Environmental Assessment United States FY2016-2025 Prescribe Burn Program Department of Agriculture

Forest Service Winn Ranger District, Kisatchie National Forest Southern Region Grant, Natchitoches & Winn Parishes, Louisiana

June 2014

The 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 of communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TTY). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

Printed on recycled paper – June 2015

Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE AND NEED ...... 1 1.1 Introduction ...... 1 1.2 Purpose and Need for Action ...... 1 1.3 Desired Future Conditions ...... 3 1.4 Decision to be Made ...... 5 1.5 Public Involvement ...... 5 1.6 Summary of Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources ...... 6 1.7 Impact Topics...... 6 1.7.1 Impact Topics Analyzed in this EA ...... 6 1.7.2 Impact Topics Dismissed from Further Consideration ...... 8 CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES ...... 10 2.1 Alternative 1: Proposed Action ...... 10 2.2 Alternative 2: No Action ...... 18 2.3 Alternatives Considered But Not Addressed in Detail ...... 18 2.3.1 Prescribed Burning Combined with Mechanical Treatment Alternative ...... 18 2.3.2 Dormant Season Burning Alternative ...... 19 2.4 Management Requirements ...... 19 2.5 Design Criteria ...... 20 2.6 Comparison of Alternatives ...... 25 CHAPTER 3: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 26 3.1 Vegetation ...... 27 3.1.1 Affected Environment ...... 27 3.1.2 Impacts of Alternative 1: Proposed Action ...... 39 3.1.3 Impacts of Alternative 2: No Action ...... 43 3.1.4 Cumulative Effects...... 46 3.2 Wildlife ...... 47 3.2.1 Affected Environment ...... 47 3.2.2 Impacts of Alternative 1: Proposed Action ...... 58 3.2.3 Impacts of Alternative 2: No Action ...... 64 3.2.4 Cumulative Effects...... 66 3.3 Soils...... 67 3.3.1 Affected Environment ...... 67 3.3.2 Impacts of Alternative 1: Proposed Action ...... 73 3.3.3 Impacts of Alternative 2: No Action ...... 74 3.3.4 Cumulative Effects...... 75 3.4 Water Quality and Aquatic Resources ...... 75 3.4.1 Affected Environment ...... 75

i Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

3.4.2 Impacts of Alternative 1: Proposed Action ...... 78 3.4.3 Impacts of Alternative 2: No Action ...... 79 3.4.4 Cumulative Effects...... 80 3.5 Air Quality ...... 80 3.5.1 Affected Environment ...... 80 3.5.2 Impacts of Alternative 1: Proposed Action ...... 82 3.5.3 Impacts of Alternative 2: No Action ...... 83 3.5.4 Cumulative Effects...... 84 3.6 Climate Change ...... 84 3.6.1 Affected Environment ...... 84 3.6.2 Impacts of Alternative 1: Proposed Action ...... 85 3.6.3 Impacts of Alternative 2: No Action ...... 87 3.6.4 Cumulative Effects...... 87 3.7 Socioeconomics ...... 88 3.7.1 Affected Environment ...... 88 3.7.2 Impacts of Alternative 1: Proposed Action ...... 90 3.7.3 Impacts of Alternative 2: No Action ...... 91 3.7.4 Cumulative Effects...... 91 3.8 Recreation ...... 91 3.8.1 Affected Environment ...... 91 3.8.2 Impacts of Alternative 1: Proposed Action ...... 94 3.8.3 Impacts of Alternative 2: No Action ...... 95 3.8.4 Cumulative Effects...... 95 3.9 Heritage Resources ...... 96 3.9.1 Affected Environment ...... 96 3.9.2 Impacts of Alternative 1: Proposed Action ...... 96 3.9.3 Impacts of Alternative 2: No Action ...... 97 3.9.4 Cumulative Effects...... 97 3.10 Public Health and Safety ...... 98 3.10.1 Affected Environment ...... 98 3.10.2 Impacts of Alternative 1: Proposed Action ...... 98 3.10.3 Impacts of Alternative 2: No Action ...... 99 3.10.4 Cumulative Effects...... 100 3.11 Transportation ...... 100 3.11.1 Affected Environment ...... 100 3.11.2 Impacts of Alternative 1: Proposed Action ...... 100 3.11.3 Impacts of Alternative 2: No Action ...... 101 3.11.4 Cumulative Effects...... 101

ii Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

CHAPTER 4: CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION ...... 102 4.1 List of Preparers ...... 102 4.2 Individuals, Organizations and Tribes Consulted ...... 102 CHAPTER 5: LITERATURE CITED ...... 104 CHAPTER 6: ACRONYMS AND GLOSSARY ...... 111 6.1 Acronyms ...... 111 6.2 Glossary ...... 112 APPENDIX A: FLORA BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT ...... A-1 APPENDIX B: FAUNA BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT ...... B-1 APPENDIX C: HERITAGE RESOURCES LIMITED REVIEW CHECKLIST ...... C-1

FIGURES Figure 1-1. Vicinity Map of Winn Ranger District Units and the Kisatchie National Forest...... 2 Figure 2-1. Proposed Burn Areas on the Winn Ranger District for the FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program...... 11 Figure 3-1. Effectiveness of Hand Raking Around Trees...... 60

TABLES Table 1-1. Land Use Classification of the Winn Ranger District...... 1 Table 1-2. Desired Future Conditions for the Winn Ranger District Fiscal Year 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program...... 4 Table 2-1. Proposed Action Activities...... 10 Table 2-2. Burning Program Acreages for the Last Ten Years...... 12 Table 2-3. Comparison of Alternatives by Actions...... 25 Table 3-1. NNIP of Concern Found on the Winn Ranger District...... 31 Table 3-2. Proposed, Endangered, Threatened, Sensitive, and Conservation Species listed for Louisiana possibly located on the Winn Ranger District of KNF...... 48 Table 3-3. Conservation Species (not analyzed as PETS) possibly located on the Winn Ranger District, KNF...... 49 Table 3-4. Terrestrial Management Indicator Species for the Winn Ranger District...... 53 Table 3-5. Aquatic Management Indicator Species for the Winn Ranger District...... 57 Table 3-6. Potential Effects to Proposed, Threatened, and Endangered Species Possibly on the Winn Ranger District...... 59 Table 3-7. Potential Effects to Sensitive Species possibly on the Winn Ranger District...... 59 Table 3-8. Soil Series Characteristics and Prescribed Burning Suitability for FY 2016through 2025, Winn Ranger District...... 71 Table 3-9. Wildland Fire Suppression Costs...... 89 Table 3-10. Prescribed Fire Treatment Acreages and Estimated Costs...... 90 Table 3-11. 2016-2026 Treatment Types and Cost Estimates – Proposed Action...... 90 Table 3-14. ROS Classifications and Objectives...... 93 Table 3-15. SIO Classification of Winn Ranger District...... 94

iii Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE AND NEED 1.1 INTRODUCTION The Winn Ranger District is proposing the use of dormant and growing season burning in Grant, Natchitoches, and Winn Parishes, Louisiana over the next 10 fiscal years (FY) starting in FY2016 (October 2015) through FY2025 (September 2025). The Winn Ranger District Prescribed Burning Project would consist of all Compartments on the Winn Ranger District in the Kisatchie National Forest (KNF). For the purpose of this Environmental Assessment (EA), the Winn District will be referred to as the “project area” (Figure 1-1).

The Winn Ranger District Office of the Kisatchie National Forest is located in western Winn Parish, approximately seven miles west of Winnfield, LA and approximately one mile south of Calvin, LA. The district is located in the Grant, Natchitoches and Winn parishes in Louisiana. Figure 1-1). The Winn Ranger District lies within several watersheds, the majority of which is located within the Saline Bayou watershed. The project area comprises portions of other watersheds including Antoine Creek, Upper Dugdemona, Nantachie Creek, Lower Dugdemona, Iatt Creek, and Little River.

The Winn Ranger District administrative boundary contains 164,774 acres of National Forest System (NFS) lands and approximately 160,237 acres of private land for a total of approximately 327,358 acres. Approximately 152,486 acres of NFS lands are forested, 1,596 acres are in agricultural use, and approximately 2,492 acres are water bodies or wetlands (Table 1-1).

Table 1-1. Land Use Classification of the Winn Ranger District. Project Area National Forest System Private Land Land Use (acres)* (acres)* Forested 149,646 120,971 Non-Forested 10,997 10,635 Agricultural 1,596 16,146 Urban 43 1,118 Wetlands 1,196 4,554 Water 1,296 6,813 Total 164,774 160,237 Grand Total 324,981 acres *All acres are estimates

1.2 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION The purpose of this project is to implement the Forest Plan’s (USFS, 1999a) direction by managing NFS lands on an ecosystem basis for red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) habitat, Louisiana pine snake habitat, unique and native plant and animal communities, healthy growing forests for plant and animal species, water quality, recreation, enjoyment of the public, and soil conservation for this generation and future generations.

Purpose and Need 1 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Figure 1-1. Vicinity Map of Winn Ranger District Units and the Kisatchie National Forest.

