and inspection of quarry material used in road reconstruction.
Dispersed Recreation and Special Uses
The project area is used by the public for activities such as hunting, fishing, camping, sightseeing, and fire wood cutting. These types of activities may cause minor effects, such as trampling, to potential sensitive plant habitat in the project area. Vehicle travel during these activities could contribute to introduction and spread of invasive plants.
Travel Management
The Fremont-Winema National Forest’s Motorized Travel Management Decision was signed in July 2010 designating approximately 6,426 miles of roads and 173.5 miles of trails for public motorized use across the forest. Implementation began in 2012 and is expected to result in reduced potential for impacts to sensitive species habitat and invasive plant spread, as a result of restricted off road travel.
Livestock Grazing
The Abert Rim, Honey Creek, McDowell, Porcupine, Squaw Butte and White Pine Forest Service grazing allotments overlap the project area and have been used for cattle grazing for decades. This use is expected to continue. The effects of livestock grazing on sensitive vascular plant species may include herbivory or trampling, leading to mortality of individual plants, or reduced vigor and reproductive output. Some species may benefit from moderate levels of grazing that create open sites for seed germination, or reduced competition for light and nutrients. Livestock grazing is unlikely to affect the fungi species Hygrophorus caeruleus and umbrella false-morel.
Livestock can transport invasive plant seeds stuck to their coats or muddy hooves. The seeds of some invasive plant species can remain viable after passing though the digestive tracks of cattle. Although livestock may disperse invasive plant seeds, the current lack of invasive plant infestations in the project area suggests they are not a major source of transport.
230 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Invasive Plant Treatments
Manual and herbicide treatment of selected invasive plant infestations have occurred within and adjacent to project area for the past 10 years. The CMH Project does not prescribe treatment of invasive plants on NFS lands. Regardless of actions to be implemented under this project’s resulting decision, invasive plant treatment is an on-going program under the analysis and decision issued from the 2011 Record of Decision (USDA Forest Service, 2011b).
Sensitive Species
Vascular Plants
Native sedge
Alternative 2 is expected to have no direct or indirect effects to native sedge. Alternative 2 would, therefore, not contribute to cumulative effects on this species. A determination of No Impact was made for this species.
Warner Mountain bedstraw
There are 595.3 acres of Warner Mountain bedstraw located within the project area. There are over 4,500 acres of suitable habitat in and adjacent to the project area.
Past vegetation management projects, including timber sales and fuels treatments, have likely occurred within occupied areas. The ground disturbance caused by these activities likely minimally impacted plants, but also created suitable open habitat conditions in and adjacent to occupied areas. Future vegetation management project would have a similar minimal impact to these species.
Livestock grazing has occurred for decades in Warner Mountain bedstraw habitat. Grazing has likely had a minor impact on the species. Warner Mountain bedstraw may be palatable but it is found in rocky scree areas and talus slopes. These types of habitats are not likely to be used by livestock, due to the lack of forage (Rittenhouse, 1991b). Incidental grazing and trampling might occur as the cattle pass through the area.
Warner Mountain bedstraw is not known to occur at any of the recreation sites in/near the project area. It is possible that dispersed recreation or off road vehicle use has impacted individual plants.
Road construction along the edge or through populations has been minimal for this species. Any opening or “edge” effect created by road construction was likely not detrimental to this species, which prefers open habitats. With the implementation of travel management, roads into occupied and suitable habitat have been closed to access. This would help minimize trampling and the potential for invasive plants introduction into occupied and suitable habitat.
Invasive plant control is on-going along roadsides and in some of the plantations found in/near the project area. No invasive plant infestations are located in Warner Mountain bedstraw habitat, and it is unlikely the species has been affected by invasive plant treatments.
With all the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects discussed above, Alternative 2 may impact individuals or habitat of Warner Mountain bedstraw, but would not likely contribute to a trend towards Federal listing or cause a loss of viability to the population or species (MIIH). With only 595.3 acres of occupied habitat occuring in project area and with the mitigations in place, the potential for Alternative 2 to contribute to cumulative effects on the species is low.
231 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Shockley’s ivesia
Alternative 2 is expected to have no direct or indirect effects to Shockley’s ivesia. Alternative 2 would, therefore, not contribute to cumulative effects on this species. A determination of No Impact was made for Shockley’s ivesia.
Blue-leaved penstemon
Over 11,000 acres of occupied blue-leaved penstemon habitat is present on the forest. Recent surveys and monitoring (2005-2008) have found additional locations of this species and more plants than were located in the early 1990’s. This suggests that past and on-going activities have not caused population declines.
Vegetation management projects, including timber sales and fuels treatments, have occurred in roughly 30 percent of the 12,200 mapped acres of habitat during the past 20-30 years. The ground disturbance caused by these activities likely impacted blue-leaved penstemon plants, but also created suitable open habitat conditions. Future vegetation management projects would be likely to impact blue-leaved penstemon the same way.
Livestock grazing has occurred for decades in blue-leaved penstemon habitat. Grazing has likely had a minor impact on the species. Blue-leaved penstemon generally grows in sparsely vegetated areas where either no grazing or light grazing occurs (Wooley, 1993). The species does not appear to be palatable to either domestic livestock or wild herbivores, and little evidence exists of more than incidental grazing (Wooley, 1993).
Blue-leaved penstemon is not known to occur at any of the recreation sites in the project area. On-going recreation impacts in these areas are likely to consist of trampling and occasional picking of flowers. It is possible that dispersed recreation and off road vehicle use has impacted individual plants in other areas.
Road construction bisected populations and removed an estimated 0.5 acres (<1 percent) of the habitat. Any opening and “edge” effect created by road construction was likely not detrimental to this species, which prefers open habitats. With the implementation of travel management, roads into occupied and suitable habitat have been closed to access. This would help minimize trampling and the potential for invasive plant introduction into occupied and suitable habitat.
Invasive plant control is on-going along roadsides and in some of the plantations found near the project area. This includes manual control and spot spraying of herbicides. Approximately 3.5 acres of invasive plant infestations are located in blue-leaved penstemon habitat. Manual control and spot spraying are both selective treatments that are likely to have minimal impacts on the species. Individual plants may be affected by trampling or inadvertent spray.
With all the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects discussed above, Alternative 2 may impact individuals or habitat of blue-leaved penstemon, but would not likely contribute to a trend towards Federal listing or cause a loss of viability to the population or species (MIIH). With the mitigations in place, the potential for Alternative 2 to contribute to cumulative effects on the species is low.
Whitebark pine
Approximately 8,400 acres of occupied whitebark pine habitat can be found on the forest. Due to the recent addition of this species to the R6 sensitive species plant list, extensive surveys for this species has not been completed.
232 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Vegetation management projects, including timber sales and fuels treatments have occurred within occupied and suitable habitat for this species over the past 20-30 years. Since whitebark pine is a higher elevation species, the higher elevation occupied habitat has probably only seen disturbance is terms of wildland fires due to accessibility issues. The majority of disturbance to the species would be in the lower elevation habitat that is within a closer proximity to roads and other desirable tree species. These disturbances include timber sale, where selective thinning to remove conifer species, has occurred. Very little prescribed fire has occurred within occupied habitat at the lower elevation band.
The largest threat over the past 20 years to whitebark pine has been from the mountain pine beetle. The mountain pine beetle has caused extensive mortality in the mature trees of this species. The mortality caused by the mountain pine beetle has created openings in the forest canopies. These openings are serving as nurseries for various tree species, including whitebark pine.
Livestock grazing has occurred for decades in whitebark pine habitat. Grazing has likely had a minor impact on the species. This species is not palatable to livestock and generally grows in habitats with minimal forage to attract livestock. Trampling of individual plants may have occurred.
Whitebark pine is known to occur at one of the recreation sites in the project area. Habitat may have been altered during construction of facilities at the developed recreation sites. On-going recreation impacts in these areas are likely to be minor and may consist of seedlings/saplings trampling. It is possible that dispersed recreation and off road vehicle use has impacted individual trees in other areas.
Road construction has occurred within occupied habitat, mostly those areas within the lower elevation band. With the implementation of travel management, roads into occupied and suitable habitat have been closed to access. This would help minimize trampling and the potential for invasive plant introduction into occupied and suitable habitat.
Invasive plant control is on-going along roadsides and in some of the plantations found in/near the project area. No invasive plant infestations are located in whitebark pine habitat, and it is unlikely the species has been affected by invasive plant treatments.
With all the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects discussed above, Alternative 2 would have multiple impacts on whitebark pine. Due to mitigation measures, Alternative 2 would have no direct or indirect impacts on live, mature trees. Therefore, Alternative 2 would not contribute to cumulative effects on live, mature trees. Due to mitigation measures, Alternative 2 would have minimal direct or indirect impacts on seedlings and saplings in the short term. Therefore, Alternative 2 may impact seedlings or saplings of whitebark pine, but would not likely contribute to a trend towards Federal listing or cause a loss of viability to the population or species (MIIH). In the long-term, the proposed activities would benefit whitebark pine because of the reduction in conifer competition due to harvest and thinning, the opportunity to introduce prescribed fire in areas where live, mature trees are dead and seedling/sapling regeneration is poor, and the opportunity to plant whitebark pine seedlings.
Bryophytes and Lichens
Alternative 2 would have no direct or indirect effects on bryophytes or lichens (Botany Report Table 1). Alternative 2 would, therefore, not contribute to cumulative effects on these species. A determination of No Impact was made for bryophytes or lichens.
233 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Fungi
There is little to no information about the abundance and distribution of Hygrophorus caeruleus or umbrella false-morel in the project area. Over 2,000 acres of mixed conifer forest occur in/adjacent to the project area and could contain potential habitat.
Past vegetation management projects, including timber sales and fuel treatments, may have occurred in habitat for these fungi. The ground disturbance caused by these activities would likely have a negative effect. Canopy opening caused by these activities may also have negatively impacted habitat for Hygrophorus caeruleus, or umbrella false-morel. Future vegetation management projects would be likely to impact these two species the same way.
With the implementation of travel management, roads into occupied and suitable habitat have been closed to access. This would help minimize trampling and the potential for invasive plant introduction into occupied and suitable habitat.
The effects of road construction, livestock grazing, recreation, and invasive plant management would likely be minor.
With all the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects discussed above, Alternative 2 may impact individuals or habitat of Hygrophorus caeruleus or umbrella false-morel, but would not likely contribute to a trend towards Federal listing or cause a loss of viability to the population or species (MIIH). Since these species are not known to occur in project area, the potential for Alternative 2 to contribute to cumulative effects on these species is low.
Invasive Plant Species The current, ongoing, and foreseeable future activities in the project area with potential to affect invasive plants include commercial and pre-commercial thinning and prescribed burning. These projects would increase the amount of open disturbed habitat available for infestation and heighten the chance for introduction of invasive plant seeds from vehicles and equipment in the short-term. In the long-term, these projects would reduce the probability of a future high severity fire, which creates invasive plant habitat.
Continuation of the Forest Service road maintenance program is expected to occur. Blading the road would create additional invasive plant habitat. However, coordination between the road crew and the invasive plant program would reduce this possibility (Refer to Fremont-Winema National Forests Invasive Species Prevention Practices and LRMP Standards listed above). Road usage, by government and private, would continue. Every time a vehicle enters National Forest System lands, there is a possibility that vehicle carries invasive plant seed with it. By keeping the roads as free of invasive plants as possible, the chance of spreading existing invasive plants would be reduced.
Continued livestock grazing and recreation have the ability to introduce new invasive plant species to the area and to spread existing sites. Monitoring and keeping areas of high use free of invasive plant species would likely reduce the potential both introduction and spread of invasive plants. Therefore, the effects of livestock grazing and recreation would be minor.
With all the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects discussed above, Alternative 2 would have a risk of introducing invasive plants within the project area as compared to the Alternative 1 (No Action). Due to a lack of invasive plant species present within the project area, the required LRMP invasive species prevention standards, recommended Fremont-Winema Prevention Practices, and mitigation measures, the proposed actions under Alternative 2 would result in a low cumulative affects to invasive plants.
234 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Compliance with LRMP and Other Relevant Laws, Regulations, Policies and Plans
Sensitive Plant Species Under Alternative 2, the proposed actions (with appropriate mitigation measures) would comply with FSM 2670.32 and 2670.5 (USDA Forest Service, 2007) and the LRMP Standards for Botanical Species (USDA Forest Service, 2011a) by ensuring viable populations for all sensitive plant species are maintained or enhanced within occupied or suitable habitat in the project area.
Invasive Plant Species Under the No Action alternative, no proposed vegetation management activities would take place. The Regulatory Framework associated with invasive plants is associated with various forest management activities. Therefore, the No Action alternative would neither comply nor violate any Regulatory Framework.
Under Alternative 2, the proposed actions would comply with all associated Regulatory Framework (FSM 2903.04 (USDA Forest Service, 2011c), Executive order 13112 of Feb. 3, 1999 (Federal Register: Volume 64, Number 25), the Record of Decision for the Pacific Northwest Regional Invasive Plant Program Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants Environmental Impact Statement (USDA Forest Service, 2005), and the April 2011 Record of Decision for the Fremont-Winema National Forest Invasive Plant Treatment EIS (USDA Forest Service, 2011b) for invasive plants because of the inclusion of the LRMP Invasive Plant Prevention Standards.
Transportation Analysis Historically, the Fremont National Forest emphasized timber management. A large road system resulted in order to gain access to timber and other forest resources. Timber sale revenue paid for the majority of the road construction and maintenance. Today, however, timber harvest has declined and the amount of road maintenance is limited to available appropriated funds, and timber sale fees and contract requirements. This change in forest management has severely reduced the Forest operating budget and the ability to maintain an extensive roads system.
Regulatory Framework The LRMP provides direction regarding resource management activities and establishes management standards and guidelines. The following LRMP direction pertains to road management: • The LRMP sets as a goal, “a safe and economical transportation system providing efficient access for the movement of people and materials” (p.51). • The transportation system will serve long-term multiple resources … (with)… the minimum system necessary to provide access for the activities authorized under management area direction (p. 116). • Overall density for roaded areas of the Forest will not exceed 2.5 miles per square mile (p.116). • All system roads will be operated and maintained to protect the resources, perpetuate the intended road management objective, and promote safety (p.116).
Forest Level Roads Analysis An Interdisciplinary Team developed a Forest-level roads analysis in 2002 for the Fremont National Forest. The Forest Roads Analysis Team produced a forest roads analysis report and transportation atlas documenting the six-step interdisciplinary process and recommendations resulting from the process for Maintenance Level (ML) 3, 4 and 5 roads. Level 3, 4, and 5 roads are maintained for low clearance, passenger vehicle access with the highest level of travel comfort at Level 5. These roads form the main or
235 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
“backbone” road system for the Fremont-Winema National Forests. Where appropriate, recommendations are made for future actions on this system that would reduce risks of unacceptable environmental disturbance and increase the benefits provided by these roads.
Project Level Travel Analysis Travel analysis for the CMH Project began in July of 2013 at an interdisciplinary team (IDT) meeting. On November 6th of 2013, the travel analysis team met to review, analyze and determine road-by-road management recommendations for the CMH Project area. The specific road management recommendations made by the travel analysis group are displayed in the Crooked Mud Honey Travel Analysis Report found in the project record. The results of this analysis are recommendations to close 43.2 miles and decommission 29.2 miles of Forest system roads within the project (Appendix E).
These road management activities are described below.
Road Closure Road Closures are identified by an interdisciplinary team to reduce impacts to Forest resources by restricting vehicular use of certain system roads. If these roads are used under the timber sale as haul routes, they are closed following harvest/treatment activities.
Road closure is performed by constructing barricades of rock, earth berms or logs, or a combination of any of these near the beginning of a road. Closure materials are usually acquired onsite, if possible. Drainage structures on these roads are maintained to properly functioning condition prior to closure. Closed roads are designated as “Operational Maintenance Level 1” in the Forest transportation system database following their implementation. Closing roads is dependent upon available funding and, therefore, is subject to prioritization typically based on resource impacts caused by the road.
Road Decommissioning Road decommissioning effectively removes the road from vehicular access and is meant to allow full revegetation and hydrologic function of the roadway’s footprint on the land.
Road decommissioning can be a collection of actions ranging from surface scarification or subsoiling with the road prism left intact, to a complete recontouring of the road prism back to a natural slope. For all roads being decommissioned, drainage structures are removed and their sites rehabilitated. Typically, revegetation is accomplished through natural seeding or tree seedling planting of the former roadway.
Following implementation, decommissioned roads are designated as “Decommissioned” under the “Route Status” attribute for the subject road in the Forest transportation system database. Historical data for each road continues to reside within the database.
The Team also made recommendations to change road maintenance levels on several project roads other than those associated with some of the road closure/decommissioning recommendations (ML 2 to ML 1). These recommendations were to change 6.1 miles from ML 1 to ML 2 and 7.7 miles from ML 2 to ML 3. These ML change recommendations affect 13.8 miles of Forest system roads.
236 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Affected Environment
Existing Condition The Forest Service roads database indicated that approximately 293.5 miles of Forest system roads occur within the CMH Project boundary. Existing road surface types include 12 miles of pavement, 67.2 miles of aggregate and 214.3 miles of native material. Of the approximate 293.5 miles of National Forest System roads in the project area; 163.1 miles are Maintenance Level 1 roads, 101.9 miles are Maintenance Level 2 roads and 16.5 miles are Maintenance Level 3 roads. Maintenance Level 4 roads total 12 miles within the project boundary.
Table 100. Current Conditions Road Maintenance Levels in CMH Project CURRENT CONDITIONS Sum of MILES 1 - BASIC CUSTODIAL CARE (CLOSED) 163.12 2 - HIGH CLEARANCE VEHICLES 101.93 3 - SUITABLE FOR PASSENGER CARS 16.47 4 - MODERATE DEGREE OF USER COMFORT 11.96 Grand Total 293.48
The following definitions of operational maintenance levels (“Guidelines for Road Maintenance Levels” U.S. Forest Service, 2005) apply to forest system roads within the project area.
Maintenance Level 4 Assigned to roads that provide a moderate degree of user comfort and convenience at moderate travel speeds. Most roads are double lane and aggregate surfaced. However, some roads may be single lane. Some roads may be paved and/or dust abated.
These roads have the following attributes: • Subject to the requirements of Highway Safety Act. • Have moderate traffic volume and speeds • May include some developed recreation roads. • Provide drainage via culverts. • Usually are collectors Maintenance Level 3 Assigned to roads open and maintained for travel by prudent drivers in a standard passenger car. User comfort and convenience are low priorities. Roads in this maintenance level are typically low speed, single lane with turnouts, and spot surfacing. Some roads may be fully surfaced with either native or processed material.
These roads have the following attributes: • Subject to the requirements of Highway Safety Act. • Roads have low, to moderate, traffic volume. • A combination of dips and culverts provide drainage. • May include some dispersed recreation roads. • Potholing or washboarding may occur.
237 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Maintenance Level 2 Assigned to roads open for use by high-clearance vehicles. Passenger car traffic is not a consideration. Traffic is normally minor, usually consisting of one or a combination of administrative, permitted, dispersed recreation, or other specialized uses. Log haul may occur at this level.
These roads have the following attributes: • Roads have low traffic volume and low speed. • Typically local roads. • Typically connect collectors or other local roads. • Dips are the preferred drainage treatment. • Not subject to the requirements of the Highway Safety Act. • Surface smoothness is not a consideration. • Not suitable for passenger cars.
Maintenance Level 1 Assigned to intermittent service roads during the time they are closed to vehicular traffic. The closure period must exceed 1 year. Basic custodial maintenance is performed to keep damage to adjacent resources to an acceptable level and to perpetuate the road to facilitate future management activities. Emphasis is normally given to maintaining drainage facilities and runoff patterns. Planned road deterioration may occur at this level. Roads receiving level 1 maintenance may be of any type, class or construction standard, and may be managed at any other maintenance level during the time they are open for traffic. However, while being maintained at level 1, they are closed to vehicular traffic, but may be open and suitable for non-motorized uses.
These roads have the following attributes: • Vehicular traffic is eliminated, including administrative traffic. • Physically blocked or entrance is disguised. • Not subject to the requirements of the Highway Safety Act. • Maintenance is done only to minimize resource impacts. • No maintenance other than a condition survey may be required so long as no potential exists for resource damage.
Current Road Density Current Forest Service total road density for the planning area is 3.7 mi2. Road density is a measure of the miles of road per square mile of land base.
Environmental Consequences The transportation system located within the boundaries of the project was analyzed for direct and indirect effects. The timeframe for which the effects to the transportation system were analyzed is the expected duration of time for completion of all project treatments (5 – 10 years). This boundary and timeframe encompass the most immediate effects from the transportation actions that support the proposed management activities. The analyses of effects to the transportation system are defined as both short and long term. Short term for this analysis is the end of one field season and the beginning of the next. Long term is the duration of time until completion of project treatments (up to 10 years). The direct and indirect effects of the CMH Project have been analyzed to determine if there would be any effect to road management objectives, road maintenance standards and motorized vehicle use.
238 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Alternative 1 - No Action Under the No Action Alternative, there would be no comprehensive management activities to recondition and maintain ML 1, 2, 3 and 4 road systems within the CMH Project area. As in the recent past, there would be occasional opportunities to replace or upgrade road/stream crossings and improve road surface drainage as funding allowed and need was identified. The lack of road maintenance activity on project roads would likely contribute to deteriorating conditions on those roads. No new or temporary road construction would take place. None of the CMH travel analysis recommendations to change maintenance levels, close, or decommission Forest roads would be authorized for implementation.
Since there would be no road management activities implemented under Alternative 1, there are no expected direct or indirect effects to road management objectives, road maintenance standards, or motorized vehicle use. Since this alternative proposes no actions, there are no cumulative effects to the Forest Service transportation system.
Alternative 2 - Proposed Action
Road Management Activities in Support of Proposed Project Treatments Alternative 2 proposes use of up to 293.5 miles of Forest system roads in support of project treatments such as timber sale log/chip haul, fuels reduction activities and related road maintenance requirements. No new permanent road construction is proposed in support of the Proposed Action. All road activities associated with the CMH Project would follow the BMPs to reduce or eliminate resource damage. The BMPs are found in Appendix D.
Timber Sale Road Maintenance Road maintenance activities are designed to bring roads to safe haul standards. They are performed during three general timeframes within the life span of the sale: pre-haul, during haul, and post haul. • Pre-haul road maintenance prepares the project road system for heavy truck traffic related to the sale. • During haul maintenance sustains optimum road conditions favorable to continued haul activity to avoid road or resource damage. • Post haul maintenance ensures that road elements within the sale area and on the haul routes within the National Forest are returned to their full operational maintenance level standards.
Timber sale road maintenance activities generally consist of surface blading, ditch pulling, light to medium roadside brushing, culvert cleaning, small quantity cutbank slump removal, and maintenance of existing drainage structures (i.e. water bars, drain dips).
This may be the only opportunity, for a substantial period of time, to perform road maintenance on ML 1 and 2 roads within the project area. Timber sale road maintenance activities are designed to effectively drain storm waters from existing roadways, thus reducing or eliminating sediment delivery to streams and lowering the potential risk of culvert and fill failures both during, and for a number of years following, project treatments. As such, there are beneficial effects expected from maintenance of the potential 293.4 miles of road used for log haul under the Proposed Action.
Temporary Roads While no permanent system roads would be constructed, temporary roads within or adjacent to individual units would be needed to access the treatment areas under Alternative 2. Temporary roads are built to facilitate ground-based harvest systems for the purpose of removing forest products from a treated stand
239 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
more efficiently. While every effort is made to utilize old skid trails and landings, construction of new temporary roads is likely to be needed to implement the action alternative.
As per standard Timber Sale or Stewardship contract provisions, the location of temporary roads would require approval by the Forest Service prior to construction. The Forest Service would approve the exact temporary road location including the flagged clearing limits that define the extent of construction. Temporary roads would be built to lowest possible standards (minimum widths) to facilitate timber harvest. Following final use, temporary roads would be obliterated under the BMP guidelines (Appendix D).
There are no expected effects to road management objectives, road maintenance standards, or motorized vehicle use resulting from the construction of temporary roads. Temporary roads would be created for implementation of the proposed action and would be decommissioned after use. Therefore, temporary roads would not add to the long term road system density.
Travel Analysis Recommendations As described in the CMH Travel Analysis Report road management recommendations to change maintenance levels, and to close and decommission roads within the CMH Project area may be authorized for implementation under the Proposed Action. The Decision maker may choose to authorize implementation of none, any, or all of these recommendations. Implementation of selected recommendations would be subject to funding availability and mitigation identified for each activity in Chapter 2 of the EA.
If all of the road management recommendations are authorized for implementation and are funded, approximately 43.2 miles of road closures would occur, while approximately 29.2 miles of Forest system roads would be decommissioned. This would reduce legal public road access for such activities as recreation, wood cutting, hunting/gathering, etc. within the CMH Project area by around 31%.
Table 101. Results of Implementing Proposed Changes to Road Maintenance Levels in CMH Project FINAL CONDITIONS Sum of MILES 1 - BASIC CUSTODIAL CARE (CLOSED) 173.81 1 - BASIC CUSTODIAL CARE (Decom) 29.23 2 - HIGH CLEARANCE VEHICLES 54.31 3 - SUITABLE FOR PASSENGER CARS 24.16 4 - MODERATE DEGREE OF USER COMFORT 11.96 Grand Total 293.48
The reduction in road miles due to decommissioning and ML changes may aid in the reduction of resource damage, and by removing roads no longer needed for resource management, meets LRMP direction to reduce overall road densities on Forest Service land, and within the affected watersheds.
Since decommissioned roads should no longer need road maintenance actions, the 29.2 miles of decommissioning would contribute to an overall reduction in road maintenance needs Forest-wide. Closing 43.2 miles of Forest system roads may also reduce maintenance needs by placing them in temporary storage condition, but remaining available for future opening and use for resource management. The refinement of the NF road system and reduction in open road miles would create changes to the Fremont-Winema NF’s Motor Vehicle Use Map (MVUM).
240 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
A total reduction of 39.9 miles of roads open to all motorized vehicles is proposed through closing or decommissioning to provide for reductions in potential resource damage. Some short-term inconveniences to Forest users would be expected while they become familiar with MVUM changes; however, no long-term effects to accessibility as identified through the MVUM are anticipated.
Cumulative Effects Since this alternative proposes no additional permanent road construction, there would be no future or cumulative adverse impacts to the watershed from new roads.
Summary Table 102. summarizes the proposed changes to road maintenance levels and open road mileage within the project associated with each Alternative.
Table 102. Summary of effects from each Alternative on Road Systems. Current Condition / Measurement Indicator Alternative 2 Alternative 1 Miles of Forest system roads within the Project 293.5 264.3 ML 4 12 12 ML 3 16.5 24.2 ML 2 101.9 54.3 ML 1 (closed) 163.1 173.8 Forest system road miles decommissioned n/a 29.2 MVUM miles by designation ------Roads Closed to Public Use 163.1 173.8 Roads Open to All Motor Vehicles 130.3 90.4 Project Area total road density (FS roads only) 3.7 3.3 Upper Camas Creek Watershed 3.1 3.1 Lower Camas Creek Watershed 1.6 0.2 Upper Crooked Creek Watershed 2.8 2.6 Middle Thomas Creek Watershed 0.6 0.6 McDowell Creek Watershed 0.3 0.0 Lower Cox Creek Watershed 1.4 1.4 Lower Drake Creek Watershed 0.0 0.0 Middle Honey Creek Watershed 4.1 3.3 Upper Drake Creek Watershed 0.1 0.0 Upper Honey Creek Watershed 5.0 4.4 Mud Creek Watershed 5.2 4.9 Lower Crooked Creek Watershed 2.8 2.8
241 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Recreation and Scenic Quality Recreation in the CMH Project area is both developed and dispersed in nature. The public uses the CMH Project area for numerous recreational activities including camping, hiking, horseback riding, snowmobiling, hunting, and scenic driving. The number of developed recreation facilities for the size of the area (density) is relatively high compared to other areas of the Fremont-Winema National Forest with a total of twelve developed campsites in three campgrounds. Dispersed activities tend to be more often used in this area, especially along the Crane Mountain and Fremont National Recreation Trails. This analysis will focus on the effects of the Proposed Action and other alternatives on developed and dispersed recreation. This analysis will also include potential effects to the visual integrity of Management Area 6 within the project area.
Overview of Issues Addressed Recreational opportunities within the CMH Project area can be categorized into two categories: developed or dispersed. Issues which will be addressed are long term and short term impacts on recreational use and the potential impacts on scenic quality and visual integrity.
Affected Environment
Existing Condition
Developed Recreation There are twelve developed recreation sites within the project area ranging in a developmental scale of 1 to 4. Developmental Scale is an evaluation of the services provided and the intent of those services. The Recreation Site Development Scale ranges from 0 to 5 with 0 having no site modification and 5 having extensive site modification. The table below breaks down the developed recreation opportunity by type. Figure 42. Campsite in Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project Table 103. Recreation Opportunities by Development Scale within Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project Recreation Facility Names Development Scale* Number of Facilities Opportunity Can Springs, Vee Lake, Campground 3 3 and Mud Creek Aspen Cabin and Drake Recreation Rental 3 2 Peak Lookout Mill and Swale 1 2 Trailhead Walker and South Fork 3 2 Crooked Creek Sno-Park Camas 4 1 Day Use Area North Warner Viewpoint 2 1 Hang Gliding Launch Tague Butte + 1 *Development scale is taken from the 2008 Recreation Facilities Analysis (RFA) for the Fremont-Winema National Forest (USDA 2008) +Tague’s Butte Hang Gliding Launch is not listed in the 2008 RFA.
242 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
The two recreation rentals and Camas Sno-Park receive the most use of the developed recreation sites within the project area. Aspen Cabin and Drake Peak Lookout are rented consistently throughout the open season, typically June through October. Use of all facilities, with the exception of the Sno-Park, occurs primarily in the summer camping and fall hunting seasons. The Camas Sno-Park is used heavily throughout the winter when conditions are conducive to snowmobiling and cross country skiing.
The developed recreation areas are regularly surveyed for hazard trees, surface hazards, and general visitor/user safety issues. The forest condition surrounding the developed recreation areas are similar to the general condition of the area.
Dispersed Recreation Dispersed recreation activities tend to be more common in the CMH Project area. During hunting season, this area is heavily used for dispersed camping and big game hunting. Along with numerous known dispersed camping sites, the CMH Project area includes two National Recreation Trails: Crane Mountain and Fremont.
The Crane Mountain National Recreation Trail runs from the California border north to approximately ½ mile west of the South Fork Crooked Creek Trailhead where it connects to the Fremont National Recreation Trail. Approximately 10 miles of the Crane Mountain National Recreation Trail are within the project area.
The Fremont National Recreation Trail (also known as the Southern Oregon Intertie Trail) travels through the Fremont-Winema National Forest from Vee Lake Campground in the project area to Yamsey Mountain on the Silver Lake Ranger District. This trail is the highest used trail on the Eastside of the Fremont-Winema National Forest and is open to horse, hiking, and portions to mountain bicycles. Approximately 18 miles of the Fremont National Recreation Trail are within the project area.
In addition to the summer recreation trails, the area is a popular winter recreation area. There are approximately 34 miles of designated snow trails in the project area accessible from Camas Sno-Park. These snow trails are open to snowmobile, cross country skiing, and snowshoeing.
Scenic Quality Areas which need to be considered for management activity impacts on visual and scenic quality are all within Management Area (MA) 6. The CMH Project area encompasses approximately 12,365 acres of MA 6. Two corridors are identified as MA6A: Forest Road 3615 from Highway 140 north to North Warner Viewpoint and the area immediately adjacent to Highway 140. These two areas total approximately 3,703 acres. The remaining approximate 8,662 acres are within MA6B.
Desired Condition
Recreation Management goals in the LRMP include several pertaining to recreation and the enjoyment of our National Forest lands by visitors. The LRMP also provided standards for the management of recreation resources, specifically those within MA 13 – developed recreation. MA 13 only encompasses the area within the designated recreation site (i.e. within the campground). These are point locations rather than areas. There are twelve developed recreation sites within the project area. The LRMP requires vegetation management plans for timber harvests and prescribed fires within developed recreation sites. Commercial grazing operations are not permitted within MA 13.
243 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Scenic Quality Chapter 4 and Appendix 4 of the Fremont LRMP identify the visual corridors and the Scenic Quality Objectives (SQO) for the Forest. The goal in the LRMP for MA 6 is to “manage the visual corridor to retain or create the desired forest character in an attractive sequential arrangement over time and space”. Areas within MA6A are to be managed to retain high to moderate scenic quality aspects while areas in MA6B are to be managed intensively for timber, but with consideration of scenic quality. Scenic areas within the MA6A throughout the Forest were categorized into three retention categories: foreground retention, foreground partial retention, and middle ground partial retention.
Crane Mountain and Fremont National Recreation Trail
Management activities will “ensure the visual integrity of the landscape in the foreground viewing zones...” (114)
Highway 140 - - Foreground Retention
“This management intensity provides that….foreground areas adjacent to the highways… will be managed to provide attractive, natural-appearing forest character. Forest management activities…will not be visually evident. Road and trail frontage: created openings shall not exceed 300 lineal feet/mile…” (153)
Forest Road 3615 - - Foreground Partial Retention
“This management intensity provides that the… forest roads…adjacent to developed recreation sites, high-use dispersed sites, and specified trails will be managed to provide an attractive, natural-appearing forest character. Forest management activities…will be noticeable, but subordinate to the characteristic landscape. Visual contrast of management…will be minimized…”(153)
Scenic areas within MA6B were not further classified, but simply identified on the Alternative F Map in the FEIS of the LRMP.
Fremont-Winema Travel Management In 2008, the U.S. Forest Service published directives in the Federal Register for governing the use of motorized vehicles on NFS lands based on the 2005 travel management rule (USDA 2008a). In July 2010, the Fremont-Winema National Forest Travel Management Decision was signed and published, which designated approximately 6,426 miles of roads and 174 miles of trails for public motorized use. In accordance with the rule, motorized access for dispersed camping (MADC) would be allowed within 300 feet on one or both sides of a portion of designated roads; however access would be confined to existing routes to existing campsites (USDA 2010). The Travel Management Decision Notice (DN) lists 3,554 miles of roads for MADC, of which approximately 69 miles are within the CMH Project area.