Purpose and Need 2 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Differences between current and desired conditions have been identified within the Winn Ranger District. In order to move the project area toward the desired future conditions, specific resource management actions were identified and the Proposed Action and alternatives were developed. This EA is tiered to the management directions stated within certain governing documents described below, which are incorporated by reference.

1.3 DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS The Forest Plan and its accompanying Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) (USFS, 1999b) have been developed to direct the management of the Kisatchie National Forest by defining goals, desired future conditions, objectives, standards, and guidelines. For the purpose of this EA, the Forest Plan goals, desired future conditions, objectives, standards, and guidelines will be referred to as “Desired Future Conditions” (DFC).

The Proposed Action, which is described in detail in Chapter 2, meets the standards and guidelines in the Forest Plan. In order to achieve desired conditions, the Proposed Action follows the goals and objectives of the Forest Plan (pages 2-1 thorough 2-7) while complying with the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Management of the Red-Cockaded Woodpecker and Its Habitat on National Forests in the Southern Region (RCW FEIS), and the Forest Plan, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service/Southern Region Red-cockaded Woodpecker Recovery Plan (RCW Recovery Plan), the Conservation Assessment for Hillside Seepage Bogs of Kisatchie National Forest (BM), and the Conservation Assessment for Prairies of the Kisatchie National Forest.

Not all of the existing conditions within the project area meet the DFC outlined within the Forest Plan. Table 1-2 provides a summary list of objectives as they relate to proposed treatments. Some of the desired conditions have been re-worded or combined to summarize the more general goals and objectives of the Forest Plan.

The National Strategy: The Final Phase in the Development of the National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management Strategy represents the culmination of the three-phased Cohesive Strategy effort initiated in 2009 (Forests and Rangelands, 2014). The National Strategy establishes a national vision for wildland fire management, defines three national goals, describes the wildland fire challenges, identifies opportunities to reduce wildfire risks, and establishes national priorities focused on achieving the national goals. The National Strategy explores four broad challenges:

1. Managing vegetation and fuels; 2. Protecting homes, communities, and other values at risk; 3. Managing human-caused ignitions; and 4. Effectively and efficiently responding to wildfire.

Furthermore, Fire Regime Condition Class (FRCC) was developed and is utilized as an interagency, standardized tool for determining the degree of departure from reference condition vegetation, fuels and disturbance regimes (FRCC, No Date). A natural fire regime is a general

Purpose and Need 3 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment classification of the role fire would play across a landscape in the absence of modern human mechanical intervention, but including the influence of aboriginal burning. Natural (historical) fire regimes are classified based on average number of years between fires (fire frequency) combines with the severity (amount of replacement) of the fire on the dominant overstory vegetation.

Table 1-2. Desired Future Conditions for the Winn Ranger District Fiscal Year 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program. Desired Future Conditions/Forest Plan Objectives Objective 1-4: Provide a level of wildfire protection, which emphasizes cost effective wildfire prevention and suppression while minimizing loss of resources (Forest Plan, page 2-4). Objective 1-5: Manage for productive and healthy forest ecosystems by utilizing comprehensive integrated approaches designed to prevent and minimize resource losses or damage due to insects and diseases (Forest Plan, page 2-4). Objective 2-1: Manage to restore or maintain the structure, composition, and processes of the four major landscape forest ecosystems known to occur on the Forest, and unique or under- represented inclusional communities embedded within them (Forest Plan, page 2-4). Objective 2-3: Manage to protect, improve, and maintain habitat conditions for all threatened, endangered, sensitive, and conservation species occurring on the Forest. Manage habitat conditions on pine and pine-hardwood areas within established RCW habitat management areas to achieve a long-term forest wide RCW population of 1,405 active clusters (Forest Plan, page 2-4). Objective 2-7: Provide quality habitat for game and fish populations (Forest Plan, page 2-5). Objective 6-1: Manage the Forest to achieve a mixture of desired future conditions using even- aged, two-aged, and uneven-aged silvicultural systems and regeneration methods; and a variety of manual, mechanical, prescribed fire, and herbicide vegetation management treatments (Forest Plan, page 2-6). Objective 6-2: Utilize prescribed fire in fire-dependent ecosystems to maintain natural plant communities by varying the timing, frequency, and intensity of fire (Forest Plan, page 2-6). Source: USFS, 1999a

The Winn Ranger District is currently characterized as a Fire Regime I, which typifies a short return interval with non-lethal fires. Fire Regime I is defined by the FRCC as follows:

 Fire Regime I: 0-35 year frequency and low (surface fires most common) to mixed severity (less than 75 percent of the dominant overstory vegetation replaced) or short return interval, non-lethal fire. Condition Class (CC) is a classification of the amount of departure from the natural regime (FRCC, No Date). They include three conditions classes for each fire regime. The classification is based on a relative measure describing the degree of departure from the historical natural fire regime. This departure results in changes to one (or more) of the following ecological components: vegetation characteristics (species composition, structural stages, stand age, canopy closure, and mosaic pattern); fuel composition; fire frequency, severity, and pattern; and other associated disturbances (e.g. insect and disease mortality, grazing, and drought). The three classes are based on low (CC 1), moderate (CC 2), and high (CC 3) departure from the central

Purpose and Need 4 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment tendency of the natural (historical) regime. The central tendency is a composite estimate of vegetation characteristics (species composition, structure stages, stand age, canopy closure, and mosaic pattern); fuel composition; fire frequency, severity, and pattern; and other associated natural disturbances. Low departure is considered to be within the natural (historical) range of variability, while moderate and high departures are outside.

The goal of the prescribed burn program is to move the Forest towards CC 1 and, in areas where that goal has already been accomplished, maintain it. In summary, implementing the proposed prescribed burn program would further improve the current FRCC over time.

1.4 DECISION TO BE MADE Based on the analysis and description of the purpose and need for the Proposed Action documented in this EA, the responsible official will make the following decisions: 1. Determine whether the Proposed Action should be implemented at this time; or if an alternative to the Proposed Action should be implemented at this time; and 2. Determine the management requirements and monitoring activities necessary to protect the ecosystem and to achieve other resource goals, objectives, and desired future conditions. Should a decision be made to select all or part of an action alternative, the selected alternative would be implemented over the next ten-year period.

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Council of Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations that implement NEPA mandate that agencies consider environmental issues. The decision to be made would be based on the environmental and non-environmental issues evaluated in this document.

1.5 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Scoping is defined by the NEPA act of 1969 (40 CFR 1501.7) as "an early and open process for determining the scope of issues to be addressed and for identifying the significant issues related to the Proposed Action." The issues are used to develop design criteria and potential alternative management actions.

This EA is subject to predecisional objection regulations under 36 CFR 218 as it discloses impacts of a project or activity implementing the Kisatchie National Forest’s Revised Land and Resource Management Plan. This project is not authorized under the Healthy Forest Restoration Act. According to 36 CFR 218.5, all interested and affected parties who provided written comment as defined in § 218.2 during scoping or the comment period will be eligible to participate in the objection process. A legal notice establishing the 30-day comment period on this draft EA will be published in the Winn Parish Enterprise. The opportunity to comment ends 30 days following the date of publication of the legal notice in the newspaper of record. The 30- day draft EA with Appendices was placed on the PALS website, http://www.fs.fed.us/nepa/nepa_projects?forest=110801, and a letter was mailed to interested parties referencing the website and requesting their 30-day comments. The 30-day comment notice was placed in the Winn Parish Enterprise on XXX.

Purpose and Need 5 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

The proposal has been listed in the Forest’s Schedule of Proposed Actions since September 17, 2014. The proposal was provided to the public, federal, state and non-government agencies for comment during a 30 day public scoping period. Scoping letters were sent out on September 17, 2014 to interested parties on the Winn Ranger District scoping list, and a Legal Notice was published in the Winn Parish Enterprise on September 24, 2014. One comment letter was received from the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma during the public scoping period asking for additional information and requesting to be a consulting party on the individual projects involved with the Prescribed Burning Program. No potentially significant issues were identified to address in the EA analysis.

1.6 SUMMARY OF IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES Irreversible commitments are non-renewable resources that are permanently lost or renewable resources that can only be renewed after a long period of time. Non-renewable resources include heritage (archaeological), soil (productivity), and minerals, such as oil and gas, coal, or petroleum products.

An irretrievable commitment is the production of renewable resources lost because of allocation decisions that forego the production or use of renewable resources. Allocation decisions that forego the production or use of most renewable resources for relatively long periods of time include those that establish wilderness and scenic areas, research natural areas, recreation sites, and the construction of new roads.

There would be no irreversible or irretrievable commitment of resources for any alternative described in this EA.

1.7 IMPACT TOPICS Specific impact topics were developed for discussion focus and to allow comparison of the environmental consequences of each alternative. These impact topics were identified based on federal laws, regulations, and Executive Orders from issues raised during internal and external scoping. A brief rationale for the selection of each impact topic is given below, as well as the rationale for dismissing specific topics from further consideration.

1.7.1 IMPACT TOPICS ANALYZED IN THIS EA Vegetation The Endangered Species Act of 1973 requires disclosure of impacts of federal actions on all federally protected threatened or endangered species. Prescribed burns can disturb, remove, and alter vegetation communities and special status plant species. The spread of invasive plants could occur and would need to be mitigated. Therefore, vegetation is addressed as an impact topic in this EA.