Environmental Consequences
Methodology To compare the effects of each alternative to the recreation and scenic quality of the project area, this report uses a combination of local knowledge, best available science, GIS, and data from the National Visitor Use Monitoring (NVUM) program. The NVUM program is completed in five year cycles and helps the Forest Service manage its recreation resources in such a way that best meets the needs of visitors while maintaining the quality of the natural resource base (USDA 2012)
244 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Incomplete and Unavailable Information NVUM is a relatively new program. Initial trials occurred from 2000 to 2003 nationwide. Implementation began in 2005. Trend information regarding recreation visitation is not yet available; rather, this data provides a ‘snapshot’ of annual visitation on National Forests (USDA 2012). The information presented in the NVUM survey results is valid and applicable at the forest, regional, and national level, it is not designed to be accurate at the district or specific site level. The most recent NVUM Report for the Fremont National Forest is from data collected in 2008. The third round of data collection occurred in FY 2013; however, the final report has not been completed at the time of this analysis.
Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis For the purposes of this effects analysis, short term effects are those effects likely to occur in the first five years (or implementation period). Long term effects are those likely to last beyond five years or occur after the initial five years.
Past, Present, and Foreseeable Activities Relevant to Cumulative Effects Analysis Past and ongoing actions which have/are impacted recreation and scenic quality in the project area when combined with the potential effects of Proposed Action include recreational user conflicts created from commercial and noncommercial timber harvest activities, past fires, invasive weed treatments, other recreational users, and grazing. The primary past events affecting conditions in the project area are the Grassy Fire, timber harvest, and the North Warner Sage/Shrub Project. These past events impacted the area, but will not be considered cumulative effects for recreation or scenic quality as the effects of these activities on recreation and scenic quality were short term in nature and do not overlap in time and space with the proposed treatments of the CMH Project as related to recreation or scenic areas.
The primary ongoing activities currently effecting conditions in the project area are developed and dispersed recreational use, grazing, firewood cutting, and road maintenance. The ongoing activities in combination with the Proposed Action may have cumulative effects which will be discussed within each alternative.
Climate Change and Recreation Climate change has the potential to impact many elements including how we use and enjoy our National Forests. “Leisure-based activities are one dimension within the larger human (social) system that are likely to be affected by climate change.” (Hunt and Kolman 2012) The length of a recreation season depends on the type of recreation and weather. Warmer springs and falls would extend the summer recreation season; however would shorten the winter recreation season. Snow sports and fishing are the major recreational opportunities within the project area that are at risk of being impacted by changes to the climate.
Alternative 1 – No Action
Direct Effects There are no direct effects associated with Alternative 1, the No Action Alternative. No management activities would occur under Alternative 1. The recreation options and limitations would continue at current levels, as would the management of the recreation resources. Scenic quality would remain the same and continue to change through natural processes.
245 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Indirect Effects There are limited indirect effects associated with the No Action Alternative. The indirect effects include the continued maturity of the forest to levels that could increase the risk of fire. Increased fire danger/risk impacts the recreation experience thru limitation to the use of campfires and in the event of an actual fire, area closures. There are no indirect effects to scenic quality with the No Action Alternative, the scenic viewshed would continue to mature at the natural levels and retain a natural appearance.
Cumulative Effects There are no cumulative effects associated with Alternative 1. No direct effects exist and indirect effects do not overlap in time or space with any residual effects from past projects or expected effects from ongoing activities with regards to recreation and scenic quality.
Summary of Effects Alternative 1 does not address the purpose and need for action as stated in Chapter 1 of this EA. Alternative 1 would eliminate the direct effects associated with the Proposed Action; however, there are potential indirect effects of no action which could impact recreational users. Alternative 1 would have no effect on scenic quality.
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action
Direct and Indirect Effects
Recreation
Developed Recreation Direct effects of Alternative 2, the Proposed Action, on developed recreation are short term in nature and limited in scale and scope. Most of the direct effects would impact only the area immediately surrounding the active units Figure 43. Developed Campsite within Crooked (timber or noncommercial) for the timeframe that that unit Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project was being actively managed. These effects include:
- Nosie from logging operations, - Heavier logging truck traffic on roads used for to access the developed recreation sites, and - Closures of specific areas for the recreational user’s safety when logging operations are working in the area. Other than the removal of hazard trees, Alternative 2 would not impact areas within MA 13, designated developed recreation sites. The Alternative 2 does include the maintenance of the road system which would increase the ease of access to the developed recreation sites.
There are no indirect effects of Alternative 2 on developed recreation because all impacts to developed recreation would occur at the same time and in the same space as the activities.
Dispersed Recreation The NVUM survey results from the 2008 data collection show that most recreation on the Fremont National Forest13 is dispersed in nature. This is also true for the CMH Project area.
13 NVUM Surveys separate the Fremont National Forest from the Winema National Forest.
246 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 104. Fremont National Forest Recreational Visitor Use Survey, Top 10 Activities by Participation Percentage (USDA 2012) Activity % Participation Avg. Hours Spent Recreating Driving for Pleasure 62.0 3.3 Fishing 40.8 3.9 Hiking/Walking 37.5 3.2 Relaxing 36.5 19.8 Hunting 35.3 17.9 Viewing Natural 29.2 3.0 Features Viewing Wildlife 26.8 4.2 Picnicking 14.1 10.1 Developed Camping 10.7 52.0 Visiting Historic Sites 7.4 0.0
The direct effects of Alternative 2 on dispersed recreation are also short term in nature and limited in scale and scope, however, they are more difficult to quantify as dispersed recreation is not monitored or managed to the level of developed recreation. Dispersed recreation happens outside of developed recreation sites on all management areas of the forest. In recreation, this is considered GFA, General Forest Area. Recreation within GFA is secondary to the management of the other resources and impacts of management activities are considered part of the “forest experience”. The direct effects would be similar to those of the developed recreation: noise from logging operations, heavier logging truck traffic on roads used for access or scenic driving, and closures of specific areas for the recreational user’s safety when logging operations are working in the area, all are short term effects and limited in location, scale, and scope.
The indirect effects of Alternative 2 on dispersed recreation include the potential increase of fishing opportunities following the proposed stream restoration work and the potential increase of wildlife viewing and hunting opportunities following the proposed prescribed fire and other noncommercial treatment of meadows, sage and shrub lands, and juniper woodlands which have the goal to increase wildlife habitat.
Alternative 2 includes the maintenance of the road system which would have an indirect effect by increasing the ease of access to the trailheads and the GFA. Alternative 2 also includes changes to the road system within the project area. These road changes may have an indirect effect on dispersed recreation. Road closures and decommissioning would reduce vehicle access for dispersed recreation in the GFA, including Motorized Access for Dispersed Camping (MADC). The designation of MADC allows users to drive up to 300 feet off of designated roads on one or both sides for the intent of camping; however access is confined to existing routes to existing campsites. MADC is designated within the GFA across multiple management areas.
Currently within the CMH Project area, there are 69 miles of forest roads identified as MADC on the Motor Vehicle Use Map (MVUM). The recommended road closures and decommissioning would change the maintenance level and thereby remove 28 miles of this MADC. Roads proposed for decommissioning or changes in maintenance level are already deteriorating, not actually drivable, or have other resource concerns such as stream and water quality or wildlife habitat.
Forty one miles of MADC, or approximately 60%, would remain in the CMH Project area. The road recommendations would not restrict use of the GFA, but rather restrict how the recreational users access the area. All of the CMH Project area would remain open to dispersed recreation. A few hunting camps
247 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
would no longer have motorized access to the site; however the site would still be open for recreational use.
Scenic Quality The direct effects of the proposed action on scenic quality would be mitigated through the BMPs and project design criteria. There may be areas within MA6A where evidence of management activities are visible, however this would be short term and minimized with mitigation measures. In accordance with the Fremont LRMP, timber harvests may be planned in foreground retention area if they would create or maintain desired visual characteristics (153). The goal of the Alternative 2 is to restore the forests to a more historical level which could create and/or maintain the natural characteristics sought after with regards to scenic quality. Mitigation measures would not be required within MA6B; however considerations may be taken to minimize the effects to visuals during and immediately after the management activities.
The indirect effects of the proposed action on scenic quality are minimal. There may be reduced recreationalists participating in scenic driving immediately following the activities in Alternative 2; however this effect would be short term. There are no long term indirect effects.
Cumulative Effects There are no cumulative effects of past, ongoing, or foreseeable actions in combination the proposed action with regards to recreation or scenic quality. There is no overlap in time and space of effects from past actions with the proposed action. The current ongoing actions are consistent with the LRMP and include recreational activities. There are no foreseeable future actions for the project area.
Compliance with Forest Plan and Other Relevant Laws, Regulations, Policies and Plans Alternative 2 is compliant with the LRMP and all other relevant laws with regards to recreation and scenic quality if the BMPs and other design criteria are used to minimize effects on scenic quality. This is especially true in MA6A, where visual quality is a management priority according to the LRMP.
Summary of Effects With regards to recreation and scenic quality, Alternative 2 would have minimal direct effects, all limited to the immediate area of the management activities. The area of effects would move throughout the project area as the various units are receiving treatment and be limited in timeframe to when that unit is be actively treated/managed. After the unit is treated, there would be no long term direct effects.
The recommended road changes could have an indirect effect on recreation. “The ability of the visiting public to move around within the National Forest transportation system is key to many of the recreation activities available. Most resource based recreation activity in the United States occurs within close proximity to a transportation system” (NSRE 2000-2002). The road maintenance that is part of Alternative 2 would increase the ease of access on the ML2-4 roads within the project area. Ease of access would help diversify the type of recreationalist rather than limiting recreation use to those with vehicles capable of traversing rough roads. The road recommendations would reduce the motorized access to dispersed camping, however approximately 60% of the MADC would remain designated and accessible.
248 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Wilderness, Potential Wilderness, and Inventoried Roadless Areas A discussion of Wilderness, Inventoried Roadless, Potential Wilderness, and Undeveloped lands and their extent within the CMH Project area will be discussed in the following report. The environmental effects associated with the project’s alternatives are summarized in the Environmental Effects section by land allocation.
Background From the mid-1970s through 2001 the Forest Service maintained a roadless area inventory of undeveloped lands that the agency used and updated for RARE (Roadless Area Review and Evaluation) and RARE II, and in support of the Fremont LRMP completed in 1989 for the Fremont National Forest. Throughout that time the Forest Service called these areas or map polygons “roadless areas” or “inventoried roadless areas.” With the completion of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule (RACR) in 2001 many of these areas ceased being just an inventory, and were designated as Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs), with fixed boundaries and prohibitions set by Forest Service regulation (36 CFR 294).
The terms and definitions as stated below will be used in this project-level analysis. Discussion of the four resource topics is based on current law, regulation and agency policy; as well as the Fremont LRMP.
Wilderness: A wilderness area is designated by congressional action under the Wilderness Act of 1964 and other wilderness acts. Wilderness is undeveloped Federal land to be administered to provide for the protection of these areas and the preservation of their wilderness character.
Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRA): These areas were identified in the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule in a set of inventoried roadless area maps, contained in Forest Service Roadless Area Conservation Final Environmental Impact Statement, Volume 2, dated November 2000 (or any subsequent update or revision of those maps (36 CFR 294.11)), which are held at the National headquarters office of the Forest Service. These areas were set aside through administrative rulemaking and have provisions, within the context of multiple use management, for the protection of inventoried roadless areas.
Potential Wilderness Areas (PWA): The purpose of identifying PWAs is to consider the unique values of areas that may have wilderness characteristics. Evaluating the value of recommending these areas as wilderness is not intended to be a part of project planning. Potential wilderness areas are not a land designation decision, they do not imply or impart any particular level of management direction or protection, they are not an evaluation of potential wilderness (as in FSH 1909.12 Chapter 72), and lastly they are not preliminary administrative recommendations for wilderness designation (as in FSH 1909.12 Chapter 73). The identification of PWAs does not change the administrative boundary of any Inventoried Roadless Area or any congressionally designated wilderness.
Typically, PWAs substantially overlap, and/or are contiguous with Inventoried Roadless Areas and may also be contiguous with designated wilderness. PWAs overlap Inventoried Roadless Areas only where those acres are consistent with the inventory criteria (FSH 1909.12 Chapter 71) and may extend beyond IRA and wilderness boundaries.
Other undeveloped lands: These areas have no history of harvest activity, do not contain forest roads and are not designated as a wilderness area, Inventoried Roadless Area, or evaluated as a potential wilderness area.
249 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Affected Environment
Existing Condition
Gearhart Mountain Wilderness Area This Wilderness was first given protection as a Wild Area in 1943, a Forest Service administrative designation. Congress included it as one of the original wilderness areas established under the 1964 Wilderness Act. The 1984 Oregon Wilderness Act enlarged the wilderness by 4,144 acres to its current size of 22,823 acres. The CMH Project area is entirely outside the designated area and lies approximately 27 miles to the east-southeast. The entire Gearhart Mountain Wilderness Area lies outside of the boundaries of the CMH Project area and will not be discussed further in this analysis.
Inventoried Roadless Areas
Drake-McDowell IRA Historically, the Drake-McDowell IRA consisted of sage steppe habitats conducive to the nesting and brood rearing of the greater sage grouse. Due to fire suppression activities, the sage steppe habitat has become overgrown with small diameter conifers and western juniper, reducing the function and quality of the sage steppe habitat.
Figure 44. Drake-McDowell IRA
The entire 5,388 acres of the Drake-McDowell IRA is within the CMH Project area. The Drake- McDowell IRA is identified in the LRMP as a “semi-primitive non-motorized” area. In general “semi- primitive non-motorized” areas are managed for recreational opportunities highlighting solitude and isolation from sights and sounds of others. Appendix C of the LRMP FEIS describes the “distinctive landscapes” and other “scenic resources” of the Drake-McDowell IRA including the caldera outlined by five distinct peaks and abrupt ridges. The Drake-McDowell IRA was established as for the high levels of habitat diversity, distinctive visual quality, and outstanding opportunities for solitude. These are the characteristics that will be discussed in the effects analysis.
Crane Mountain and Mt. Bidwell IRAs The Crane Mountain and Mt. Bidwell IRAs are identified in the LRMP as “semi-primitive motorized” areas. Crane Mountain IRA encompasses just over 23,000 acres, while Mt. Bidwell IRA encompasses approximately another 4,450 acres. The northern most tip of the Crane Mountain IRA is approximately 4 miles south of the southernmost edge of the project area. The Mt. Bidwell IRA is approximately 13 miles south of the project area. The Crane Mountain and Mt. Bidwell IRAs are almost contiguous with only the
250 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
FS Road 3915corridor separating them. The Crane Mountain NRT passes through the Crane Mountain IRA. This portion of the Crane Mountain NRT is open to motorized, as well as non-motorized uses. The entirety of the Crane Mountain and Mt. Bidwell IRAs lies outside of the boundaries of the CMH Project area and will not be discussed further in this analysis.
Potential Wilderness
Methods A combination of GIS modeling analysis, aerial photograph interpretation, and professional judgment was applied to determine the existence of potential wilderness areas (PWAs) within the project area. The scope of the PWA analysis included all National Forest System (NFS) acres within the CMH Project area, and all federal lands outside the project area sufficient to be considered contiguous with similar areas within it.
First screen Areas considered for evaluation as potential wilderness if it meets criteria 1 and 3, or criteria 2 and 3 as described here: 1. Areas containing 5,000 acres or more; 2. Areas containing less than 5,000 acres but can meet one or more of the following three criteria: a. Areas that can be preserved due to physical terrain and natural conditions, b. Areas that are self-contained ecosystems, such as an island, that can be effectively managed as a separate unit of the National Wilderness Preservation System, c. Areas that are contiguous to existing Wilderness, primitive areas, Administration- endorsed wilderness, or potential wilderness in other Federal ownership, regardless of their size; 3. Areas that do not contain forest roads (authorized Forest System roads) or other permanently authorized roads. The application of criteria constitutes the first screen for this analysis.
Second screen Any areas that satisfied the criteria identified in the first screen were further evaluated by applying the 11 “criteria for including improvements” found in Section 71.11 of FSH 1909.12, which states that areas may qualify for potential wilderness even though they include the following types of areas or features: 1. Airstrips and heliports. 2. Cultural treatments involving plantations or plantings where the use of mechanical equipment is not evident. 3. Electronic installations, such as cell towers, television, radio, and telephone repeaters, and the like, provided their impact is minimal. 4. Evidence of historic mining (50+ years ago). Do not include areas of significant current mineral activity, including prospecting with mechanical or motorized earthmoving equipment. The inventory may include areas where the only evidence of prospecting is holes that have been drilled without access roads to the site. Potential wilderness also may include: a. a. Areas that otherwise meet inventory criteria if they are covered by mineral leases having a “no surface occupancy” stipulation. b. b. Areas covered by mineral leases that otherwise meet inventory criteria only if the lessee has not exercised development and occupancy rights. If and when these rights are exercised, remove the area, or portion affected, from the inventory unless it is possible to establish specific occupancy provisions that would maintain the area in a condition suitable for wilderness.
251 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
5. Structures or evidence of vegetative manipulation resulting from past management practices in National grasslands and prairies. 6. Federal ownership of less than 70 percent if it is realistic to manage the Federal lands as wilderness, independent of the private land. 7. Minor structural range improvements (FSM 2240.5), such as fences or water troughs, exclude areas where nonstructural range improvements are readily visible and apparent. Areas with spray or burning projects are permissible if there is little or no evidence of the project. 8. Recreation improvements such as occupancy spots or minor hunting or outfitter camps. As a general rule, do not include developed sites. Areas with minor, easily removable recreation developments may be included. 9. Timber harvest areas where logging and prior road construction are not evident, except as provided in Section 71.12 for areas east of the 100th meridian. 10. Ground-return telephone lines, electrical lines, and powerlines if a right-of-way has not been cleared. 11. Watershed treatment areas if the use of mechanical equipment is not evident. The inventory may include areas where minor watershed treatment has been accomplished manually such as small hand-constructed gully plugs.
The criterion that is most applicable and restrictive within the project area is criteria #9. To meet this criterion, logging and prior road construction cannot be evident. FSH 1909.12 further explains how to evaluate this criterion by describing these areas as places where stumps and skid trails or roads are substantially unrecognizable or areas where clearcuts have regenerated to the degree that canopy closure is similar to surrounding uncut areas. Therefore, criterion #9 was used as the starting point for the second screen. If an area met the requirements of the first screen and met Criterion #9, the remaining 10 criteria were evaluated. In some instances, professional judgment was required. Examples of situations that required the use of professional judgment included, but are not limited to: • Determination if there is substantially recognizable evidence of timber harvest (such as stumps, roads, and differences in canopy closure as compared to surrounding uncut areas). • Determination about whether decommissioned roads are still evident. • Placement of PWA boundaries along permanent natural or semi-permanent human-made features such as ridges, streams, topographic breaks, past harvest unit boundaries, or forest roads to facilitate easy on-the-ground identification. • Whether to proceed through an isthmus (or pinch point) created by two roads or two harvest areas or place a PWA boundary across the isthmus. • Whether to locate a PWA boundary around a peninsula or place the boundary through the peninsula.
Results When running the GIS Potential Wilderness Areas model, the screening criteria of 1,000 acres and 5,000 acres were used. The minimum acreage in Forest Service policy for consideration of Potential Wilderness is 5,000 acres unless the area is a self-contained ecosystem, such as an island. The 1,000 acres criteria were used in response to public comments received during the scoping process. While there is a belief that 1,000 acres should be the initial size criteria for screening, currently the policy is 5,000 acres. The table below shows the results of the GIS modeling including both the 1,000 acre and 5,000 acre criteria.
252 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Table 105. Potential Wilderness GIS Modeling Results First Screen Second Screen PWA Area color as Acres Criteria Criteria Criteria depicted on 1 2 3 Map 1 Blue 1, 263 NO NO YES Not considered NO Teal 3, 668 NO NO YES Not considered NO Brown 5, 332 YES YES Past logging and roads evident to NO reduce to under 5,000 acres Red 6, 615 YES YES Past logging and roads evident to NO reduce to under 5,000 acres Green 7, 725 YES YES Past logging reduces PWA to IRA YES boundary
Based on the results of the GIS modeling and the PWA screening process, only one area (the green polygon) of potential wilderness will be considered in the effects analysis (Figure 46). This area of Potential Wilderness overlaps with the Drake-McDowell IRA. The area outside of the IRA has evidence of past logging operations, however due to its size the IRA still qualifies as Potential Wilderness. The area outside of the designated IRA boundary where past management is evident has been removed from the PWA polygon for analysis reducing this PWA to the same boundary of the Drake-McDowell IRA.
Figure 45 Drake-McDowell IRA 2013
253 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Figure 46. Potential Wilderness Polygons identified through GIS modeling within the Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project. All other identified areas including the area outside of the IRA will be considered Other Undeveloped Lands in the effects analysis (Figure 45).
Other Undeveloped Lands During the scoping process, Oregon Wild submitted areas to be considered as “unroaded areas”. These areas, along with the entire project area, were evaluated for potential wilderness using the screening method above. Those areas that do not meet the criteria for potential wilderness and do not have the current land management designation of wilderness or IRA are considered Other Undeveloped Lands. With the exception of the areas submitted by Oregon Wild and those areas identified through the PWA process, Other Undeveloped Lands have not been mapped.
Most of the CMH Project area has been subject to some degree of timber harvest or road building. The project area lies entirely within the Lakeview Federal Stewardship Unit; one of their goals is to promote stability in communities through continuous supplies of timber and forest products. There is no management direction in the LRMP for Other Undeveloped Lands. If past timber activities or road building have been limited, it is most likely due to topography or other limiting factors.
254 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Environmental Consequences
Drake-McDowell Inventoried Roadless Area (IRA)
Alternative 1 – No Action
Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects Alternative 1 would not affect, directly or indirectly, the characteristics of the Drake-McDowell IRA. There would be no change to the current IRA conditions. There would be no management actions taken, therefore there would be no cumulative effects.
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Alternative 2 includes the non-commercial treatment of 950 acres of <9 inch diameter conifers and juniper up to 21 inches in diameter in the meadow and sage steppe habitats of the NE corner of the IRA for the purpose of enhancing sagebrush ecosystems and improving habitat for the sage grouse. Subsequent burning of cut individual junipers would follow treatment. Treatments would be performed using chainsaws with no road construction or reconstruction occurring within the IRA. All primitive roads currently within the IRA would be decommissioned (letting them restore naturally).
Direct and Indirect Effects The non-commercial treatment of 950 acres within the IRA would have direct effects on the IRA characteristics. Short term effects include a reduced level of solitude during the time of treatment with a crew entering the same areas over an extended period of time and using chainsaws. Noise, user trails, and cut trees lying on the ground could all occur as short term effects. Long term direct effects include evidence of stumps and treatment activities.
While these effects may occur, the Drake-McDowell IRA is far from pristine with a history of extensive Figure 47. Drake-McDowell IRA livestock grazing, fences, timber harvesting, and primitive roads. There are currently three miles of primitive roads in the IRA which were initially built for the purpose of timber harvests. The entirety of the Drake-McDowell IRA is actively grazed in the McDowell Allotment.
The Roadless Area Conservation Rule exception situation 36 CFR 291.13(b)(1) allows for the cutting, sale, or removal of generally small diameter timber to improve threatened, endangered, proposed, or sensitive species habitat. The sage grouse is currently under review by the USFWS to determine if it should be listed as threatened under the ESA.
Indirect effects of Alternative 2 include improved brood rearing habitat of the sage grouse, which may help prevent the species from being listed under ESA. The decommissioning of the roads within the IRA would eventually increase the natural appearance of the IRA.
255 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Cumulative Effects There are no effects from past, ongoing, or foreseeable future actions that when combined with the effects of Alternative 2 would have a cumulative effect on the IRA characteristics.
Potential Wilderness Areas (PWA) The potential wilderness areas (PWA) identified in Figure 46. provides the scale for this effects analysis. The Drake-McDowell IRA, discussed above, is the only area within the project area that meets the criteria for potential wilderness area. The GIS modeling identified some area outside of the IRA, as potential wilderness, however reviews of old aerial imagery and records of past logging and management activities eliminate this adjacent 2,240 acres from consideration as PWA reducing the PWA within the project area to the same boundary as the Drake-McDowell IRA.
Other Undeveloped Lands All areas within the CMH Project area that are not developed (roads, developed recreation sites, evidence of past harvests) and do not qualify as Wilderness, Potential Wilderness, or Inventoried Roadless Areas are considered Other Undeveloped Lands. Other Undeveloped Lands have intrinsic ecological and social values because they do not contain roads or visible evidence of past timber harvest. The values below are used as indicators of undeveloped lands. Values and features previously used in this document that characterize an inventoried roadless area (36 CFR 294) were specifically avoided, because Other Undeveloped Lands are not inventoried roadless areas.
• Intrinsic physical and biological resources (soil, water, wildlife, recreation, fisheries, etc.)
• Intrinsic social values (apparent naturalness, solitude, remoteness)
Alternative 1 – No Action
Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects
There would be no effects to Other Undeveloped Lands because no actions would occur. The environment within these areas would remain unchanged, except by natural processes and ongoing activities such as grazing and recreation.
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action
Direct and Indirect Effects Most of the CMH Project area has been subject to some degree of timber harvesting activities. The entirety of the project area falls within the Lakeview Federal Stewardship Unit who has a goal to promote the stability of forest communities through continuous supplies of timber and forest products.
With the exception of the IRA which has restrictions on management activities, those lands without roads or evidence of past timber activities were left undeveloped due to topography or other limiting factors. Due to the extensive history of logging, there would not be any direct effects to the intrinsic social value of naturalness or remoteness of the Other Undeveloped Lands. There may be short term direct effects to the solitude due to the increased human traffic in the area during the proposed management activities, however, the Forest Service has no measure nor standard for solitude in non-Wilderness environments. There are no known intrinsic physical and biological resources within the Other Undeveloped Lands which have not been identified and mitigated through other resource specialties.
256 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Cumulative Effects There are no effects from past, ongoing, or foreseeable future actions that when combined with the effects of Alternative 2 would have a cumulative effect on the intrinsic values of the Other Undeveloped Lands. Public Health and Safety Warning signs would be posted as required by contract provisions in commercial harvest activity areas. Public safety issues, including the need to abate dust on roads open to the public, would be addressed with contractors during contract pre-work sessions. A site-specific burn plan would be prepared prior to implementing prescribed fire. The plan would ensure that resource management objectives are clearly defined, and that site environment and human health are not harmed. The plan would contain a risk assessment and actions to prevent escape, and a contingency plan for actions to quickly contain an escaped fire. The CMH Project area is within 4 air miles of the town of Lakeview, Oregon, a smoke sensitive receptor area (SSRA). Prescribed fire in this area is subject to mandatory compliance with the Oregon Smoke Management Plan (477.013). This project would comply with the requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act and be conducted in accordance with the operational guidelines agreed to by the USDA Forest Service and the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. All burning operations would be conducted with coordination from the Oregon Department of Forestry and their smoke management forecaster. Burns must be registered in advance and smoke guidelines followed. Warning signs would be posted during prescribed fire activities to provide for public safety in the project area. Information on prescribed fire activities would be provided to the public through Forest news releases, advertisements in local newspapers and radio or television announcements. There would be no significant effects to public health or safety as a result of implementing the CMH Project. Prime Farmland, Rangeland, and Forestland The Secretary of Agriculture issued Memorandum 1827 which is intended to protect prime farmlands and rangelands. The project area does not contain any prime farmlands. Prime forestland is not applicable to lands within the National Forest System. Adverse effects on prime rangeland not already identified in the Forest Plan FEIS are not expected from implementing the alternatives. Floodplains and Wetlands No direct, indirect, or cumulative adverse effects to floodplains or wetlands as described in Executive Orders 11988 and 11990 would occur with implementation of the action alternatives. Adherence to Forest Plan standards and INFISH (1995) direction provides the mechanism by which the Forest Service complies with Executive Orders 11988 and 11990. Civil Rights and Environmental Justice 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. With the implementation of any of the alternatives, there would be no disproportionately high adverse human health or environmental effects on minority or low-income populations. The actions would occur in a remote area and nearby communities would mainly be affected by positive economic impacts as related to timber harvest and processing or contracts implementing non-commercial thinning and other restoration activities.
The proposed alternatives would not adversely affect consumers, civil rights, minority groups, or women. Federal contracts include non-discrimination requirements.
257 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Potential or Unusual Expenditures of Energy Energy consumption under the proposed action would be related primarily to the energy required for timber harvesting and tree thinning activities, restoration activities of other resources, and road maintenance. Implementation of the proposed action would not result in unusual expenditures of energy.
258 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
References Adams, S.N. 1975. Sheep and cattle grazing forests: A review. J. Applied Ecology 12:143-152
Agee 1994. Fire and weather disturbances in terrestrial ecosystems of the eastern Cascades. 52p. In Assessment, edited by P.F. Hessburg. Vol. 3 of Eastside forest ecosystem health assessment. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-320. Portland, OR: U.S. Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station.
Agee 1996. The influence of forest structure on fire behavior. In: Proceedings of the 17th Annual Forest Vegetation Management Conference, January 16–18, 1996. Redding, CA. pp. 52–68.
Agee, J.K. 1993. Fire ecology of Pacific Northwest Forests. Island Press, Washington D.C. 493 pp.
Agee, J.K. 1994. Fire and weather disturbances in terrestrial ecosystems of the eastern cascades. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-320. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 52pp. [Available online] http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/gtr320.pdf [07 January 2009]
Agee, J.K. 1993. Fire ecology of Pacific Northwest forests. Washington, DC: Island Press. 493p.
Agee, James K. 1993. Fire Ecology of Pacific Northwest Forests. Island Press, Washington D.C. 493pp.
Altman, B. 2000. Conservation strategy for landbird s in the lowlands and valleys of western Oregon and Washington. Version 1.0. Oregon-Washington Partners in Flight. http://www.orwapif.org/pdf/western_lowlands.pdf.
Altman, B. 2000b. Conservation strategy for landbirds in the northern Rocky Mountains of eastern Oregon and Washington. Version 1.0. Oregon-Washington Partners in Flight. http://www.orwapif.org/pdf/northern_rockies.pdf.
Altman, B. 2000c. Conservation strategy for landbirds of the east-slope of the Cascade Mountains of eastern Oregon and Washington. Version 1.0. Oregon-Washington Partners in Flight. http://www.orwapif.org/pdf/east-slope.pdf
Altman, B. 2012. Conservation strategy for landbirds in coniferous forests of eastern Oregon and Washington. Version 2.0. Oregon-Washington Partners in Flight. http://www.orwapif.org/pdf/western_forest.pdf.
Altman, B., and A. Holmes. 2000. Conservation strategy for landbirds in the Columbia Plateau of eastern Oregon and Washington. Version 1.0. Oregon-Washington Partners in Flight. http://www.orwapif.org/pdf/columbia_basin.pdf.
Alvarez, Maria. 2000. Leucanthemum vulgare. In: Bossard, Carla C., John M. Randall, and
259 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Marc C. Hoshovsky (eds.), Invasive Plants of Calilfornia’s Wildlands. University of California Press. Berkley, CA, p. 227-231.
Amaranthus, M. H. Jubas, and D. Arthur. 1989. Stream shading, summer streamflow, and maximum water temperature following intense wildfire in headwater streams. Pages 75- 78 in N. H. Berg, editor. Proceedings of the symposium on fire and watershed management. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report PSW-109.
Anderson PD, Larson DJ, Chan SS. 2007. Riparian buffer and density management influences on microclimate of young headwater forests of western Oregon. Forest Science 53: 254- 269.
Anderson, E. W., M.M. Borman and W.C Kruger. 1998. The Ecological Provinces of Oregon. Atreatise on the basic ecological geomorphology of the state. Ag. Ex. Station, Oregon State University. pp. 63-68.
Anderson, H.E. 1982. Aids to determining fuel models for estimating fire behavior. General Technical Report INT-122, 22p. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station.
Andrews, P.L. and R.C. Rothermel. 1982. Charts for interpreting wildland fire behavior characteristics. General Technical Report INT-131, 21 p. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station.
Anthony, R.G., R.J. Steidl, and K. McGarigal. 1995. Recreation and bald eagles in the Pacific Northwest. IN: R.L. Knight and K.J. Gutzwiller, eds. Wildlife and recreationists: coexistence through management and research. Island Press, Washington D.C. 372 pp.
Arcinega, Lora. Personal communication 2014.
Ares A, Terry TA, Miller RE, Anderson HW, Flaming BL. 2005. Ground-based forest harvesting effects on soil physical properties and Douglas-fir growth. Soil Science Society of America Journal 69: 1822–1832.
Arno, S.F. and J.K. Brown. 1991. Overcoming the paradox in managing wildland fire. Western Wildlands. 17(1):40-46.
Aubry, K.B., McKelvey, K.S., and Copeland, J.P. 2007. Distribution and broad scale habitat relations of the wolverine in the contiguous United States. Journal of Wildlife Management. 71: 2147-2158.
Bach, Melva. 1981 History of the Fremont National Forest. Edited by Ward Tonsfeldt, Tonsfeldt Consulting, Bend, Oregon.
Bachelet, D., Neilson, R.P., Lenihan, J.M., and R.J. Drapek. 2001. Climate change effects on vegetation distribution and carbon budget in the United States. Ecosystems. 4: 164-185
Banci, V. 1994. In Ruggiero, L.F., Aubry, K.B., Buskirk, S.W., Lyon, L.J, and Zielinski, W.J.
260 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
(editors.). The Scientific Basis for Conserving Forest Carnivores in the Western United States.
Bangs, E. E., Fritts, S.H., Fontaine, J.A., Smith, D.W., Murphy, K.M., Mack, C.M., and Niemeyer.C.C. 1998. Status of gray wolf restoration in Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming. Wildlife Society Bulletin 26(4):785-798.
Barnard, Jeff Dec. 4, 2008 DNA Secrets: Cave’s Latrines Yield New Evidence About Prehistoric North America. The Associated Press.