Wildlife The Endangered Species Act of 1973 requires disclosure of impacts of federal actions on all federally protected threatened or endangered species. Burning vegetation could alter wildlife

Purpose and Need 6 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment habitat and temporarily displace wildlife, including special status species, from the immediate vicinity of the project area. Therefore, wildlife is addressed as an impact topic in this EA.

Soils Prescribed burning can increase total watershed yields, storm peak flows, erosion, and sedimentation without runoff management practices in place to protect soil loss. Soil productivity could be adversely impacted through compaction, erosion, and nutrient leaching. Therefore, soils are addressed as an impact topic in this EA.

Water Quality and Aquatic Resources United States Forest Service (USFS) policies require protection of water quality consistent with the provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977, a national policy to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters and to prevent, control, and abate water pollution. Prescribed burning could result in ground disturbing activity and an associated potential for soil erosion, storm water runoff sedimentation, and turbidity. Therefore, water quality and aquatic resources are discussed in this EA.

Air Quality The Federal 1970 Clean Air Act stipulates that federal agencies have an affirmative responsibility to protect the air quality of national forests from adverse air pollution impacts. All types of fires generate smoke and particulate matter, which can impact air quality within the KNF and surrounding region. Therefore, air quality is addressed as an impact topic in this EA.

Climate Change A growing body of scientific research, published in peer reviewed journals and synthesized by groups such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the U.S. Climate Change Science Program, depicts a global climate that is changing. Research also shows that human activities, especially emissions of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, contribute to this changing climate. Emissions of greenhouse gases could occur during prescribed burning. Therefore, climate change is addressed as an impact topic in this EA.

Socioeconomics Prescribed burning could have impacts on socioeconomics associated with the cost of treatments. Additionally, prescribed burn treatments that reduce hazardous fuel loads tend to limit the size and frequency of wildland fires and therefore suppression costs. Therefore, socioeconomics is addressed as an impact topic in this EA.

Recreation Prescribed burning can result in the temporary closure of certain areas and/or result in visual impacts that may affect recreational use of the national forest. Therefore, recreation is addressed as an impact topic in this EA.

Heritage Resources Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, provides the framework for federal review and protection of heritage resources and ensures that they are considered during federal project planning and execution. Prescribed burning activities, such as

Purpose and Need 7 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment construction of fireline, can disturb or destroy heritage resources. Therefore, heritage resources are addressed as an impact topic in this EA.

Public Health and Safety Public health and safety would be affected by exposure to smoke and the potential for a fire to escape. Therefore, public health and safety is addressed as an impact topic in this EA.

Transportation Smoke from prescribed fires can create hazardous situations on roads resulting in temporary road closures. Therefore, transportation is addressed as an impact topic in this EA.

1.7.2 IMPACT TOPICS DISMISSED FROM FURTHER CONSIDERATION Conflicts with Land Use Plans, Policies, or Controls Both alternatives considered in this EA conform to the KNF’s related land use plans. Therefore, this impact topic was dismissed from further consideration in this EA.

Ecologically Critical Areas or Other Unique Natural Resources The areas targeted for prescribed burning within the Winn Ranger District do not contain any designated ecologically critical areas, wild and scenic rivers, or other unique natural resources. Therefore, this impact topic was dismissed from further consideration in this EA.

Environmental Justice Presidential Executive Order 12898, General Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, requires all Federal agencies to incorporate environmental justice into their missions by identifying and addressing the disproportionately high and/or adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs and policies on minorities and low-income populations and communities. The proposed project would not have disproportionate health or environmental effects on minorities or low-income populations or communities as defined in the USEPA’s Draft Environmental Justice Guidance (July 1996). Therefore, environmental justice was dismissed from further consideration in this EA.

Prime and Unique Farmlands In August 1980, the Council for Environmental Quality (CEQ) directed that Federal agencies must assess the effects of their actions on farmland soils classified by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources Conservation Service as prime or unique. Prime or unique farmland is defined as soil that particularly produces general crops, such as common foods, forage, fiber, and oil seed; unique farmland produces specialty crops, such as fruits, vegetables, and nuts. Since the project area does not meet the definition of farmland as stated in Title 7, Chapter 73, Section 4201 (c)(1) of the Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA), it is not applicable to the FPPA. Therefore, this impact topic was dismissed from further consideration in this EA.

Soundscape The soundscape could be affected during the prescribed burn activities; however, impacts would be temporary and negligible in intensity. The proposed action would not affect natural ambient

Purpose and Need 8 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment sound in the long-term. Therefore, soundscape was dismissed from further consideration in this EA.

Sustainability and Long-term Management: Sustainability is the result achieved by doing things in ways that do not compromise the environment or its capacity to provide for present and future generations. Sustainable practices minimize the short- and long-term environmental impacts of development and other activities through resource conservation, recycling, waste minimization, and the use of energy efficient and ecologically responsible materials and techniques. Project actions would not compromise the environment or the forest’s capacity to provide for present and future generations. Therefore, this impact topic was dismissed from further consideration in this EA.

Purpose and Need 9 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES A basic principle of NEPA is that the federal government must consider reasonable alternatives to a proposed action. Considering alternatives helps avoid unnecessary impacts and allows analysis of reasonable ways to achieve the stated purpose. To warrant detailed evaluation, an alternative must be reasonable. To be considered reasonable, an alternative must be ready for decision (any necessary preceding events have taken place), affordable, capable of implementation, and must meet the purpose of and need for the action.

2.1 ALTERNATIVE 1: PROPOSED ACTION Prescribed burning is used to obtain a desired future condition in longleaf forests and other southern pines of the west gulf coastal plains described as open stands of pine with species-rich, productive herbaceous plant communities. The Proposed Action is designed to help achieve the desired future conditions of improved forest health, fuel reduction, wildlife habitat improvement, restoration of native plant communities and brownspot (longleaf pine) disease control on National Forest properties within the Winn Ranger District. A description of the treatments proposed under the Proposed Action is given below. Activities proposed as part of the Proposed Action are presented in Table 2-1 and shown in Figure 2-1.

Table 2-1. Proposed Action Activities. Proposed Activities Treatment Area1 Proposed prescribed burn treatments (yearly): Dormant season 18,000 to 22,000 acres Growing season 5,000 to 8,000 acres2 1Acreage is estimated from GIS 2Growing season accomplishment may exceed the 5,000 to 8,000 range in any given year, but would be close to the total goal for the period of the project.

Approximately 230,000 to 300,000 acres would be burned under the decision to implement this alternative. These areas would be burned in fiscal years 2016 through 2025, and subsequently inspected for additional burning needs on a two to five-year rotation as described in the management area prescriptions contained in the Forest Plan. Both dormant season (mid- September through mid-March) and growing season (mid-March through mid-September) burns are proposed for each fiscal year. In some instances, areas would be burned in the dormant season and then again in the next year’s growing season. Weather and/or funding constraints may prohibit all areas being burned during the appropriate fiscal years. Burning would occur during the next burning cycle.

The timing for the proposed FY 2016 through 2025 prescribed burn areas is an estimate. Program implementation would be dependent upon the conditions that exist at the time of the burning. If conditions are unfavorable at the time that a particular burn is scheduled, implementation would take place later in the same year, or in the following year. The majority of prescribed burns would be during the dormant season (mid-September to mid-March), and the remainder would be during the growing season (mid-March to mid-September). Dormant season

Alternatives 10 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Figure 2-1. Proposed Burn Areas on the Winn Ranger District for the FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program.

Alternatives 11 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment burns are less heat intensive and reduce forest fuels (dead grasses, leaves, needles, branches, small logs, etc.), lessen the risk of catastrophic wildfires, and promote herbaceous species diversity for wildlife. Growing season burns are more heat intensive burns, specifically late April, May, and June burns that are advantageous for longleaf pine seedling competition control, growth stimulation, and control of hardwood midstory. Growing season burns are also utilized for the control of woody stems and promoting herbaceous species diversity. Both types of burns may be utilized to reduce forest fuels and enhance wildlife habitat. In some instances, areas would be burned in the dormant season and then again in the following growing season. This technique is used to reduce existing forest fuels during dormant season burning, which subsequently, manages fire behavior by reducing fuel loading before the growing season burning.

Landscape burning is the method used where existing barriers, such as streams and roads, provide firebreaks to the fullest extent possible. Where no natural barriers exist, permanent firebreaks would be constructed, generally along boundaries with private land. These permanent firelines would be bladed (eight to10 feet wide) with a dozer and would be waterbarred, fertilized, and seeded with native or non-invasive species during implementation as needed.

Fireline erosion control measures include waterbarring, seeding, and fertilizing. Seeding would be completed with native plant seed where feasible. These measures would limit off-site sediment production from the area and the introduction and establishment of invasive exotic plant species.

The number of acres burned in the prescribed burn program on the District has increased over the past few years based on ecosystem management concepts as described in the Forest Plan and the FEIS-RCW. Table 2-2 summarizes the burning program acreages for the last 10 years.