Barnett, J. K. and Crawford, J. A. 1994. Pre-laying nutrition of sage grouse hens in Oregon. J. Range Management 47:1114-118.
Barrett, S., Havlina, D., Jones, J., Hann, W., Frame, C., Hamilton, D., Schon, K., Demeo, T., Hutter, L., and J. Menakis. 2010. Interagency Fire Regime Condition Class Guidebook. Version 3.0 [Homepage of the Interagency Fire Regime Condition Class website, USDA Forest Service, US Department of the Interior, and The Nature Conservancy]. [Online], Available: www.frcc.gov
Bartholow JM. 2000. Estimating cumulative effects of clearcutting on stream temperatures. Rivers 7: 284-297.
Bates, R. F., Svejcar, T. J., Pierson, F.B., and Eddleman, L.E., 2007. Western Juniper Field Guide: Asking the right Questions to Select Appropriate Management Actions: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1321, 61 p.
Beck, K. George. 1999. Biennial Thistles. In: Roger L. Sheley and Janet K. Petroff (eds.), Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds. Oregon State University Press. Corvallis, OR, p. 145-161.
Beckham, Stephen D. 1981. The Oregon Central Military Wagon Road: A History and Reconnaissance. Heritage Research Associates Report No. 6, vol.1 Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region, Willamette National Forest.
Belford, D.A.; Gould, W.R. 1989. An evaluation of trout passage through six highway culverts in Montana. North American Journal of Fisheries Management. 9: 437-445.
Black, H., R. Scherzinger, and J.W. Thomas. 1976. Relationships of Rocky mountain elk and rocky mountain mule deer habitat to timber management in the Blue Mountains of Oregon and Washington. In proceedings of the elk- Logging-Roads Symposium, 16-17 Dec. 1975, Moscow, Idaho. Edited by S.R. Heib Forest Wildlife and Range Experiment Station, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID. Pp. 11-31.
Boisvenue, C. and S.W. Running. 2006. Impacts of climate change on natural forest productivity – evidence since the middle of the 20th century. Global Change Biology. 12: 862–882.
Bonnicksen, T.M. and E.C. Stone. 1981. The giant sequoia-mixed conifer forest community
261 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
characterized through pattern analysis as a mosaic of aggregations. Forest Ecol. and Manage. 3: 307-328.
Breen, C. 2000. “The Biogeography of Gulo gulo (wolverine).” Geography 316: Biogeography. San Francisco State University Department of Geography. Accessed online 4/24/2006. http://bss.sfsu.edu/geog/bholzman/courses/Fall00Projects/wolverine.html.
Briggs, J.M., G.A. Hoch, and L.C. Johnson. 2002. Assessing the Rate, Mechanisms, and Consequences of the Conversion of Tallgrass Prairie to Juniperus virginiana Forest. Ecosystems. 5:578-586.
Brown, J.K., Arno, S.F., Barrett, S.W. and J.P. Menakis. 1994. Comparing the prescribed natural fire program with presettlement fires in the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness. International Journal of Wildland Fire. 4(3): 157-168.
Brown, James K., Elizabeth D. Reinhardt, and Kylie A. Kramer. 2003. Coarse woody debris: Managing benefits and fire hazard in the recovering forest. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS_GTR-105. Ogden UT. USDA, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 16p. http://www.fs.fed.us/rm/pubs/rmrs_gtr105.pdf
Brown, T.J., Hall, B.L. and A.L. Westerling. 2004. The impact of twenty-first century climate change on wildland fire danger in the western United States: an applications perspective. Climatic Change. 62(1-3): 365-388.
Buecking, K. 1998. “Wolverines.” Predator Conservation Alliance. Accessed 4/24/2006. http://www.predatorconservation.org/predator_info/Forest_Clearinghouse/Wolverine/bu ecking1998.htm.
Bull, E. L., and T. W. Heater. 2000. Resting and denning sites of American marten in northeastern Oregon. Northwest Science 74:179-185.
Bull, Evelyn L., and Thad W. Heater. 1995. Intraspecific predation on American marten. Northwestern Naturalist 76:132-134.
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. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 55p.
Bunting, S.C. 1998. Use of prescribed fire for habitat enhancement in woodlands and shrub- steppe ecosystems. Fire and wildlife in the Pacific Northwest research, policy, and management symposium. Spokane, WA
Busse, M. D., Cochran, P.H., Hopkins, W.E., Johnson, W.H., Riegel, G. M., Fiddler, G. O., Ratcliff, A. W., C. J. Shestak. 2009. Developing resilient ponderosa pine forests with mechanical thinning and prescribed fire in central Oregon’s pumice region. Can. J. For. Res. 39: 1171-1185. NRC Research Press.
262 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Busse, M.D. and G. M. Riegel. 2009. Response of antelope bitterbrush to repeated prescribed burning in Central Oregon ponderosa pine forests. Forest Ecology and Management 257 (2009) 904–910.
Busse, M.D., S.A. Simon, G.M. Riegel. 1999. Tree-growth and understory responses to low- severity prescribed burning in thinned Pinus ponderosa forests of central Oregon. Forest Science.
Cahall, R.E. and Hayes, J.P. 2009. Influences of postfire salvage logging on forest birds in the Eastern Cascades, Oregon, USA. Forest Ecology and Management 257:3 1119-1128.
Cahill, R.E. 2007. Influences of salvage logging on forest birds after fire in the eastern Cascades, Oregon. M.S. Thesis. Oregon State University, Corvallis. 132pp.
California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) 2013. Wolverines in California. www.dfg.ca.gov/news/issues/wolverine. Access date December 2013.
California Department of Food and Agriculture. 2012. Plant Heath Division, Integrated Pest Control: Lens-podded Whitetop. California Department of Food and Agriculture. Web page: http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/plant/ipc/weedinfo/winfo_table-commname.htm Accessed: April 27, 2012.
California Native Plant Link Exchange. Plant information. Galium serpenticum ssp. warnerense - Warner mtns. Bedstraw. http://www.cnplx.info/nplx/species?taxon=Galium+serpenticum+ssp.+warnerense Accessed 30 March 2009.
Carex Working Group, 2008. Carex cordillerana ecology and range (October 29, 2008). http://www.carexworkinggroup.com/pages/october2008.html
Castellano MJ, Valone TJ. 2007. Livestock, soil compaction and water infiltration rate: Evaluating a potential desertification recovery mechanism. Journal of Arid Environments 72: 97-108.
Chamberlain, T.W.; Harr, R.D.; Everest, F.H. 1991. Timber harvest, silviculture and watershed process. In: Meehan, W.R., ed. Influences of forest and rangeland management on salmonid fishes and their habitat. Special Publication 19. Bethesda, MD: American Fisheries Society: 181-206.
Chang H, Jung I. 2010. Spatial and temporal changes in runoff caused by climate change in a complex large river basin in Oregon. Journal of Hydrology 388: 186-207.
Chapman, R.C. 1976. Human Disturbance at Wolf Dens – A Management Problem. In Linn, R.M. (ed.) Proceedings of the 1st Conference Scientific Research in the National Parks. U.S. National Park Service. Proceedings series Number 5, Volume 1.
Clark, R.G., C.M. Britton. Date unk. Seasonal response of bitterbrush to burning and clipping
263 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
in Eastern Oregon. On file Silver Lake Ranger District.
Cochran, P.H. 1998. Examples of mortality and reduced annual increments of white fir induced by drought, insects, and disease at different stand densities. Res. Note PNW-RN-525. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 19 p.
Collen, P. and R.J. Gibson. 2001. The general ecology of beavers (Castor spp.), as related to their influence on stream ecosystems and riparian habitats, and the subsequent effects on fish – a review. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 10: 439–461, 2001.
Connelly, J. W., Browers, H. W., and Gates, R. J. 1988. Seasonal movements of sage grouse in southeastern Idaho. J. Wildl. Manage. 52:116-122.
Connelly, J. W., Knick, S.T., Braun, C.E., Baker, W.L, Beever, E.A., Christiansen, T., Doherty, K.E., Garton, E.O., Hanser, S.E., Johnson, D.H., Leu, M. Miller, R.F. Naugle, D.E., Oyler-McCance, S.J., Pyke, D.A., Reese, K.P., Schroeder, M.A., Stiver, S.J., Walker, B.L., and Wisdom, M. J. 2011. Conservation of Greater Sage-Grouse. Pp 549-563 in Knick, S (editor.) Greater Sage-Grouse: Ecology and Conservation of a Landscape Species and Its Habitats, University of California Press, Berkeley California.
Connelly, J. W., Schroeder, M.A., Sands, A.R., and Braun, C. E. 2000. Guidelines to manage sage grouse populations and their habitats. Wildlife Society Bulletin 28:967-985.
Cook, J.G, T.J. Hershey, L.L. Irwin. 1994. Vegetative response to burning on Wyoming mountain-shrub big game ranges. Journal of Range Management. 47:296-301.
Copeland, J.P., Peak, J., Groves, C., Melquist, W., McKelvey, K.S., McDaniles, G.W., Long, C.D., Harris, C.E. 2007. Seasonal habitat associations of the wolverine in central Idaho. Journal of Wildlife Management. 71:2201-2212.
Cressman L.S. 1940. Studies of Early Man in South Central Oregon. Carnegie Institution of Washingon Yearbook 39:300-306.
Cressman, L.S. 1937. Petroglyphs of Oregon. University of Oregon Monographs. Studies in Anthropology 2. Eugene.
Cressman, L.S. 1942. Archaeological Researches in the Northern Great Basin. Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Institution of Washington 538.
Cross, S.P. and Waldien, D. (Southern Oregon State College). 1995. Ashland, ORFinal Report.
Csuti, B.A. and Kimerling, A.J, O’Neil, T.A, Shaughnessy, M.M, Gaines, E.P. and others. 2001. Atlas of Oregon.
Csuti, B.A., A.J. Kimerling, T.A. O’Neil, M.M. Shaughnessy, E.P. Gaines, and M.M. Huso. 1997. Atlas of Oregon Wildlife: Distribution, Habitat, and Natural History. Oregon
264 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 492 pp.
Currens, K.P.; Shreck, C.B.; Li, H.W. 2009. Evolutionary Ecology of Redband Trout. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 138:797-817.
Dahlberg, A. and Stenlid, J. 1995. Spatiotemporal patterns in ectomycorrhizal populations. Canadian Journal of Botany 73:S1222-S1230.
Davies, K.W., Boyd, C.S., Beck, J.L., Bates, J.D., Svejcar, T.J., and Gregg, M.A.. 2011. Saving the sagebrush sea: An ecosystem conservation plan for big sagebrush plant communities. Biological Conservation doi:10.1016.
Davies, K.W., C.S. Boyd, J.L. Beck, J.D. Bates, T.J. Svejcar and M.A. Gregg. 2011. Saving the sagebrush sea: An ecosystem conservation plan for big sagebrush plant communities. Biological Conservation. 144:2573-2584.
Deal, Krista. 2002. Fire Effects to Lithic Artifacts. USDA Forest Service, Eldorado National Forest.
Dealy, J.E. 1971. Habitat characteristics for the Silver Lake mule deer range. Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. Forest Service, US Department of Agriculture, Portland, OR.
DeBano LF, Neary DG, Folliott PF, editors. 1998. Fire’s Effects on Ecosystems. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York: New York. 333 p.
DeBano LF. 2000. The role of fire and soil heating on water repellency in wildland environments: a review. Journal of Hydrology 231: 195-206.
Demarchi, M.W. and Bunnell F.L. 1993. Estimating canopy affects on summer thermal cover for Cervidae (deer family). Can. J. For. Res. Vol. 23.
DEQ. Department of Environmental Quality [Online], Available: www.epa.gov Accessed June 29, 2014.
Dewey, R. 2012. Mycorrhizal fungi: Biological/ecological information and effects of selected types of forest management actions. http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/sfpnw/issssp/planning- tools/#fungi.
Dixon, G.E. comp. 2002 (Revised: October 16, 2012). Essential FVS: A user’s guide to the Forest Vegetation Simulator. Internal Rep. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Management Service Center. 226p.
Dixon, Rita D. and Victoria A. Saab. 2000. Black-backed Woodpecker (Picoides arcticus), The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/509
265 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Driscoll, R.S. 1963. Sprouting bitterbrush in central Oregon. Ecology 44:820-821.
Drut, M. S., Crawford, J. A., and Gregg, M. A.. 1994. Brood habitat use by sage grouse in Oregon. Great Basin Naturalist. 54:170-176.
DuBois, Kristi, D. Becker, J. Thornbrugh. 1987. Identification of Montana Birds of Prey. Montana Outdoors. 18(6):11-31.
Dunn, P. O., and Braun, C. E. 1986. Summer habitat use by adult female and juvenile sage grouse. Journal of Wildlife. Management. 50:228-235.
Dwire, K.A.; Kauffman, J.B. 2003. Fire and riparian ecosystems in landscapes of the western USA. Forest Ecology and Management 178: 61-74.
Dyer, A.R., 2002. Burning and Grazing Management in a California Grassland: Effect on Bunchgrass Seed Viability. Restoration Ecology. 10: 107-111
Elliot WJ, Page-Dumroese D, Robichaud PR. 1999. The effects of forest management on erosion and soil productivity. Proceedings of the Symposium on Soil Quality and Erosion Interaction, Keystone, CO, July 7, 1996. Ankeney, IA: Soil and Water Conservation Society. 16 p. http://forest.moscowfsl.wsu.edu/smp/docs/docs/Elliot_1- 57444-100-0.html
Elliot, William J.; Miller, Ina Sue; Audin, Lisa. Editors 2010, Cumulative Watershed Effects of Fuel Management in the Western United States. General Technical Report RMRS GTR- 231. Fort Collins Colorado: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 299 pages.
Ellis CR, Pomeroy JW, Link TE. 2013. Modeling increases in snowmelt yield and desynchronization resulting from forest gap-thinning treatments in a northern mountain headwater basin. Water Resources Research 49: 936-949. doi: 10.1002/wrcr.20089
Elmore, W. and R. L. Beschta. 1987. Riparian areas: Perceptions in Management. Rangelands 9(6):260-265.
Evans, E., R. Thorp, S. Jepsen & S. H. Black. 2008. Status Review of Three Formerly Common Species of Bumble Bee in the Subgenus Bombus. Prepared for the Xerces Society of Invertebrate Conservation [Online] http://www.xerces.org/wp- content/uploads/2008/12/xerces_2008_bombus_status_review.pdf.
Eyre, F.H. 1980. Forest Cover Types of the United States and Canada: Society of American Foresters, 148p.
Ferriel, J. and K. Grenier. 2013. Annotated Bibliography of Information Potentially Pertaining to Management of Rare Fungi on the Special Status Species list for California, Oregon, and Washington. http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/sfpnw/issssp/planning-tools/#fungi.
Fettig, C.J.; Reid, M.L.; Bentz, B.J.; Sevanto, S.; Spittlehouse, D.L.; Wang, T. 2013. Changing
266 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Climates, Changing Forests: Western North America Perspective. Journal of Forestry. 111 (3): 214-228.
Finney, Mark A. 2006. An Overview of FlamMap Fire Modeling Capabilities. In: Andrews, Patricia L.; Butler, Bret W., comps. 2006. Fuels Management-How to Measure Success: Conference Proceedings. 28-30 March 2006; Portland, OR. Proceedings RMRS-P-41. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. p. 213-220
Fischer, R. A., Apa, A. D., Wakkinen, W. L. , Reese, K. P., and Connelly, J. W.. 1993. Nesting- area fidelity of sage grouse in southeastern Idaho. Condor 95:1038-1041.
Fitzgerald, S.A. 2005. Fire ecology of ponderosa pine and the rebuilding of fire-resilient ponderosa pine ecosystems. In Symposium: Ritchie, M.W.; Maguire, D.A.; Youngblood, A., technical coordinators. Proceedings of the Symposium on Ponderosa Pine: Issues, Trends, and Management, 2004 October 18-21, Klamath Falls, OR. General Technical Report PSW-GTR-198: 197-225. Albany, CA: USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station.
Flannigan, M.D.; Stocks, B.J. and B.M. Wotton. 2000. Climate change and forest fires. The Science of the Total Environment. 262: 221-229.
Foltz RB. 1995. Traffic and no-traffic on an aggregate surfaced road: Sediment production differences. USDA Forest Service, Washington, DC. USA.
Forrisstal, C. 2009. Influence of postfire salvage logging on black-backed woodpecker nest-site selection and nest survival. M.S. Thesis. Montana State University, Bozeman, MT. 93pp.
Fowler, C. 2008. The Effects of Prescribed Burning on Cultural Resources. Forest Encyclopedia Network. Encyclopedia ID:p832.http://www.forestencyclopedia.net/p/p832.
Fowler, C.S. and S. Liljeblad. 1986. Northern Paiute. In Great Basin, edited by W.L. D’Azevedo, pp. 435-465. Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 11, W.C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian,Washington, D.C.
Franklin, J. F., and K. N. Johnson. 2009. Restoration of federal forests in the Pacific Northwest. http://www.cof.orst.edu/cof/fs/PDFs/JohnsonRestoration_Aug15_2009.pdf
Franklin, J. F., Johnson, K .N., D. L. Johnson. 2008. A Plan for the Tribes’ Management of the Klamath Reservation Forest.