Table 2-2. Burning Program Acreages for the Last Ten Years. Fiscal Year Dormant Season Growing Season TOTAL 2005 15,705 7,200 22,905 2006 12,914 6,404 19,318 2007 18,282 5,153 23,435 2008 19,558 4,588 24,146 2009 19,418 4,854 24,272 2010 21,361 5,282 26,623 2011 18,468 1,933 20,401 2012 15,057 11,483 26,540 2013 12,493 10,265 22,758 2014 15,854 7,782 23,636 TOTAL 169,110 64,944 234,034

The planned overall program for FY 2016 through FY 2025 is being increased to better address hazardous fuels and fire regime conditions and continue the restoration of areas where fire has not been most effectively employed in the past.

Alternatives 12 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

The existing six-year average for prescribed fire is approximately 24,000 acres per year. If the maximum goal of approximately 30,000 acres per year for this 10-year period could be achieved it would increase the annual average prescribed burn acreage by approximately 6,000 acres per year. However the actual accomplishment will be limited by timber sale activity.

The Forest Plan delineates Management Areas (MA) and Sub-Management Areas (SMA) that respond to the Forest goals and objectives and desired future conditions. Specific management area emphasis, within the context of standards and guidelines, is described below. Prescribed burning is proposed within the following SMA's on the Winn Ranger District:

Sub-Management Area 1C (Forest Plan, page 3-3) Goals: The management goals within SMA 1C emphasizes producing and sustaining a high level of a mixture of commodity outputs.

Desired Conditions: The overstory vegetation on a large majority of the area consists primarily of pine stands, which may contain up to 30 percent hardwood. In the older managed stands, trees are typically 90-100 feet tall, greater than 18 inches in diameter, and roughly 80-90 years old. Less than 15 percent of the area is in stand-sized openings less than 20 years old. Prescribed fire should be used where necessary to meet specific tree establishment and maximum growth objectives or to maintain safe levels of fuel loadings to reduce damage from wildfires.

Existing Conditions: Field inventories identified approximately 6,820 acres not meeting desired conditions. Current fuel loading range from 6-10 tons per acre and an abundance of laddered fuel are present in the project area creating hazardous fuel conditions.

Sub-Management Area 3BL (Forest Plan, page 3-8) and Sub-Management Area 3CL (Forest Plan, page 3-11) Goals: The management goals within SMA 3BL and SMA 3CL emphasize the restoration of native, fire dependent longleaf pine communities.

Desired Condition: As a result of frequent prescribed fire, the landscape should be composed of relatively open park-like pine stands eventually dominated by native, fire dependent longleaf pine communities. Other than longleaf pine, there are few shrubs and mid-story trees. The native ground cover is a continuous carpet of grasses, composites, legumes, and other forbs. Prescribed fire is used to maintain conditions at the landscape scale every two to five years with an emphasis on growing season burns.

Existing Condition: Field inventory work identified approximately 7,448 acres in SMA 3BL and 1,182 acres in SMA 3CL not meeting desired conditions. These areas are largely located on dry, upland sites with bisecting drainages. The vegetation consists of dense stands of shrub and midstory hardwoods with the desired pine overstory. The desired ground cover is present but sparse.

Alternatives 13 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Sub-Management Area 3BS (Forest Plan, page 3-9) Goals: The management goals within SMA 3BS emphasize the restoration of native shortleaf pine/oak hickory communities.

Desired Condition: As a result of infrequent prescribed fire, mixtures of shortleaf pine, oaks and hickories (SOH) should dominate the landscape. The overstory has a more or less open canopy, which is moderately to densely stocked with variable sized shortleaf pines and hardwoods. Various shrubs are present and form a fairly thick midstory and understory component. The herbaceous ground cover is sparse to moderate. Prescribed fire should be applied at the landscape scale every 7-10 years.

Existing Condition: Field inventories identified approximately 7,524 acres not meeting desired conditions due to heavy fuel loads. These areas are located primarily on dry, upland sites with dissecting drainages. The existing vegetation consists of dense shrub and midstory hardwoods and a pine/hardwood overstory. The desired ground cover is present but is sparse. Overall, the desired conditions are present within the MA. The areas identified as not meeting desired condition are a result of a buildup of hazardous fuels.

Sub-Management Area 3BM (Forest Plan, page 3-10) Goals: The management goals within SMA 3BM emphasize the restoration of native mixed hardwood/loblolly pine (MHL) communities in an intermediate time period while providing a moderate level of protection of other resources.

Desired Conditions: Restoration includes maintaining areas of MHL while restoring those areas currently dominated by off-site species back to MHL communities. Off-site species are those other than MHL currently existing on sites historically occupied by MHL. Communities composed primarily of various hardwoods dominate the forest. Loblolly pine is also present as a major associate. Old trees greater than 100 years of age occur as individuals or in small groups. There are many large MHL restoration areas up to 80 acres in size, scattered throughout the landscape. Approximately 15 percent of the area is in stand-sized openings at any given time.

Existing Conditions: Vegetation patterns are primarily a product of restoration harvests, stand improvement practices, and the lack of prescribed fire, which results in many large openings in the forest canopy. Field inventories identified approximately 1,763 acres not meeting desired conditions.

Sub-Management Area 3CS (Forest Plan, page 3-12) Goals: The management goals within SMA 3CS emphasize the restoration of native shortleaf/ oak-hickory communities.

Desired Conditions: As a result of infrequent prescribed fire, a mixture of shortleaf pines, oaks, and hickories dominates the landscape. The overstory has a more or less open canopy, which is moderately to densely stocked with variable-sized shortleaf pine and hardwoods. Various shrubs are present and, in combination with regenerating overstory species, form a fairly thick midstory

Alternatives 14 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment and understory component. The herbaceous ground cover is sparse to moderate. Prescribe fire should be applied at the landscape scale every 7-10 years.

Existing Conditions: Field inventories identified approximately 474 acres not meeting desired conditions. These areas are largely located on dry upland sites with bisecting drainages. Current fuel loadings are approximately 7-8 tons per acre and an abundance of ladder fuels are present within the project area creating hazardous fuel conditions.

Sub-Management Area 5CL (Forest Plan, page 3-16) Goals: The management goals within SMA 5CL emphasize the management of RCW habitat and restoring native, fire dependent longleaf pine communities.

Desired Condition: As a result of frequent prescribed fire, the landscape should be composed of relatively open, park-like pine stands with a continuous carpet of herbaceous plants dominated by grasses, composites, legumes and other forbs. Other than longleaf, few shrubs and midstory trees grow on the uplands. Prescribed fire should be applied at the landscape level every two to five years with an emphasis on growing season burns.

Existing Condition: Field inventories identified approximately 49,497 acres not meeting desired conditions. The areas are located primarily on dry, upland sites. The existing vegetation consists of dense shrub and midstory hardwoods and a pine overstory. The desired ground cover is present but sparse. In addition, there are 22 active RCW clusters in this sub-management area.

Sub-Management Area 5CM (Forest Plan, page 3-19) Goals: The management goals within SMA 5CM emphasize management of RCW habitat and restoring native mixed hardwood/loblolly pine communities.

Desired Conditions: Although prescribed fire is a primary tool used to develop and maintain suitable RCW habitat, it has a minimal effect in altering and maintaining the landscape in this area. Fire frequency is increased in those areas providing RCW cluster sites and foraging habitat. Prescribed fire should be applied at the landscape level every 10-15 years; prescribed fire should be used more frequently on areas supporting suitable RCW habitat.

Existing Conditions: Field inventories identified approximately 4,904 acres not meeting desired conditions. There are two RCW clusters (110-2 and 100-5) and its associated foraging habitat, inactive RCW clusters 99-1, 100-1, 100-3, and 101-1 and recruitment cluster 97-R located within the project area. Communities composed primarily of various hardwoods, with loblolly pine as a major associate, dominate the forest. The overstory is relatively closed, multi-layered, and moderately to densely stocked. The midstory is also multi-layered composed of a diversity of shrubs, vines, and overstory saplings. The herbaceous cover is sparse.

Sub-Management Area 5CS (Forest Plan, page 3-18) Goals: The management goals within SMA 5CS emphasize management of RCW habitat and restoring native shortleaf pine/oak-hickory communities.

Alternatives 15 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Desired Conditions: As a result of prescribed fire, the landscape is dominated by a mixture of shortleaf pine, oak, and hickories. Prescribed fire should be applied at the landscape scale every 5-10 years.

Existing Conditions: Field inventories identified approximately 8,617 acres not meeting desired conditions. The areas are located primarily on dry, upland sites. The existing vegetation consists of dense shrub and midstory hardwoods and a pine understory. The desired ground cover is present but sparse.

Sub-Management Area 7C (Forest Plan, page 3-25) Goals: The management goals within MA 7 emphasize providing high levels of hardwood composition, featuring hard mast producers. Forest practices and activities focus on improving the composition of hardwoods in all forested stands. A large majority of the area is managed as hardwood or mixed stands of hardwoods and pines. Benefits to those wildlife species that are associated with habitats containing an increased component of hardwood, especially hard mast producers, are provided.