Franklin, J.F. and C.T. Dyrness. 1988. Natural vegetation of Oregon and Washington. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University Press. Commentary and bibliographic supplement to: Natural vegetation of Oregon and Washington, 1973. General Technical Report PNW-8. Portland, OR: USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 417p.
267 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Franklin, J.F., K. Cromack, Jr., W. Denison, A. McKee, C. Maser, J. Sedell, F. Swanson, and G. Juday. 1981. Ecological characteristics of old-growth Douglas-fir forests. PNW-GTR- 118. USDA Forest Service. PNW Research Station. [Available online] http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/gtr118part1.pdf http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/118part2.pdf [07January 2009].
French, D.M. 1905. An Illustrated History of Central Oregon, Embracing Wasco, Sherman, Gilliam, Wheeler, Crook, Lake and Klamath Counties. Spokane, WA: Western Historical Publishing Co.
Fuller, T.K. 1989. Population Dynamics of Wolves in North central Minnesota. Wildlife Monograms: 10541.
Furniss, M.J., T.D. Roelofs, and C.S. Yee. 1991. Road construction and maintenance. In: Meehan, William R. (Ed.). Influences of Forest and Rangeland Management on Salmonid Fishes and their Habitats. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: American Fisheries Society Special Publication 19, 297-323.
Gay, D. 1998. A test of the southcentral Oregon mule deer habitat suitability index. M.S. thesis, Univ. of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho.
GLFWG (Goose Lake Fishes Working Group). 1996. Goose Lake Fishes Conservation Strategy.
Goggans, R., R. D. Dixon, and L. C. Seminara. 1988. Habitat use by three-toed and black- backed woodpeckers. Nongame Rep. 87-3-02. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Portland, Oregon.
Goldenberg, D. and Sondergaard, C. 1994. USDA Forest Service Region Six Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Plant Sighting Form for Eriogonum prociduum. Unpublished Forest document.
Goodman, Willaim, 2008 Cedar Creek Fuels Hydrology and Soils Report Fishlake National Forest.
Goodman, Willaim, 2013 Barry Point Salvage Watershed Report Fremont-Wineam National Forest
Graham, R.T.; Harvey, A.E.; Jain, T.B. and J.R. Tonn. 1999. The effects of thinning and similar stand treatments on fire behavior in Western forests. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-463. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 27 p.
Green, Dee F., Kristen Bordwell, Randell Hall and Andrew Goheen. 1997. Effects of Prescribed Fire on Obsidian Hydration Rates. USDA Forest Service, Modoc National Forest, Warner Mountain Ranger District.
Gregg, M. A., Crawford, J. A., Drut, M. S., and Delong, A. K. 1994. Vegetation cover and
268 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
predation of sage grouse nests in Oregon. Journal of Wildlife Management 58:162-166.
Griffiths, R., M. Madritch and A. Swanson. 2005. Conifer invasion of forest meadows transforms soil characteristics in Pacific Northwest. Forest Ecology and Management. 208:347-358.
Groberg, Matthew G. 2013. An experimental reintroduction of Pleuropogon oregonus, a rare wetland grass native to Oregon. Master’s Thesis, Oregon State University.
Hagmann, K.R.; Franklin, J.F. and N.K. Johnson. 2013. Historical structure and composition of ponderosa pine and mixed-conifer forests in south-central Oregon. Forest Ecol. and Manage. 304: 492-504.
Hagmann, R. K., Franklin, J. F., K. N. Johnson. 2013. Historical structure and composition of ponderosa pine and mixed conifer forests in south-central Oregon. Forest Ecology and Management 304 492-504.
Hansen, E.M. 2014. Forest development and carbon dynamics following mountain pine beetle outbreaks. Forest Science. In press.
Hardy, Colin C. 2005. Wildland fire hazard and risk: Problems, definitions, and context. Forest Ecology and Management. 211: 73-82.
Hargis, Christina D., John A Bissonette, and David L. Turner. 1999. The influence of forest fragmentation and landscape pattern on American martens. Journal of Applied Ecology 36:157-172.
Haugo, R.D., and C.B. Halpern. 2007. Vegetation responses to conifer encroachment in a western Cascade meadow: a chronosequence approach. Canada Journal of Biology. 85: 285-298.
Hawskworth, F.D., Weins, D., Geils, B.W. 2006. Arceuthobium in North America. USDA Forest Service, Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-98. 2002.
Hayden, J., G. Ardt, M. Flemming, T.W. Keegan, J. Peek, T.O. Smith, and A. Wood. 2008. Habitat Guidelines for Mule Deer: Northern Forest Ecoregion. Mule Deer Working Group, Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. USA.
Heede, B.H. 1980. Stream dynamics: an overview for land managers. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-72. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station.
Hermann, G.; Furniss, M.J.; Ziemer, R.R.; Brookes, M.H. 2001. Forest roads: A synthesis of scientific information. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-509. Portland, Oregon: U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service. 103 p.
Hessburg, P.F.; Agee J.K. and J.F. Franklin. 2005. Dry mixed conifer forests and wildland fires of the Inland Northwest: contrasting the landscape ecology of the pre-settlement and
269 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
modern eras. Forest Ecology and Management. 211:117–139.
Hessburg, P.F.; Mitchell, R.G. and G.M. Filip. 1994. Historical and current roles of insects and pathogens in eastern Oregon and Washington forested landscapes. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-327. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 72 p.
Heyerdahl, Emily K.; Loehman, Rachel A. and Donald A. Falk. In Press. Fire and Forest Histories from Tree Rings in Central Oregon. Gen. Tech. Report. RMRS-GTR-DRAFT. Fort Collins, CO: USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, 68p.
Hobbs, R.J. and H.A. Mooney. 1986. Community changes following shrub invasion of grassland. Oecologia. 70:508-513.
Hollenbeck, J., Saab, V.A., and Frenzel, R.A. 2011. Habitat suitability and nest survival of white-headed woodpeckers in unburned forests of Oregon. Journal of Wildlife Management 75(5):1061-1071. http://www.rmrs.nau.edu/publications/Hollenbeck-et-al- 2011-JWM/Hollenbeck-et-al-2011-JWM.pdf
Hopkins, W. E. 1979. Plant Associations of the Fremont National Forest. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region; R6-ECOLO-79-004.
Hopkins, W. E. 2000. Guidelines for Forage Resource Evaluation within the Fremont National Forest. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region.
Hopkins, W.E. 1979. Plant associations of the Fremont National Forest. R6-Ecol-79-004. Portland, OR: USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 106p.
Hopkins, William E. 1979. Plant Associations of the Fremont National Forest. USDA Forest Service Pacific Northwest Region. R6-Ecol-79-004.
Hunt, Len M. and Brian Kolman. 2012. Selected social implications of climate change for Ontario's Ecodistrict 3E-1 (the clay belt). CCRR-29. Applied Research and Development, Ontario Forest Research Institute, Ministry of Natural Resources. Ontario, Canada.
Hutto, R.L. 1995. Composition of bird communities following stand-replacement fires in northern Rocky Mountain (U.S.A.) conifer forests. Conservation Biology 9:1041-1058.
Ice George, Gordon Stuart, Jack Waide, Lloyd Irland, and Paul Ellefson. 25 Years of the Clean Water Act: How Clean are Forest Practices? Journal of Forestry 1997.
Ice, George et al, 2010 Journal of Forestry September 2010 “Trends for Forestry Best Management Practices Implementation.”
Ice, George. 2004 History of Innovative Best Management Practice development and its role in addressing Water Quality Limited Waterbodies. Journal of Environmental Engineering
270 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
June 2004.
Jackman, S.M. 1974. Woodpeckers of the Pacific Northwest: their characteristics and their role in the Forests. Masters thesis.
Jacobs, J. 2007. Ecology and Management of field bindweed [Convolvulus arvensis L.]. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service. Invasive Species Technical Note No. MT-9 February 2007.
Janisch JE, Wondzell SM, Ehinger WJ. 2012. Headwater stream temperature: Interpreting response after logging with and without riparian buffers, Washington, USA. Forest Ecology and Management 270: 302-313.
Jenkins, M.J.; Herbertson, E.; Page, W.G. and C.A. Jorgensen. 2008. Bark beetles, fuels, fires and implications for forest management in the Intermountain West. For. Ecol. Manage. 254: 16-34.
Jenkins, M.J.; Runyon, J.B.; Fettig, C.J.; Page, W.G. and B.J. Bentz. 2014. Interactions among the mountain pine beetle, fires, and fuels. Forest Science. In Press.
Jensen, W.F. Fuller, T.K., Robinson, W.L. 1986. Wolf, Canis lupus, Distribution on the Ontario- Michigan Border near Sault Ste. Marie. Canadian Field-Naturalist. Volume 100: 363-366 as cited in Mech, L.D, Fritts, S.H., Radde, G.L., Paul, W.J; Wolf Distribution and Road Density in Minnesota, Wildlife Society Bulletin 16(1):85-87.
Johnson, K. N. and J. F. Franklin. 2009. Restoration of federal forests in the Pacific Northwest. http://www.cof.orst.edu/cof/fs/PDFs/JohnsonRestoration_Aug15_2009.pdf
Johnson, V. 2005. Wolverine. California Department of Fish and Game Wildlife Habitat Relation System. PDF obtained from webpage www.dfg.ca.gov/news/issues/wolverine [Wolverine 2005.pdf] [Access Date: December 2013]
Kan, T. and Pollak, O. 2000. Taeniatherum caput-medusae. In: Carla C. Bossard, John M. Randall, and Marc C. Hoshovsky (eds), Invasive Plant of California’s Wildlands. University of California Press. Berkeley, CA, p. 309-312.
Kelly, I.T. 1932. Ethnography of Surprise Valley Paiute. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnography, 31 (3):67-210.
Kelsall, J.P. 1981. Status report on wolverine, Gulo gulo, in Canada 1981. Ottawa, On: Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). 47.p.
Keown, K. 2011. Northern Goshawk (Accipiter gentilis) Management Indicator Species Assessment Wallowa-Whitman National Forest. On file Fremont-Winema National Forest Supervisor’s Office.
Keyes, C.R.; O’Hara, K.L. 2002. Quantifying stand targets for silvicultural prevention of crown
271 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
fires. Western Jounal of Applied Forestry. 17(2): 101-109.
Knowles N, Dettinger MD, Cayan DR. 2006. Trends in snowfall versus rainfall in the western United States. Journal of Climate 19: 4545-4559.
Kovalchik, B. L. 1987. Riparian Zone associations: Deschutes, Ochoco, Fremont, and Winema National Forests. R6-ECOL-TP-279-87. Portland, OR: USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. pp 171.
Kramer, M. 2012. Senior Climate Change Scientist, Region 6. Silviculture Program Regional Course.
Lajeunesse, Sherry. 1999. Dalmatian and Yellow Toadflax. In: Roger L. Sheley and Janet K. Petroff (eds.), Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds. Oregon State University Press. Corvallis, OR, p. 202-216.
Lakeview Stewardship Group 2011. 2011 Long-range strategy for the Lakeview Federal Stewardship Unit. Prepared by the Lakeview Stewardship Group (Original 2005). 71 p.
LANDFIRE Data Access Tool (LFDAT) for ArcGIS 10 (version 2.4). 2012. Toney, Chris; Bramel, Jody; Anderson, John. USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station and National Interagency Fuels Technology Transfer. Available: www.niftt.gov.
Landres, P.B., Morgan, P., Swanson, F.J. 1999. Overview of the use of natural range of variability concepts in managing ecological systems. Ecological Applications 9(4):1179- 1188.
Larson, A.J. and D. Churchill. 2012. Tree spatial patterns in fire-frequent forests of western North America, including mechanisms of pattern formation and implications for designing fuel reduction and restoration treatments. Forest Ecology and Management. 267: 74-92.
Laycock, W.A. 1991. Stable states and thresholds of range condition on North American rangelands: a viewpoint. Journal of Rangeland Management 44: 427-433.
Lenihan, J.M., Drapek, R., Bachelet, D., and Neilson, R.P. 2003. Climate Change Effects On Vegetation Distribution, Carbon, And Fire In California. Ecological Applications 13:1667–1681.
Letey J. 2001. Causes and consequences of fire-induced soil water repellency. Hydrological Processes 15: 2867-2875.
Lowrance, R., J.K. Sharpe, and J.M. Sheridan. 1986. Long-term sediment deposition in the riparian zone of a coastal plain watershed. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 41(4): 266-27.
LRMP (Land and Resource Management Plan). 1989. USDA Forest Service, Fremont National
272 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Forest.
Luce CH, Black TA. 1999. Sediment production from forest roads in western Oregon. Water Resources Research 35: 2561-2570.
Lynch and Corbett, 1990 Evaluation of Best Management Practices for Controlling NonPoint Sources of Pollution from Silvicultural Operations.
Mackie, Richard J., Kie, John G., Pac, David F., Hamlin, Kenneth L. 2003. Mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus). In: Feldhamer, George A.; Thompson, Bruce C.; Chapman, Joseph A., eds. Wild mammals of North America: Biology, management, and conservation. 2nd ed. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press: 889-905.
Magoun, A.J. and Copeland, J.P. 1998. Characteristics of wolverine reproductive dens sites. Journal of Wildlife Management. 62:1313-1320.
Major, J. and D.W. Taylor. 1988. Alpine. In: Barbour, Michael G.; Major, Jack, eds. Terrestrial vegetation of California. New York: John Wiley and Sons: 601-675.
Manning, M.E., S.R. Swanson, T. Svejar and J. Trent. 1989. Rooting characteristics of four intermountain meadow community types. Journal of Rangeland Management 42:309- 312.
Marcot, B.G., J.L. Ohman, K. Mellen-McLean, K. Waddell. 2010. Synthesis of Regional Wildlife and Vegetation Field Studies to Guide Management of Standing and Down Dead Trees. Forest Science 56(4):391-404.
Marcot, Bruce G., Barbara C. Wales, and Rick Demmer. 2003. Range maps of terrestrial species in the Interior Columbia River Basin and northern portions of the Klamath and Great Basins. PNW-GTR-583, USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, and USDI Bureau of Land Management, Portland, OR. 304 p. http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/publications/gtr583/
Markus, Amy. 2014. Personal Communication.
Marshall, D.B., Chilcote, M.W., and Weeks, H. 1996. Species at Risk, Threatened, and Endangered Vertebrates of Oregon. 2nd edition.
Marshall, D.B., M.G. Hunter, and A.L. Contreras, Eds. 2003. Birds of Oregon: A General Reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 pp.
Martin, R.E. and C.H. Driver. 1983. Factors affecting antelope bitterbrush reestablishment following fire. In research and management of bitterbrush and cliffrose in western North America. Compiled by A.R. Tiedemann and D.L Johnson. USDA For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-152. pp.266-279.
Maser, C., B.R. Mate, J.F. Franklin, and C.T. Dyrness. 1981. Natural history of Oregon coast mammals. Portland, OR.: USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range
273 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Experiment Station. General Technical Report PNW-133. 496 p.
McCabe GJ, Clark MP. 2005. Trends and variability in snowmelt runoff in the western United States. Journal of Hydrometeorology 6: 476-482.
McConnell, B.R. and J.G. Smith. 1970. Response of understory vegetation to ponderosa pine thinning in Eastern Oregon. Journal of Range Management 23:J208-212.
McKenzie, D., Gedalof, Z., Peterson, D. L. and P. Mote. 2004, Climatic change, wildfire, and conservation. Conservation Biology. 18: 890–902.
Mech, L.D, Fritts, S.H., Radde, G.L., Paul, W.J; Wolf Distribution and Road Density in Minnesota, Wildlife Society Bulletin 16(1):85-87.
Mech, L.D. 1989. Wolf Population Survival in an Area of High Road Density. American Midlands Naturalist. 121:387-389.
Mech, L.D. 1977. Productivity, Mortality, and Population Trend of Wolves in Northeastern Minnesota. Journal of Mammalogy. 58: 559-574.
Meehan, W.R., ed. 1991. Influences of forest and rangeland management on salmonid fishes and their habitats. Special Publication 19. Bethesda, MD: American Fisheries Society. 751 pp.
Mellen, Kim, Bruce G Marcot, Janet L. Ohmann, Karen L. Waddell, Elizabeth A. Willhite, Bruce B. Hostetler, Susan A. Livingston, Catherine Ogden, and Tina Dreisbach. 2006. The DecAID repository: background information for DecAID, the decayed wood advisor for managing snags, partially dead trees, and down wood for biodiversity in forests of Washington and Oregon. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station and Pacific Northwest Region, Portland, Oregon. Available on-line at: http://wwwnotes.fs.fed.us:81/pnw/DecAID/DecAID.nsf.
Mellon-McClean. 2011a. MIS Information Sheet American Marten (Martes americana). On file Fremont-Winema National Forest Supervisor’s Office.
Mellon-McClean. 2011b. MIS Information Sheet Black-backed Woodpecker (Picoides arcticus). On file Fremont-Winema National Forest Supervisor’s Office.
Mellon-McClean. 2011c. MIS Information Sheet Pileated Woodpecker (Dryocopus pileatus). On file Fremont-Winema National Forest Supervisor’s Office.
Mellon-McClean. 2011d. MIS Information Sheet American Three-toed Woodpecker (Picoides dorsalis) Three-toed Woodpecker (Picoides tridactylus) Northern Three-toed Woodpecker (Picoides tridactylus dorsalis) On file Fremont-Winema National Forest Supervisor’s Office.
Memorandum of Understanding between the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to Promote the Conservation of Migratory Birds.
274 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
(December 08, 2008)
Memorandum of Understanding between the U.S. Department of Interior Bureau of Land management and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to Promote the Conservation of Migratory Birds. (April 10, 2010)
Messier, F. 1987. Physical Condition and Blood Physiology of Wolves in Relation to Moose Density. Canadian Journal of Zoology 65:91-95.
Meyer, C.L.; Sisk, T.D. and W.W. Covington. 2001. Microclimate changes induced by ecological restoration of ponderosa pine forests in northern Arizona. Restoration Ecology 9(4): 443-452.
Miller, J.D., H.D. Safford, M. Crimmins and A. Thode. 2009. Quantitative evidence for increasing forest fire severity in the Sierra Nevada and Southern Cascade Mountains, California and Nevada, USA. Ecosystems. 12: 16–32.
Miller, R.F and J.A. Rose. 1999. Fire history and western juniper encroachment in sagebrush steppe. J Range Manage. 52(6): 550-559.
Miller, R.F. and P.E. Wigand. 1994. Holocene changes in semiarid pinyon-juniper woodlands. BioScience. 44: 465-474.
Miller, R.F., Bates, J.D., Svejcar, T.J., Pierson, F.B., Eddleman, L.E., 2005. Biology, Ecology and Management of Western Juniper (Juniperus occidentalis). Technical bulletin 152.
Minor, Rich, Stephen Dow Beckham and Kathryn Anne Toepel. 1979. Cultural Resource Overview of the BLM Lakeview District, South0Central Oregon: Archeology, Ethnography, History. University of Oregon Anthropological Papers No. 16.
Mladenoff, D.J. Sickly, T.A., Haight, R.G., Wydeven, P.A. 1995. A Landscape Analysis and Predictions of Favorable Gray Wolf Habitat in the Northern Great Lakes Region. Conservation Biology 9:279-294.
Mladenoff, D.J.; Sickley, T.A.; Wydeven, A.P. 1999. Predicting Gray Wolf Landscape Decolonization: Logistic Regression Models vs. New Field Data. Ecological Applications 9:37-44.
Moore RD, Wondzell SM. 2005. Physical hydrology and the effects of forest harvesting in the Pacific Northwest: a review. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 41: 763-784.
Moore, N.M and D.W. Huffman. 2004. Tree encroachment on the North Rim, Grand Canyon National Park, USA. Art. Anarct. Apl. Res. 36: 474-483.
Morishita, Don W. 1999. Canada Thistle. In: Roger L. Sheley and Janet K. Petroff (eds.), Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds. Oregon State University Press.
275 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Corvallis, OR, p. 162-174.
Morrow, R.J. 1986. Age structure spatial pattern of old-growth ponderosa pine in Pringle Falls Experimental Forest, central Oregon. M.S. Thesis, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR. 80p.
Mote PW, Hamlet AF, Clark MP, Lettenmaier DP. 2005. Declining mountain snowpack in western North America. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 86: 39–49.
Mote, P., Salathe, E., Duliere, V., Jump, E. 2008. Scenarios of future climate for the Pacific Northwest. Climate Impacts Group, University of Washington.
Moyle, P.B. 2002. Inland Fishes of California. University of California Press. Berkeley, Calif.
National Climate Assessment (2014) http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/.
National Survey on Recreation and the Environment (NSRE): 2000-2002. AMERICAN’S PARTICIPATION IN OUTDOOR RECREATION: Results From NSRE (With weighted data) (Versions 1 to 13). The Interagency National Survey Consortium, Coordinated by the USDA Forest Service, Recreation, Wilderness, and Demographics Trends Research Group, Athens, GA and the Human Dimensions Research Laboratory, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN. http://www.srs.fs.usda.gov/trends/Nsre/Rnd1t13weightrpt.pdf
NatureServe 2013. NatureServe Explorer Species Database. www.natureserve.org/explorer. Access Date December 2013.
NatureServe. 2010. NatureServe Explorer: An online encycopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington. Virginia. Available http://www.natureserve.org/explorer. Last accessed January 2012.
Neary DG, Ryan KC, DeBano LF. 2005 (revised 2008). Wildland fire in ecosystems: effects of fire on soils and water. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-42-vol.4. Ogden,UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.
Neilson, R. P. and R. J. Drapek. 1998. Potentially complex biosphere responses to transient global warming. Global Change Biology 4:505–521.
Nielsen-Pincus, N and E.O. Garton. 2007. Responses of cavity-nesting birds to changes in available habitat reveal underlying determinants of nest selection. Northwestern Naturalist 88:135–146.
Nord, E.C. 1965. Autecology of bitterbrush in California. Ecological Monographs 35:307-334
Noss, R.F.; Franklin, J.F.; Baker, W.L.; Schoennagel, T. and P.B. Moyle. 2006. Ecology and management of fire-prone forests of the western United States. www.conbio.org [2013, Sep. 12]. 72p.
NRIS Wildlife Database. October 2011. On file Fremont-Winema National Forest Supervisor’s
276 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Office.
ODEQ. 2010. Water Quality Assessment - Oregon’s 2004/2006 Section Integrated Report Database, Portland, Oregon. http://www.deq.state.or.us/wq/assessment/rpt0406/search.asp
ODFW (Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2005. Oregon native fish status report. ODFW, Fish Division. Salem, OR.
ODFW (Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2011. Warner Lakes native fish status report. ODFW, Fish Division. Salem, OR.
ODFW Mule Deer Initiative Website http://www.dfw.state.or.us/resources/hunting/big_game/mule_deer/MDI.asp
Olson, R., and W. A. Hubert. 1994. Beaver: water resources and riparian habitat manager.University of Wyoming Press, Laramie.
Ormsbee, Pat. 2013. Personal Communication.
Panjabi, A. O., E. H. Dunn, P. J. Blancher, W. C. Hunter, B. Altman, J. Bart, C. J. Beardmore, H. Berlanga, G. S. Butcher, S. K. Davis, D. W. Demarest, R. Dettmers, W. Easton, H. Gomez de Silva Garza, E. E. Iñigo-Elias, D. N. Pashley, C. J. Ralph, T. D. Rich, K. V. Rosenberg, C. M. Rustay, J. M. Ruth, J. S. Wendt, and T. C. Will. 2005. The Partners in Flight handbook on species assessment. Version 2005. Partners in Flight Technical Series No. 3. Rocky Mountain Bird Observatory website: http://www.rmbo.org/pubs/downloads/Handbook2005.pdf
Parker, (no date), Implementation of the Clean Water Act (PL92-500) Through Best Management Practices Implementation and Monitoring.
Parker, D.L. and L.E. Stipe. 1993. A sequence of destruction: mountain pine beetle and wildfire: Yellowstone National Park. Albuquerque, NM: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southwestern Region. 19 p.
Partners in Flight Science Committee. 2012. Species Assessment Database, version 2012. Available at http://rmbo.org/pifassessment. Accessed on Dec. 2013.
Peek, J.M., J.A. Korol, and B.C. Dennis. 1999. A review and analysis of habitat relationships and mule deer populations in south-central Oregon. Univ. of Idaho. Moscow, ID.
Perkins, Dana Lee. 1995. A dendroecological assessment of whitebark pine in the Sawtooth Salmon River region Idaho. M.S. Thesis, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ. 56p.
Peterson SL Stringman TK. 2008. Infiltration, runoff, and sediment yield in response to western juniper encroachment in southeast Oregon. Rangeland Ecology and Management 61: 74-81.
277 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Peterson, R.O. 1977. Wolf Ecology and Prey Relationships on Isle Royal. U.S. National Park service Scientific Monograph Series 11. Washington D.C. www.nps.gov/history/online_books/science/11. Access Date December 2013.
Phillips, Sarah J. and Robert L. Wooley. 1994. Conservation Strategy for Castilleja chlorotica. Fremont National Forest. p. 1-71.
Pierson FB, Bates JD, Svejcar TJ, Hardegree SP. 2007. Runoff and erosion after cutting western juniper. Rangeland Ecology and Management 60: 285-292.
Pierson FB, Williams CJ, Kormos PR, Hardegree SP, Clark PE, Rau BM. 2010. Hydrologic vulnerability of sagebrush steppe following Pino and Juniper encroachment. Rangeland Ecology and Management 63: 614-629.
Piper, Gary L. 1999. St. Johnswort. In: Roger L. Sheley and Janet K. Petroff (eds.), Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds. Oregon State University Press. Corvallis, OR, p. 372-381.
Platts, W.S. 1991. Livestock grazing. In Meehan W.R., ed. Influences of Forest and Rangeland Management on Salmonid Fishes and their Habitat, Special Publication 19, American Fisheries Society: Bethersda, MD; 389-423.
Powell, D.C. 2010. Estimating crown fire susceptibility for project planning. Fire Management Today. 70(3): 8-15.
Powell, David C. 2010. Range of Variation Recommendations for Dry, Moist, and Cold Forests. White Paper F14-SO-WP-SILV-3. Umatilla National Forest. Supervisor's Office, Pendleton, OR
Pyle, Robert M. 2002. The Butterflies of Cascadia. Seattle Audobon Society. P. 210-211.
Raphael, M. G., and M. White. 1984. Use of snags by cavity nesting birds of the Seirra Nevada. Wildl. Monogr. 86:1-66. In: Garrett, K. L., Raphael M.G., Dixon, R. D. The birds of North America, No. 509. Philadelphia, PA: The Acadamy of Natural Sciences; and Washington DC: The American Ornithologists’ Union. In: Altman, B. 2000. Conservation Strategy for
Raphael, Martin G., and L.L.C. Jones. 1997. Characteristics of resting and denning sites of American martens in central Oregon and western Washington. pp.146-165 in G. Proulx, H.N. Bryant, and P.M. Woodard, eds., Martes: taxonomy, ecology, techniques, and management. Provincial Museum of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Rebain, Stephanie A. comp. 2010 (revised October 29, 2013). The Fire and Fuels Extension to the Forest Vegetation Simulator: Updated Model Documentation. Internal Rep. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Management Service Center. 408p.
Regonda SK, Rajogopalan B, Clark M, Pitlick J. Seasonal cycle shifts in hydroclimatology
278 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
over the western United States. Journal of Climate 18: 372-384.
Remington, T.E. and Braun, C.E. 1985. Sage grouse food selection in winter, North Park, Colorado. Journal of Wildlife Management 49:1055-1061.
Reveal, James L. 2008. In: Flora of North America Editorial Committee, eds 1993+. Flora of North America North of Mexico. 16+ vols. New York and Oxford. Vol. 5, Polygonaceae, Eriogonum; 107a. Eriogonum umbelatum Torrey var. umbellatum.
Reynolds, R.T., R.T. Graham, M. Hildegard Reiser, R.L. Bassett, P.L. Kennedy, D.A. Boyce Jr., G. Goodwin, R. Smith, and E.L. Fisher. 1991. Management Recommendations for the Northern Goshawk in the Southwestern United States. USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region. 182 pp.
Rice, P. 1999. Sulfur Cinquefoil. In: Roger L. Sheley and Janet K. Petroff (eds.), Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds. Oregon State University Press. Corvallis, OR, p. 382-388.
Rich, T.D., C.J. Beardmore, H. Berlanga, P.J. Blancher, M.S.W. Bradstreet, G.S. Butcher, D.W. Demarest, E.H. Dunn, W.C. Hunter, E.E. Iñigo-Elias, J.A.Kennedy, A.M. Martell, A.O. Panjabi, D.N. Pashley, K.V. Rosenberg, C.M. Rustay, J.S. Wendt, and T.C.Will. 2004. Partners in Flight North American Landbird Conservation Plan: Ithaca, NY, Cornell Lab of Ornithology. http://www.partnersinflight.org/cont_plan/.
Rich, T.D., C.J. Beardmore, H. Berlanga, P.J. Blancher, M.S.W. Bradstreet, G.S. Butcher, D.W. Demarest, E.H. Dunn, W.C. Hunter, E.E. Iñigo-Elias, J.A.Kennedy, A.M. Martell, A.O. Panjabi, D.N. Pashley, K.V. Rosenberg, C.M. Rustay, J.S. Wendt, and T.C.Will. 2004. Partners in Flight North American Landbird Conservation Plan: Ithaca, NY, Cornell Lab of Ornithology. http://www.partnersinflight.org/cont_plan/.
Riegel, G.M.; Thornburgh, D.A. and J.O. Sawyer. 1990. Forest habitat types of the South Warner Mountains, Modoc County, California. Madroño. 37(2): 88-112.
Riegel, Gregg (In draft) Southcentral Oregon Riparian Field Guide. Forest Service South Central Oregon Ecology Project, Deschutes National Forest, 1001 S.W. Emkay Drive, Bend OR 97702.
Rieman B, Isaak DJ. 2010. Climate change, aquatic ecosystems, and fishes in the Rocky Mountain west: Implications and alternatives for management. Rocky Mountain Research Station General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-250.
Rittenhouse, Bruce. 1991b, November 13. Status Report for Galium serpenticum ssp. warnerense on Lakeview Ranger District, Fremont National Forest.
Rittenhouse, Bruce. 1991a. Status Report for Ivesia shockleyi on the Lakeview Ranger District, Fremont National Forest. October 16, 1991.
Roche, C.T. and Wilson, L.M. 1999. Mediterranean Sage. In: Roger L. Sheley and Janet K.
279 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Petroff (eds.), Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds. Oregon State University Press. Corvallis, OR, p. 261-270.
Rose, C.L., B.G. Marcot, T.K. Mellen, J.L. Ohmann, K.L. Waddell, D.L. Lindley and B. Schreiber. 2001. Decaying wood in Pacific Northwest forests: Concepts and tools for habitat management. In: Wildlife habitat relationships in Oregon and Washington. D.H. Johnson and T.A. O’Neil, managing directors. Oregon State University Press. Pp. 580- 623.
Rothermel, Richard C. 1972. A mathematical model for predicting fire spread in wildland fuels. Research Paper INT-115. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 40 p.
Ruggiero, L.F., K.B. Aubry, S.W. Buskirk, J.L. Lyon, W.J. Zielinski. 1994. The scientific basis for conserving forest carnivores: American marten, fisher, lynx and wolverine in the western United States. USDA For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-254. Ft. Collins, CO. 7 pp.
Ruggiero, L.F., McKelvey, K.S., Aubry, K.B., Copeland, J.P. Pletscher, D.H., Hornocker, M.G. 2007. Wolverine Conservation and Management. Journal of Wildlife Management. 71:2170-2179.
Rundel, P.W.; Parsons, D.J. and D.T. Gordon. 1988. Montane and subalpine vegetation of the Sierra Nevada and Cascade Ranges. In: Barbour, Michael G.; Major, Jack, eds. Terrestrial vegetation of California. New York: John Wiley & Sons: 559-599.
Saab, Victoria, L. Bate, J. Lehmkuhl, B. Dickson, S. Story, S. Jentsch, W. Block. 2006. Changes in Down Wood and Forest Structure After Prescribed Fire in Ponderosa Pine Forests. USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-41.
Salwasser, H. 1979. The ecology and management of the Devil’s Garden interstate deer herd and its range. Univ. California (Berkley) PhD dissertation. 377pp.
Sauer, J. R., J. E. Hines, and J. Fallon. 2008. The North American Breeding Bird Survey, Results and Analysis 1966 - 2007. Version 5.15.2008. USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, MD
Scherer R, Pike RG. 2003. Effects of forest management activities on streamflow in the Okanagan Basin: outcomes of a literature review and a workshop. FORREX, Kamloops, B.C. FORREX Series 9.
Scheuering R.W. 2003. Bufflehead Bucephala albeola. Pp. 124-126 In . D.B. Marshall et al., eds. Birds of Oregon. Corvallis, OR. Oregon State University Press. 752 p.
Scheuering R.W. 2003. Bufflehead Bucephala albeola. Pp. 124-126 In . D.B. Marshall et al., eds. Birds of Oregon. Corvallis, OR. Oregon State University Press. 752 p.
Schlosser, I.J. and J. R. Karr. 1981. Water quality in an agricultural watershed: impact of
280 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
riparian vegetation during base flow. Water Resources Bulletin 17: 233-240.
Schroeder, M. A., Young, J.R. and Braun, C.E. 1999. Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus), The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/425 [Access Date: December 2013]
Schwartz, M.K., Pilgrim, K.L., McKelvey, K.S., Rivera, P.T., Ruggiero, L.F. 2007. Sources and Patterns of Wolverine Mortality in Western Montana. Journal of Wildlife Management. 71:2213-2200.
Scott W. 2007. A Soil Disturbance Classification System. Forestry Research Technical Note 07-3.
Scott, J. H.; Reinhardt, E. D., compilers. 2007. FireWords: Fire science glossary. Version 1.0, [Online]. Missoula, MT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://firewords.net [2013, December 11].
Scott, J.H. and R.E. Burgan. 2005. Standard fire behavior fuel models: a comprehensive set for use with Rothermel’s surface fire spread model. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-153. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, 72p.