Desired Conditions: The landscape in this area maintains a relatively natural appearance and is dominated by communities comprised of a mixture of hardwoods and pines. Vegetation patterns are primarily a product of restoration harvests, stand improvement practices, and infrequent prescribed fire that protects and promotes increased hardwood component across the entire area. Narrow road corridors frequently intersect the landscape area. Perennial and intermittent streams frequently dissect the uplands. The overstory is relatively closed, multi-layered, and moderately to densely stocked. The canopy consists of a variety of hardwood trees, with pine being a major associate. The midstory is also multi-layered, composed of a diversity of shrubs, vines, and overstory saplings. The herbaceous groundcover is sparse. The ground is covered with leaf litter and down woody material in various stages of decay.

Existing Conditions: A majority of the forest occurs as areas within which trees are essentially the same age. Tree ages vary from area to area. In the older managed stands, trees are typically 90-100 feet tall and 18-20 inches in diameter. There are small regeneration harvest areas up to 25 acres in size scattered throughout the landscape. Field inventories identified approximately 548 acres not meeting desired conditions.

Sub-Management Area 10DM (Forest Plan, page 3-35) Goals: The management goals within SMA 10DM emphasize management of the scenic river corridor while providing some areas of marginal RCW habitat.

Desired Conditions: Alterations to the area are done so as to produce suitable RCW habitat conditions where possible. Although prescribed fire is a primary tool used to develop and maintain suitable RCW habitat, it has a minimal effect in altering and maintaining the landscape in this area. Fire frequency is increased on those areas providing RCW cluster site and foraging habitat. Evidence of recent prescribed fire occurs on a limited amount of the landscape. Forest succession plays a major role in shaping the landscape vegetation.

Alternatives 16 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Existing Conditions: Other than prescribed burning, no RCW habitat improvements have occurred in the Wild and Scenic River Corridor. This habitat is not suitable for the RCW. Field inventories identified approximately 542 acres not meeting desired conditions.

Sub-Management Area 11DM (Forest Plan, page 3-42) Goals: The management goals within SMA 11DM emphasize management of RCW habitat and production of high quality wildlife habitats within a mixed hardwood-pine landscape. Forest management practices and activities focus on achieving established RCW population objectives and on creating and managing those habitat mosaics, conditions, and attributes most beneficial to the wildlife communities reliant upon mature mixed hardwood-pine habitats.

Desired Conditions: Vegetation patterns are primarily a product of RCW and other wildlife habitat improvement practices, stand regeneration, and the lack of fire. Although prescribed fire is a primary tool used to develop and maintain suitable RCW habitat, it has a minimal effect in altering and maintaining the landscape in this area. Fire frequency is increased in those areas providing RCW cluster sites and foraging habitat.

Existing Conditions: Communities composed primarily of various hardwoods, with loblolly pine as a major associate, dominate the forest. Perennial and intermittent streams frequently dissect the uplands. The overstory is multi-layered and moderately to densely stocked. The midstory is also multi-layered, composed of a diversity of shrubs, vines, and overstory saplings. The herbaceous ground cover is sparse. The ground is covered with leaf litter and down woody material. Field inventories identified approximately 1,354 acres that do not meet desired conditions.

Sub-Management Area 11DS (Forest Plan, page 3-40) Goals: Management goals emphasize providing suitable RCW habitat and producing high quality wildlife habitat created within a mixed pine-hardwood landscape.

Desired Conditions: Vegetation patterns are primarily produced a product of RCW and other wildlife habitat improvement practices, stand regeneration harvests, and infrequent prescribed fire. Small openings may occur frequently as a result of prescribed fire.

Existing Conditions: Much of the forest consists of larger, older overstory trees interspersed with small patches of variable-sized mixtures of hardwoods and pines, or small openings. On the remaining portion, small regeneration harvests are scattered throughout the landscape, primarily shelterwoods, where a significant portion of overstory hardwoods and pines are initially left to provide a seed source and a beneficial environment for the new stand. Field inventories identified approximately 6,375 acres not meeting desired conditions. In addition, there are 10 active RCW clusters in this sub-management area.

Sub-Management Area 11E (Forest Plan, page 3-44) Goals: Management goals emphasize the highest levels of hardwood stands and mixed stands of hardwoods and pines, featuring hardwoods that produce hard mast.

Alternatives 17 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Desired Conditions: Vegetation patterns are primarily produced by infrequent prescribed fire and forest regeneration harvests that protect and promote maximum hardwood composition across the entire area. Regeneration harvests result in small stand-sized openings that are scattered throughout the area.

Existing Conditions: Much of the forest consists of larger, older overstory trees interspersed with small patches of variable-sized mixtures of hardwoods and pines, or small openings. On the remaining portion, small regeneration harvests are scattered throughout the landscape, primarily shelterwoods, where a significant portion of overstory hardwoods and pines are initially left to provide a seed source and a beneficial environment for the new stand. Field inventories identified approximately 7,071 acres not meeting desired conditions.

2.2 ALTERNATIVE 2: NO ACTION Under this alternative, none of the proposed management activities included in the Proposed Action would be implemented. Fire management actions would be limited to prevention, wildfire suppression, and implementation of the prescribed burn program in units for which other valid NEPA documentation and project plans exist. Other actions addressed in other decisions may also occur. Selection of this alternative would not preclude the consideration of other proposals for the analysis area in the future.

This alternative is required by NEPA and serves as a benchmark for other alternatives in order to analyze the effects on the environment from implementation of management activities. However, this alternative is inconsistent with and does not achieve the desired future conditions described in Chapter 2 of the Forest Plan or in Section 1.2 of this document.

2.3 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT NOT ADDRESSED IN DETAIL

2.3.1 PRESCRIBED BURNING COMBINED WITH MECHANICAL TREATMENT ALTERNATIVE This alternative, identified by the Forest’s interdisciplinary team, includes the same activities as the Proposed Action with the exception of combining mechanical treatments (e.g., WOODGATOR®) along with prescribed fire.

This alternative was not considered in detail because it would not meet the entire purpose and need of this project. The use of mechanical treatments, such as the WOODGATOR®, are generally pre-treatment procedures for surface vegetation followed by prescribed burning. The use of the WOODGATOR® would produce results similar to growing season burns in that it would reduce woody stems and promote the growth of herbaceous vegetation. However, the use of the WOODGATOR® would produce different objectives from those achieved by utilizing dormant season burns in that it would not reduce forest fuels, but would only shred or mulch the surface vegetation leaving significantly greater fuel loads on the forest floor. Furthermore, the use of the WOODGATOR® is not economically feasible at a landscape scale. Prescribed burning treatments generally cost an average of $20-$25/acre, whereas the use of the WOODGATOR® costs approximately $400/acre (USFS, 2010a).

Alternatives 18 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

2.3.2 DORMANT SEASON BURNING ALTERNATIVE Dormant Season Burning was considered as an alternative but was dismissed because it is not consistent with the KNF Revised Land and Resource Management Plan and Forestwide Standards and Guidelines for longleaf pine management and RCW management:

 FW-063: Use prescribed fire in fire-dependent plant communities as biologically necessary to maintain ecosystems by varying the timing, frequency, and intensity of fire to cause the change required to perpetuate their existence.

 FW-064: Conduct management ignited burns during both dormant and growing season.

 FW-736: Emphasize growing season burns in those habitats that were naturally maintained by growing season fire.

 FW-800: Emphasize use of growing season burns in ecologically appropriate areas. The guidelines in the Forest Plan for longleaf sub-management areas (SMA) are as follows: SMA-3CL-01 & 02 (Native Community Restoration); SMA-5CL-01&02 (RCW and Native Community Restoration).

2.4 MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS Management requirements are included as part of the Proposed Action. Included in the Proposed Action are applicable standards and guidelines in the Forest Plan, management requirements of the Record of Decision (ROD) and FEIS, and guidance found in the following regional documents, as amended by the Kisatchie’s Revised Forest Plan: the Record of Decision (VM- ROD) and Final Environmental Impact Statement for Vegetation Management in the Coastal Plain/Piedmont (VM-FEIS), the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Suppression of the Southern Pine Beetle, Southern Region, the RCW FEIS, the BM, the Conservation Assessment for Prairies and associated rare plants species of the Kisatchie National Forest, the Conservation Assessment for Louisiana bluestar (Amsonia ludoviciana), the Conservation Assessment for the Barbed rattlesnakeroot (Prenanthes barbata), the Candidate Conservation Agreement for the Louisiana pine snake (Pituophis ruthveni), and the Red-Cockaded Woodpecker (Picoides borealis) Recovery Plan, 2003. They are incorporated here by reference:

 Forest Plan: pages 2-7 through 2-74 (Forestwide Standards and Guidelines). ROD: page R-13 (Rationale for the Decision, Issue #10 Prescribed Burning), page R-19 (Monitoring and Evaluation), and page R-20 (Mitigation).

 FEIS: pages 2-4 through 2-11 (Management Prescriptions and Management Areas), pages 3- 1 through 3-162 (Affected Environment), and pages 4-1 through 4-134 (Environmental Consequences).

 VM-ROD: pages A-1 through A-14 (Management Requirements and Mitigation Measures).

 VM-FEIS: Volume I, pages II-44 through II-65 (Method-Specific Management Requirements and Mitigation Measures) and IV-80 (Soil). Volume II, pages 2-11 through 2- 13 (Personal Protective Equipment and Mitigation Measures).

 SPB-FEIS: pages 2-24 through 2-28 (Mitigation and Specific Mitigating Measures).