Sheley, Roger L. and Jack Stivers. 1999. Whitetop. In: Roger L. Sheley and Janet K. Petroff (eds.), Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds. Oregon State University Press. Corvallis, OR, p. 401-407.
Sheley, Roger L., Jacobs, J. S., and Carpinelli, M. L. 1999. Spotted Knapweed. In: Roger L. Sheley and Janet K. Petroff (eds.), Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds. Oregon State University Press. Corvallis, OR, p. 350-361.
Sherman, R.J. and Chilcote, W.W. 1972. Spatial and chronological patterns of Purshia tridentata as influenced by Pinus ponderosa. Ecology, Vol. 53, No.2 pp 294-298.
Shoal, R., Ohlson, T., and Aubry, C. 2008. Land Managers Guide to Whitebark Pine Restoration in the Pacific Northwest Region. Olympic, WA: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. p. 1-37
Silvermoon, J.M. 1985. Cultural Resources Overview, Fremont National Forest. Lakeview, Oregon: Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region, Fremont National Forest.
Simon, S.A. 1990. Fire effects from prescribed underburning in central Oregon ponderosa pine plant communities: first and second growing season after burning. Unpublished report on file, Fremont National Forest, Lakeview, Oregon.
Simpson, M. 2007. Forested Plant Associations of the Oregon East Cascades. USDA Forest
281 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Service Technical Paper R6-NR-ECOL-TP-03-2007.
Skinner, C.N. and C.R. Chang. 1996. Fire regimes, past and present. In: Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project: Final report to Congress, vol. II, Assessment and scientific basis for management options, pp. 1041-1069. Davis: University of California, Centers for Water and Wildland Resources.
Skovlin, J.M., P.F. Edgerton, and R.W. Harris. 1968. The influence of cattle management on deer and elk. Trans. North Am. Wildl. and Nat. Res. Conf. 33:169-181
Slauson, K.M., Zielinski, W.M. and Hayes, J.P. 2007. Habitat selection by American martens in coastal California. Journal of Wildlife Management 71:48-468.
Smith, Galen S., Bruhl, J. J., Gonzalez-Elisondo, M.S., and Manapace, F. J. 2008. In: Flora of North America Editorial Committee, eds 1993+. Flora of North America North of Mexico. 16+ vols. New York and Oxford. Vol. 23, pp. 82.
Squires, J.R. and P.L. Kennedy. 2006. Goshawk ecology: an assessment of current knowledge and information needs for conservation and management. Studies in Avian Biology No. 31:8-62.
Stalmaster, M.V. and J.R., Newman. 1978. Behavioral responses of wintering bald eagles to human activity. J. Wildl. Manage. 42(3):506-13.
Stam, B.R., J. C. Malechek, D. L. Bartos, J. E. Bowns, and E. B. Godfrey. 2008. Effect of Conifer Encroachment Into Aspen Stands on Understory Biomass. Rangeland Ecology & Management: January 2008, 61(1): 93-97.
Stewart IT, Cayan DR, Dettinger MD. 2004. Changes in snowmelt runoff timing in western North America under a “business as usual” climate change scenario. Climatic Change 62: 217-232.
Stewart IT, Cayan DR, Dettinger MD. 2005. Changes toward earlier streamflow timing across western North America. Journal of Climate 18: 1136-1155.
Stewart IT. 2009. Changes in snowpack and snowmelt runoff for key mountain regions. Hydrological Processes 23: 78-94.
Stewart, O. C. 1939. The Northern Paiute Bands. University of California Anthropological Records. 2 (3)
Storck P, Lettenmaier DP, Bolton SM. 2002. Measurement of snow interception and canopy effects on snow accumulation and melt in a mountainous maritime climate, Oregon, United States. Water Resources Research 38: 1223-1238.
Stottlemyer R, Troendle CA. 2001. Effect of canopy removal on snowpack quantity and quality, Fraser Experimental Forest, Colorado. Journal of Hydrology 245: 165-176.
282 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Stuart, John D. 1983. Stand Structure and Development of a climax lodgepole pine forest in south-central Oregon. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Washington, Washington.
Taylor, A.H. and Skinner, C.N. 1998. Fire history and landscape dynamics in a late- successional reserve, Klamath Mountains, California, USA. Forest Ecology and Management 111: 285-301.
Theil, R.P. 1985. Relationship Between Road Densities and Wolf Habitat Suitability in Wisconsin. American Midlands Naturalist. 113:404-407.
Thomas, Jack Ward. September, 1979. Wildlife Habitats in Managed Forests, the Blue Mountains of Oregon and Washington. U.S.D.A. Agriculture Handbook No. 553. 512 pp.
Thomas, T.L. and J.K. Agee. 1986. Prescribed fire effects on mixed conifer forest structure at Crater Lake, Oregon. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 16: 1082-1087.
Torgersen, T. R. Log resources and wildlife relationships. Unpub. Pacific Northwest Research Station. LaGrande, Or.
Townsfeld, Ward and Dennis Gray. 2009. Cultural Resource Inventory Plan, Fremont-Winema National Forests. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region, Fremont-Winema National Forest, Supervisors Office, Lakeview, Oregon
U. S. Code of Federal Regulations [CFR]. Title 36 Parks, Forests, and Public Property. Washington D.C.
U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA]. 2001. Roadless Area Conservation Rule (RACR). Washington D.C.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA]. 2008a. Final Travel Management Directives; FSM 2350, 7700, and 7710 and FSH 7709.55. Washington D.C.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA]. 1989. Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) Land and Resource Management Plan, Fremont National Forest. Lakeview, Oregon.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA]. 1989. Fremont National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP). Lakeview, Oregon.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA]. 1989. Fremont National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP). Lakeview, Oregon.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA]. 2000. Forest Service Roadless Area Conservation FEIS. Washington D.C.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA]. 2006. Forest Service Handbook (FSH)
283 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
1909.12: publications management handbook. Washington, D.C.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA]. 2010. Fremont-Winema National Forest Motorized Travel Management Project Decision Notice. Lakeview, Oregon
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA]. 2012. National Visitor Use Monitoring. Data Collected FY 2008, Fremont National Forest. http://apps.fs.fed.us/nrm/nvum/results/A06002.aspx/Round2
U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2004. 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
U.S. Department of Agriculutre, Forest Service [USDA]. 2008b. Fremont-Winema National Forest Recreation Facility Analysis Final 5-year Program of Work. Lakeview, Oregon.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2007. National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines . 23 pp. Last accessed December 20, 2011. http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Management/BaldEagle/National BaldEagleManagementGuidelines.pdf
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1986. Recovery Plan for the Pacific Bald Eagle. Portland, OR: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1995. Endangered and Threatened Species; Bald eagle reclassification; final rule. Federal Register 60(133):36000-10.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1999. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed rule to remove the bald eagle in the lower 48 states from the list of endangered and threatened wildlife; proposed rule . Washington DC: Federal Register 64(128):36454-64.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2008. Birds of Conservation Concern 2008. United States Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, Arlington, Virginia. 85 pp. [Online version available at http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/
Urness, P.J. 1990. Livestock as manipulators of mule deer winter habitats in northern Utah. Pp. 25-40 in USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-194.
USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture). 1989. Land and resource management plan. Forest Service, Fremont National Forest. Lakeview, OR.
USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture). 1992. Level II Stream Habitat Survey. Forest Service, Fremont-Winema National Forests. Available at Supervisor’s Office, Lakeview, Oregon.
284 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture). 1995. Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact; Environmental Assessment for the Inland Native Fish Strategy (INFISH).
USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture). 1997. Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project (ICBEMP). An assessment of ecosystem components in the Interior Columbia Basin and portions of the Klamath and Great Basins. Volume III. USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management. Gen Tech. Rep. PNW- GTR-405.
USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture). 2005. Field Inventory of Habitat and Potential Occurrence for Six Sensitive Mollusk Species. Forest Service, Fremont-Winema National Forests and BLM, Lakeview. Available at Supervisor’s Office, Lakeview, Oregon.
USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture). 2012. Level II Stream Habitat Survey. Forest Service, Fremont-Winema National Forests. Available at Supervisor’s Office, Lakeview, Oregon
USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture). 2013. Level II Stream Habitat Survey. Forest Service, Fremont-Winema National Forests. Available at Supervisor’s Office, Lakeview, Oregon
USDA Forest Service and Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management. 2005. Northwest Forest Plan Temperature TMDL Implementation Strategies.
USDA Forest Service. 1988. General Water Quality Best Management Practices, Pacific Northwest Region.
USDA Forest Service. 1989. Fremont National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP).
USDA Forest Service. 1989. Land and Resource Management Plan Fremont National Forest. Pacific Northwest Region
USDA Forest Service. 1995. Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact for the Inland Native Fish Strategy (INFISH).
USDA Forest Service. 1998. Deep Creek Watershed Analysis
USDA Forest Service. 2002. Fremont National Forest Soil Productivity Guide.
USDA Forest Service. 2007. FSM 2600 – Wildlife, fish and sensitive plant habitat management. Chapter 2670 – threatened, endangered and sensitive plants and animals. Forest Service Manual, National Headquarters (WO). Washington, DC
USDA Forest Service. 2009. Forest Soil Disturbance Monitoring Protocol. General Technical Report WO-82a.
285 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
USDA Forest Service. 2011. Watershed Condition Classification Technical Guide. FS-978.
USDA Forest Service. 2011. Watershed Condition Framework. FS-977.
USDA Forest Service. 2011a. FINAL Region 6 Regional Forester Special Status Species List December 1, 2011. http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/sfpnw/issssp/agency-policy/
USDA Forest Service. 2011b. Fremont-Winema National Forest Invasive Plant Treatment Record of Decision.
USDA Forest Service. 2011c. FSM 2900 – Invasive species management. Forest Service Manual, National Headquarters (WO). Washington, DC.
USDA Forest Service. 2012. National Best Management Practices for Water Quality Management on National Forest System Lands, Volume 1: National Core BMP Technical Guide. FS-990a.
USDA Forest Service. 1989. Fremont National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. Pacific Northwest Region, Fremont National Forest. Lakeview, OR 97630. pp. 232.
USDA Forest Service. 1989. Fremont National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. Pacific Northwest Region, Fremont National Forest. Lakeview, OR 97630. pp. 232.
USDA Forest Service. 2005. Pacific Northwest Region Invasive Plant Program Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants. Final Environmental Impact Statement Record of Decision.
USDA Forest Service. 2005. Grazing Permit Administration Handbook. FSH 2209.13
USDA Forest Service. 2006. Drews creek watershed analysis: ecosystem analysis at the watershed scale. Prepared by Duck Creek Associates Inc. for USDA Forest Service, Fremont-Winema National Forests, Lakeview Ranger District. 360p.
USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. 2013. Federally listed, proposed, candidate species and species of concern under the jurisdiction of the Fish and Wildlife Service which may occur within Lake County, Oregon. http://www.fws.gov/oregonfwo/Species/Lists/Documents/County/LAKE%20COUNTY. pdf)
USDI National Park Service. 2005. Invasive Plant Species in Alaska: Scentless False Mayweed. In: Alaska Exotic Plant Management Team website. http://www.nps.gov/akso/NatRes/EPMT/Species_bios/Tripleurospermum%20perforata.p df Accessed: November 25, 2012.
USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 1998. Recovery Plan for the Native Fishes of the Warner Basin and Alkali Subbasin. Portland, Oregon.
USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2013. Programmatic Biological opinion for Aquatic Restoration Activities in the States of Oregon, Washington and portions of California,
286 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Idaho and Nevada (ARBO II). FWS reference: 01EOFW00-2013-F-0090. Portland, Oregon.
Van Auken, O.W. 2000. Shrub Invasions of North American Semiarid Grasslands. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. 31:197-215.
Vermeire, L.T., R.B Mitchell, S.D. Fuhlendorf, and R.L. Gillen. 2004. Patch burning effects on grazing distribution. Journal of Range Management.57:248-52.
Voegelin, Erminie W. 1955. The Northern Paiute of Central Oregon: A Chapter in Treaty- Making, Part 1. Ethnohistory 1 (2). Indiana University.
Voight, D.R., Kolenosky, C.B., and Pimlott, D.H. 1976. Changes in Summer Foods of Wolves in Central Ontario. Journal of Wildlife Management. 40:663-668.
Wahl, T. R., B. Tweit, and S. G. Mlodinow, editors. 2005. Birds of Washington: status and distribution. Corvallis, OR, U.S.A Oregon State Univ. Press. 436 pp.
Wall, T., M. Vavra, R. Miller. 1999. Aspen Ecology and Rehabilitation in Eastern Oregon. Annual Report, Eastern Oregon Agricultural Research Center.
Walstad, J.D., D.V. Sandberg. 1990. Natural and Prescribed Fire in Pacific Northwest Forests. Oregon State University Press. Corvallis, OR. 752 pp.
Weide, M.L. 1968. Cultural Ecology of Lakeside Adaptation in the Western Great Basin. Ph.D. dissertation. University of California, Los Angeles. UMI Dissertation Services, Ann Arbor.
Weise, D.R. and C.S. Wright. 2014. Wildland fire emissions, carbon and climate: Characterizing wildland fuels. Forest Ecology and Management. 317: 26-40.
Wenzel DL. 1979. Soil Resource Inventory. Fremont National Forest, Pacific Northwest Region.
West, N. E. 1999. Distribution, composition and classification of current juniper-pinyon woodland and savannahs across Western North America. In Monsen, S. and R. Stephens, eds. Proceedings of the conference on ecology and management of pinyon-juniper communities in the Interior West. RMRS-P9. USDA Forest Service. Ogden, Utah, USA. 20-13.
West, N.E. 1968. Rodent-influenced establishment of ponderosa pine and bitterbrush seedlings in central Oregon. Ecology 49:1009-1011.
Whitehead, R. J.; Russo, G. L.; Hawkes, B. C.; Taylor, S. W.; Brown, B. N.; Barclay, H. J. and R.A. Benton. 2006. Effect of a Spaced Thinning in Mature Lodgepole Pine on Within- Stand Microclimate and Fine Fuel Moisture Content. In: Andrews, Patricia L.; Butler, Bret W., comps. 2006. Fuels Management-How to Measure Success: Conference Proceedings. 28-30 March 2006; Portland, OR. Proceedings RMRS-P-041. Fort Collins,
287 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. p. 523-536
Wilson, B.L., Brainerd, R., Lytjen, D., Newhouse, B., and Otting, N. 2008. Field Guide to the Sedges of the Pacific Northwest. Oregon State University Press. Corvallis, OR.
Wilson, Jeannette. 2002. Pleuropogon oregonus Chase. In: Plants on the Fremont-Winema National Forests, R6 Sensitive Vascular Plant Profile [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Fremont-Winema National Forest, Botany (Producer). http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/fsbdev3_061495.pdf Accessed 13 May 2014.
Wisconsin Redd Canary Grass Management Working Group [WRCFMWG]. 2009. Reed Canary Grass (Phalaris arundinacea) Management Guide: Recommendations for Landowners and Restoration Professionals. PUB-FR-428 2009
Wisdom, M. J.; R.S. Holthausen, B.C. Wales, C.D. Hargis, V.A. Saab, D.C. Lee, W.J. Wendel, T.D. Rich, M.M. Rowland, W.J. Murphy, M.R. Eames. 2000. Source habitat for terrestrial vertebrates of focus in the interior Columbia basin: broad scale trends and management implications. Volume 1-3. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-485. Portland, OR. U.S. Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. (Quigley, T.M., tech. ed.; Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project: scientific assessment).
Wooley, R.L. April 1993. Conservation Strategy for Penstemon glaucinus. Fremont National Forest. p. 1-44.
Wrobleski, D.W and J.B. Kauffman. 2006. Initial effects of prescribed fire on morphology, abundance, and phenology of forbs in big sagebrush communities in Southeastern Oregon. Restoration Ecology. Vol 11(1). pp. 82-80.
Wydeven, A.P., and Wiedenhoeft, J.E. 2011. Gray Wolf Population 2010-2011. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Online Report. http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/WildlifeHabitat/documents/reports/graywolfpop2.pdf [Access Date: December 2013].
Youngblood, A.; Max, T. and K. Coe. 2004. Stand structure in eastside old-growth ponderosa pine forests of Oregon and northern California. Forest Ecology and Management. 199:191-217.
Zamudio D. 2007. Westside Fuel Reduction Project Soil Specialist Report.
Zielinski, W. J., K. M. Slauson, C. R. Carroll, C. J. Kent, and D. K. Kudrna. 2001. Status of American marten populations in the coastal forests of the Pacific states. Journal of Mammalogy 82:478–490.
Zouhar, Kris. 2004. Lepidium latifolium. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/ [ 2014,
288 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
May 8]. http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forb/leplat/all.html Accessed 8 May 2014.
Zyznar, E. and P.J. Urness. 1969. Qualitative identification of forage remnants in deer feces. Journal of Wildlife Management 33:506-510.
289 Crooked Mud Honey Integrated Restoration Project
Appendix A – Project Maps
Appendix B – Vegetation Treatment Scheme Maps
Appendix C – Criteria for Retention Areas
Appendix D – BMPs
Appendix E – Road Recommendations Table
290