 RCW-FEIS: pages 202 through 207 (Monitoring—Proposed Action).

Alternatives 19 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

 BM: pages 9 through 13 (Recommendations for Restoration and Management of Hillside Seeps, and Standards and Guidelines for Bog Management).

 Conservation Assessment for prairies and associated rare plants species of the Kisatchie National Forest: pages 15-20.

 Conservation Assessment for the Louisiana bluestar (Amsonia ludoviciana): pages 10-18.

 Conservation Assessment for the Barbed rattlesnakeroot (Prenanthes barbata): pages 17-20.

 Candidate Conservation Agreement for the Louisiana pine snake (Pituophis ruthveni): pages 14-15.

 Red-Cockaded Woodpecker (Picoides borealis) Recovery Plan, 2003: pages 162-205 (Section 8—Guidelines).

 State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO): Louisiana Division of Archaeology, pages 1 through 18 (Investigation and Report Standards).

 Biological Evaluations for the Winn Ranger District, Kisatchie National Forest, December 2014 (Appendices A and B).

2.5 DESIGN CRITERIA Design criteria are defined as actions taken to avoid, minimize, reduce, eliminate, or compensate for adverse effects of implementing the Proposed Action. The Forest Plan management requirements and standards and guidelines are incorporated into the design of the proposal and alternatives. These design criteria are listed below by resource area.

Soil Productivity and Water Quality

 Use existing firebreaks such as roads, streams, and old firelines where possible; construct waterbars or other water diversions concurrently with fireline reestablishment and rehabilitate as soon as possible after blading; use bladed firelines (as opposed to plowed firelines) when constructing or reconstructing firelines; no firelines would be bladed within 33 feet of the scour channel or 200 feet of bogs; the portion of the fireline between the end of the fireline and the edge of the scour channel or bog will be hand raked. (Project-specific mitigation)

 Wherever firelines must be established with a plow, flat-blade them and install water control devices as described above as soon as ground conditions allow following the burn. Heavy equipment would not be allowed within protected stream courses. (Project-specific mitigation)

 FW–073: Follow prescribed burning parameters and soil exposure standards to minimize soil exposure as specified in the KNF supplement to FSM 5140. (Forest Plan) (GUIDELINE)

 FW–074: Conduct slash burns so they do not consume all litter and duff and alter structure and color of mineral soil on more than 20 percent of the area. Steps taken to limit soil heating include the use of backing fires on steep slopes, scattering slash piles, and burning heavy fuel pockets separately. (VM-29)(GUIDELINE)

Alternatives 20 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

 FW–075: On severely eroded forest soils any area with a litter-duff depth averaging less than 1/2 inch will not burned. (VM-30) (GUIDELINE)

 FW–077: Waterbars on slopes and diversion ditches 50 feet from the stream channel are required on firelines. (Forest Plan) (GUIDELINE)

 FW–078: Install waterbars and diversion ditches on firelines during their construction. Revegetate firelines as soon as possible after the burn project has been completed. (KNF) (GUIDELINE)

 FW–079: Locate plowed firelines outside filter strips along lakes, perennial or intermittent streams, wetlands, or water-source seeps except at designated points. Minimize soil disturbance by using the firelines only as a tie-in with natural barriers. (Forest Plan) (GUIDELINE)

 FW–080: Allow fire to burn into moist landforms and filter strips to create a transition zone or ecotone between uplands and bottomlands. (Forest Plan) (GUIDELINE)

 FW–081: Plan the frequency at which a site is burned to prevent potential adverse effects on soil productivity and soil loss. Burn soils with poor productivity less frequently. (Forest Plan) (GUIDELINE)

 FW–082: Plan the intensity of slash burns to prevent adverse effects on soil erosion, and take into account soil erosion hazards. (Forest Plan) (GUIDELINE)

 FW–083: When wetlands need to be protected from fire, blade, disc, or plow firelines around them only when the water table is low so that the prescribed fire will not damage wetland vegetation or organic matter. Reuse previous firelines as much as possible. Use the least- disturbing method affording adequate fire protection. (Forest Plan) (GUIDELINE)

 FW–084: If a fireline is required next to a wetland, it is not plowed in the transition zone between upland and wetland vegetation except to tie into a natural firebreak. (VM-35) (GUIDELINE)

 FW–449: Manage soils to maintain or improve productivity and to minimize erosion and compaction (refer to FSH 2509.18 and R8 Supplement, FSM 2500, FSH 2509.11 17 and 3509.12). (Forest Plan) (GUIDELINE)

 FW–450: Include erosion control measures and maintenance in all program and project plans. Implement erosion control measures at the time of ground-disturbing activities. Revegetate areas as promptly as practical. (Forest Plan) (GUIDELINE)

 FW–451: Design and implement land management practices so that soil loss does not reduce soil productivity by exceeding allowable loss for any given soil. (Forest Plan) (GUIDELINE)

Streamside Habitat, Riparian Areas, and Wetlands

 FW–513: Within Streamside Habitat Protection Zones (SHPZS) do not allow the following practices:

 Roads, multiple-use trails, plow lines, and skid trails that run parallel to the scour channel, if feasible.

Alternatives 21 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

 Tractor-plow firelines unless they are: (1) used only for wildfire suppression or (2) are more than 33 feet from the scour channel for prescribed fire and used only for tie-in. For wildfires, revegetate plow lines as soon as possible. For prescribed fire, hand rake and subsequently revegetate the fireline between the end of the tractor-plow line and the edge of the scour channel: (Forest Plan) (GUIDELINE)

 FW-515: Riparian Area Protection Zones (RAPZ): Within in a zone that may extend beyond the SHPZ to at least the extent of the flat, level area or alluvial floodplain landform, plan and conduct forest management activities to protect or enhance those distinctive resource values and characteristics that comprise the aquatic and riparian ecosystems. (Forest Plan) (GUIDELINE)

Forest Vegetation Including (TESC) Species

 FW-063: Use prescribed fire in fire-dependent plant communities as biologically necessary to maintain ecosystems by varying the timing, frequency, and intensity of fire to cause the change required to perpetuate their existence. (Forest Plan) (GUIDELINE)

 FW-064: Conduct management ignited burns during both dormant and growing seasons. (Forest Plan) (GUIDELINE)

 FW-076: Growing season underburns are not allowed on the same site more than twice in succession without an intervening dormant season burn. (VM-31) (GUIDELINE)

 TESC (threatened, endangered, special concern) locations and sensitive plant sites are mapped in the Forest Geographic Information System (GIS) coverages; no fireline construction would be permitted within these areas. (Project-specific mitigation)

 Never allow entry of vehicles or machinery into bogs, especially during fireline establishment. (Project-specific mitigation) Sites with Forest-listed rare plants of bogs

 FW-685: Apply prescribed fire, at minimum, when surrounding areas are burned, unless burning of bogs is not practical. When feasible, include bogs within larger burn areas. Use prescribed fire at the season and frequency that applies to the management area or sub- management area within which the area is located. Generally, apply prescribed fire during the growing season on a two to three year frequency. Prohibit plowlines within the bogs. (Forest Plan) (GUIDELINE)

 FW-686: Use natural firebreaks or wetlines where possible, or disked lines outside the perimeter of buffer strips. Avoid using plowed firelines within bogs whenever possible. They may be used when needed to protect private lands. (Forest Plan) (GUIDELINE)

 FW-687: Allow dormant season fires to reduce fuels in bogs prior to growing season burns. (Forest Plan) (GUIDELINE)

 Coordinate prescribed fire activities with other resource management needs.

Alternatives 22 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Sites with Forest-listed rare plants of bayhead swamps

 FW-690: Apply prescribed fire, at minimum, when surrounding areas are burned, unless burning of bayhead swamps is not practical. When feasible, include bayhead swamps within larger burn areas. (Forest Plan) (GUIDELINE)

 FW-691: Allow dormant season fire to reduce fuels in bayhead swamps prior to growing season burns. (Forest Plan) (GUIDELINE)

 FW-692: Use natural firebreaks or wetlines where possible; alternately, use disked lines outside the perimeter of buffer strips. Avoid plowed firelines within bayhead swamps whenever possible. They may be used when needed to protect private lands. (Forest Plan) (GUIDELINE)

 FW-694: Use prescribed fire at the season and frequency that applies to the management area or sub-management area within which the calcareous prairie and forest are located. Avoid fire plow lines in prairies as much as possible and allow fires to burn down toward streams without firelines if feasible. Alternatively, control woody encroachment by bush- hogging, cutting, or herbicide injection. (Forest Plan) (GUIDELINE) Sites with Forest-listed rare plants of sandy woodlands

 FW-698: Use prescribed fire at the season and frequency that applies to the management area or sub-management area within which the sandy woodlands are located. Allow fires to burn down toward streams without firelines if feasible. (Forest Plan) (GUIDELINE)

Exotic Pest Plants

 FW-701: Identify and map exotic pest plant species infestations as they are located. Use appropriate control methods as funding allows, including, but not limited to, prescribed fire, herbicides, manual removal, and mowing. Monitor after control treatments and re-treat as needed to control infestations. (KNF) (GUIDELINE)

Wildlife Including (TESC) Species

 Management requirements for the protection of RCW and RCW habitat include no fireline construction or use of heavy equipment within cluster boundaries, except when topography, protection of other resources and property boundary location dictate the construction of new firelines or other management activities (such as slash treatments); no concentrated activity within cluster, avoid nesting season disturbance except as necessary for the continued survival of the RCW which would include activities such as installation of artificial cavities to replace cavities lost to natural causes or in the event of a cavity tree being lost or damaged during implementation of the Proposed Action. (Project-specific mitigation)

 RCW cluster trees will be protected from prescribed burns by hand raking to within 5 feet of the tree and pre-lighting. All active cavity trees lost or any active cavities destroyed by prescribed fire will be replaced within 48 hours by installing the appropriate number of artificial cavities within suitable trees (FEIS, I-38).

Alternatives 23 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Heritage Resources

 Surveys for heritage resources will be conducted in those areas not qualifying for categorical exclusion before any decision is made. Any sites requiring protection will be identified prior to a decision and designated on the ground before ground disturbing activities occur. If any sites are discovered during fireline construction, operations will cease until the District Archaeologist can evaluate the site and will follow the Programmatic Agreement among the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Kisatchie National Forest, the Louisiana State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) and Federally Recognized Tribes Concerning the Management of Historic Properties on the National Forest Lands in Louisiana. (Project-specific mitigation)

Human Health and Safety

 A detailed Burn Plan will be prepared for each proposed unit identifying required resources, concerns, and specific burning parameters. The burn will be executed by qualified personnel under the supervision of a prescribed burn boss whose level of qualification will be based on the complexity of the unit. Contingency forces would be identified in the BP and the burn boss will be responsible to ensure their availability. (Project-specific mitigation)

 Louisiana Voluntary Smoke Management (LVSM) guidelines would be adhered to. Smoke warning signs will be placed on state highways and parish roads where smoke has the potential to limit visibility for motorists. (Project-specific mitigation)

 Burn blocks, recreation areas and trails would be patrolled prior to ignition to minimize any risk to forest users. Signs or lookouts will be posted on trail crossings to warn users of the proposed actions. (Project-specific mitigation)

Fire Management

 The use of prescribed fire on the district would be governed by the prescription parameters outlined in the Kisatchie National Forest Supplement to Forest Service Manual 5140 (KNF Supplement 5100-08-1) which outlines atmospheric, weather, and physical constraints on prescribed fire.

 Effects on other resources will be mitigated by adherence to the constraints noted above. In the past, it was common practice to plow out to "protect" sensitive resources including riparian areas, wildlife key areas, and areas of sensitive soil and water resources. With the move to landscape-level burning, it has been observed through monitoring of post burn effects that generally these areas are not adversely affected by careful application of prescribed fire. The majority of species for which fire is thought to have adverse effects are bottomland species. During the early to mid-dormant season these areas generally do not burn intensively. Following green-up in the early spring, live fuel moistures in these areas are generally too high to support intense fire activity.

 Two time frames appear to be critical for protection of these resources. From mid to late March, prior to "green-up," fire often carries through bottomlands; and during mid to late summer, when live fuel moistures fall below 150-200 percent, fire may carry through the bottomlands, particularly during drought conditions.

Alternatives 24 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

 Monitoring of fire behavior and post-burn evaluations will be used to govern program implementation within prescription parameters. If it is observed that fire is carrying into and through the riparian areas, firing techniques will be modified or the program suspended until rainfall moderates burning conditions. (Project-specific mitigation)

Air Quality

 FW-060: Do not conduct prescribed burning when the predicted atmospheric dispersion (mixing height and transport wind speed) does not meet criteria outlined in A Guide for Prescribed Fire in the Southern Forests, the KNF supplement to Forest Service Manual (FSM 5140), or State regulations and guidelines, or when predictions indicate that smoke might drift into highways, airports, hospitals, populated areas, or other sensitive areas. (Forest Plan) (GUIDELINE)

 FW-053: Conduct each management ignited prescribed fire according to a burn plan prepared before ignition. The appropriate line officer must approve the burn plan before carrying out a management ignited fire, or to continue with a prescribed natural fire. (KNF) (STANDARD)

2.6 COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES Table 2-3 provides an overview of the differences between the two alternatives considered in this EA. A quantitative comparison of the environmental effects of the alternatives is summarized in Chapter 3.

Table 2-3. Comparison of Alternatives by Actions. Alternative 1: Proposed Alternative 2: Proposed Activities Action No Action Fiscal Year Average Dormant season burning 18,000 to 22,000 acres 0 acres Growing season burning 5,000 to 8,000 acres 0 acres Yearly Average acres 23,000 to 30,000 acres 0 acres

10 Year TOTAL 230,000 to 300,000 acres 0 acres

Alternatives 25 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

CHAPTER 3: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES This section discusses the expected effects of the Proposed Action and No Action alternatives presented in Chapter 2. It also forms the scientific basis for comparing the alternatives in consideration of the best available science. Programmatic environmental impact statements were prepared during development of the Forest Plan and as an examination of vegetation management activities in the Coastal Plain/Piedmont. These documents, the FEIS (USFS, 1999b) and the VM-FEIS (USFS, 1989a), present analyses of general effects expected from practices such as those included in the Proposed Action. Discussions of effects in this chapter are tiered to these documents to avoid repetition.

The analysis of Proposed, Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive (PETS) species were considered in the Biological Evaluations (BE) for the Prescribed Burning Program on the Winn Ranger District, KNF. The Flora and Fauna BEs are included as part of this analysis in Appendices A and B respectively. For the purpose of this EA, conservation species were included in the analysis as required by Forest Service NEPA guidelines.

Effects can be positive or negative depending on the resource perspective and desired future condition. Effects can be direct, indirect or cumulative. Direct effects occur at the time and place as the actions that cause them. Their causes are usually obvious. Indirect effects occur at a later time or a different place than the actions that cause them. Their causes may not be obvious and may stem from effects on other environmental elements. Cumulative effects are the combined effects of these actions with those of other past, present and future actions. Cumulative effects can be on-site (confined to the project area) or outside-site (outside the project area).

Past, present, and future projects and actions considered for the cumulative effects analysis include:

 Prescribed burning  Periodic wildland fire (on the district, on the Forest, and outside of the Forest)  Visitor use, including hiking, hunting, boating, biking, camping, horseback riding, motorized use, and wildlife viewing  Infrastructure development, construction, and urbanization  Vehicular use on and off road  Forestry and logging  Spread and management of invasive species  Habitat management and restoration  Herbicide use

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 26 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

3.1 VEGETATION

3.1.1 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 3.1.1.1 General Vegetation The KNF is divided into four major landscape community types which represent the historical landscapes of the Forest: longleaf pine forests, shortleaf pine/oak-hickory forests, mixed hardwood/loblolly pine forests, and riparian forests. Detailed descriptions of each community type are provided in the FEIS, pages 3-19 through 3-21 (USFS, 1999b). Over time, these landscapes have been altered by management actions. The most significant change has been the reduction of old-growth, uneven-aged forests, which have been harvested and replanted to create younger, even-aged forests. In an attempt to monitor the health of these landscapes, Management Indicator Species (MIS) have been selected for each landscape type. These species were chosen to represent specific niches within each of these communities. The concept is to use these species to indicate the effects of management actions on each of the communities. Summary descriptions of the landscape community types and the plant species MIS for each is as follows:

Longleaf Pine Forest Longleaf pine forests occur in hilly upland areas, and longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) is the dominant overstory species found in these areas. These forests are dominated by pine communities with a canopy at or approaching maturity, with less than 30 percent hardwoods. The midstory is sparse, and the herbaceous ground cover is diverse and thick with grasses, composites, legumes, and other forbs. Snags and downed logs are common throughout the area. Prescribed fire is used frequently and is the principle influence in creating and maintaining open, park-like forest conditions (FEIS, page 3-19). MIS plants are:

 Longleaf Pine (Pinus palustris)  Noseburn (Tragia urticifolia)  Pinehill Bluestem (Andropogon scoparium var. divergens)  Pale Purple Coneflower (Echinacea pallida) Shortleaf Pine/Oak-Hickory Forests Shortleaf pine/oak-hickory forests occur in uplands along slopes and ridges. These areas can be described as mixed pine-hardwood communities with multi-layered, mature canopies having relatively open areas, with considerable amounts of hardwoods (30 – 50 percent). Shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata) is historically the dominant species, but currently loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) appears to be more prevalent. The midstory is diverse and multi-layered and can be thick in some areas. The herbaceous ground cover ranges from sparse to dense, with snags, downed logs, and den trees. Regular intervals of prescribed burning are utilized to control plant community composition and to maintain an open midstory (FEIS, page 3-20). MIS plants are:

 Black Hickory (Carya texana)  Flowering Dogwood (Cornus florida)  Mockernut Hickory (Carya tomentosa)  Partridge Pea (Cassia fasciculata)  Shortleaf Pine (Pinus echinata)  White Oak (Quercus alba)

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 27 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

 Wild Bergamot (Monarda fistulosa) Mixed Hardwood-Loblolly Pine Forests Mixed hardwood-loblolly pine forests are generally moist, rich woods dominated by mixed hardwood-pine and hardwood communities. The multi-layered forest canopy is at or approaching maturity and is relatively closed. Loblolly pine comprises 20 percent or more of the overstory, but large amounts of hardwoods (greater than 50 percent) are also found in the canopy. The midstory is multi-layered and diverse, with a variety of trees, shrubs, vines, and overstory saplings. The understory has sparse patches of herbaceous vegetation, and the ground is covered with leaf litter. Snags, downed logs, and den trees are common throughout the area (FEIS, page 3-21). MIS plants are:

 Bigleaf Snowbell (Styrax grandifolia)  Black Snake-root (Actaea racemosa)  Christmas Fern (Polystichium acrostichoides)  Loblolly Pine (Pinus taeda)  Partridge Berry (Mitchella repens)  Southern Red Oak (Quercus falcata var. falcata)  Virginia Dutchman’s Pipe (Aristolochia serpentaria) Riparian Forests Riparian forests are narrow, wetland forests occurring along small rivers or streams that are usually dominated by hardwood and hardwood-pine communities. The composition and structure of these areas is determined by the frequency and duration of flooding. The mature canopies consist of a diverse variety of oaks, hickories, and some pines may be present in the small-stream communities. The midstory is multi-layered with a diverse population of small trees and shrubs. The herbaceous understory is sparse but may contain a variety of ferns, mosses, sedges, vines, and flowering plants. Snags, downed logs, and den trees are common throughout the area (FEIS, page 3-22). MIS plants are:

Small-Stream Riparian Plants

 American Beech (Fagus grandifolia)  Basswood (Tilia americana)  Cherrybark Oak (Quercus pagoda)  Inland Sea-oats (Chasmanthium latifolium)  Ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana)  Mayapple (Podophyllum peltatum)  Wild Azalea (Rhododendron canescens)

Large-Stream Riparian Plants

 Green Hawthorn (Crataegus viridus)  Inland Sea-oats (Chasmanthium latifolium)  Lizard’s Tail (Saururus cernuus)  Louisiana Sedge (Carex louisianica)  Southern Magnolia (Magnolia grandiflora)

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 28 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

 Swamp Chestnut Oak (Quercus michauxii) The longleaf pine forest has been greatly reduced through harvesting and replanting of loblolly and slash pines. Where longleaf pine forests remain, the fire regime has been altered. It is estimated that the frequency of fires in these forests was approximately once every one to four years (USFS, 2000a). With the suppression of fires, other pine species, hardwoods, and shrubs began to invade the understory and midstory, thereby reducing the species diversity historically found within the longleaf pine forest.

The shortleaf pine/oak-hickory forest supported a less frequent fire regime. This contributed to the creation of these historically open-canopied forests. Over time, fire suppression has allowed the canopy to become more closed. The hardwoods generally found in the canopy are absent and the proportion of shortleaf pines has been reduced.

Within the mixed hardwood/loblolly pine forest, the hardwood component has been removed or reduced through timber harvesting. This has allowed the loblolly pine forest type to dominate the overstory.

Alterations to the riparian forest have been minimal. These forests generally have retained their historical structure and composition. There is evidence that a portion of the loblolly pine component has been removed from this community.

These communities have been further divided into more specific forest types. The proposed project area contains 16 forest types. Stands in the project area proposed for burning range in age from one to 140 years. Currently, the acres within the proposed project area are classified as 81 percent pine, eight percent mixed pine/hardwood, five percent upland hardwoods, four percent mixed hardwood/pine, and one percent bottomland hardwoods. The remaining one percent is classified as non-forested.

Embedded within the four landscape types are numerous small-scale, unique community types. A number of rare plant habitats are present. Embedded within the Upland Longleaf Forests are Hillside Bogs and Baygalls. Xeric longleaf habitat supports Sandy Woodland communities. The District is perhaps most notable for the presence of numerous small openings of Jackson Calcareous Prairies, which are most often found in shortleaf pine stands. Zones surrounding streams near the prairies can often be classified as Calcareous or Riparian Forest. Saline prairies are present on the Winn Ranger District as well. In addition there are numerous sites with disturbed vegetation along roadsides and right-of-ways.

3.1.1.2 Sensitive and Conservation Species There are 83 Sensitive and Conservation plant species on the KNF, 55 of which were retained for further consideration in the Flora BE (Appendix A). No federally listed threatened or endangered plants are known to occur on the Forest. However, it is possible that one federally threatened plant, earth fruit (Geocarpon minimum), could occur on the Forest. Earth fruit has very narrow habitat specificity. Across its range it is found in saline prairies and sandstone glades. Suitable habitat for earth fruit is present in glades and barrens found on the Kisatchie Ranger District, as

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 29 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment well as in a saline prairie on the Winn Ranger District; however, it was not found during past field surveys. Therefore, earth fruit was eliminated from further analysis.

The KNF lists 24 Regional Forester Sensitive Species (RFSS) plants as occurring, or likely to occur, on the forest (RFSS are identified on the USFS Region 8 Intranet, at: http://fsweb.r8.fs.fed.us/nr/bio_phy_res/tes/TES_SoC.shtml). Seven were eliminated from further analysis (see Flora BE in Appendix A).

The KNF lists 59 Conservation plants as occurring, or likely to occur, on the forest (USFS, 1999b). Not all of the conservation species have suitable habitat within the project area, or they may be found in habitats that may be present, but are prohibited from disturbance under the Forest Plan. Therefore, conservation plants that meet these criteria were eliminated from further analysis (see Flora BE in Appendix A).

Effects of prescribed fire to TESC (threatened, endangered, special concern) plants have been analyzed for each natural community in which they occur. There are 11 natural communities on the Winn Ranger District:

 Bayhead Swamp and Wooded Seep  Calcareous Forest  Cypress-Tupelo Swamp  Hardwood Slope Forest  Jackson Calcareous Prairie  Mixed Hardwood-Loblolly Forest  Shortleaf Pine/Oak-Hickory Forest  Small Stream Forest (Riparian Forest)  Western Hillside Seepage Bog (Hillside Bog)  Western Upland Longleaf Pine Forest (Upland Longleaf Pine Forest)  Western Xeric Sandhill Woodland (Sandy Woodland) Natural community classification follows that outlined by the Louisiana Natural Heritage Program (LNHP, 2014). General references for discussions of these natural communities are Martin and Smith (1991), Smith (1996), LNHP (2014), Grace and Smith (1995), Larke and Smith (1994), and Kral (1983).

3.1.1.3 Non-Native Invasive Plants Presidential Executive Order 13112, issued February 3, 1999 and amended by the National Invasive Species Management Plan of 2001, states: “A species is considered invasive if it meets two criteria: 1) it is nonnative to the ecosystem under consideration, and 2) its introduction causes or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human, animal, and plant health.” The latter phrase contains recent modifications recommended to the National Invasive Species Council (USFS Southern Regional Task Force, 2008).

Most of the problematic invasive woody species re-sprout from the base when injured. These species are difficult to control with prescribed burning and often require very hot burns, multiple burns, or a combination of tools to be successful. Long-term successful control of Non-native

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 30 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Invasive Plants (NNIP) includes preventing flowering or seed set by destroying seeds, by stimulating seed germination so that follow-up treatments could be applied, by depleting carbohydrate reserves, by killing perennating buds at or near the soil surface, and by stimulating desirable native competitors. All of these methods have an effect on the environment in which these NNIP occur. Literature suggests that, in general, prescribed burns increase plant diversity and species richness, particularly of native plants. Most studies show that this is due to an increase in forbs. This increase has not been shown to be a response to invasive target species suppression. Furthermore, few non-target species are negatively influenced by prescribed fire, and those that do, are generally non-native species (DiTomaso and Johnson, 2006).

The Southern Region of the USDA Forest Service lists 384 plants as invasive exotic species of management concern (USFS, 2008). There are 38 species on the KNF non-native invasive plant list (see Flora BE in Appendix A). Table 3-1 lists the 16 NNIP of concern occurring or possibly occurring on the Winn District.

Table 3-1. NNIP of Concern Found on the Winn Ranger District. Response Common Name Scientific Name Habit to Fire Brazilian Vervain Verbena brasiliensis forb inhibits Chamber Bitter Phyllanthus urinaria grass inhibits Chinese Privet Ligustrum sinense shrub inhibits Golden Bamboo Phyllostachys aurea grass variable Japanese Climbing Fern Lygodium japonicum vine inhibits Japanese Honeysuckle Lonicera japonica vine inhibits Japanese Lespedeza Kummerowia striata forb inhibits Johnsongrass Sorghum halepense grass inhibits King Ranch Bluestem Bothriochloa ischaemum var. songarica grass enhances Paper Mulberry Broussonetia papyrifera tree inhibits Santa Maria Parthenium hysterophorus forb inhibits Sericea Lespedeza Lespedeza cuneata forb inhibits Shrubby Lespedeza Lespedeza bicolor shrub inhibits Silktree Albizia julibrissin tree inhibits Tallow Tree Triadica sebifera tree inhibits Trifoliate Orange Poncirus trifoliata tree inhibits

Fire tolerant plant species are those that are not negatively impact by fire and in many cases they excel in fire ecosystems. These species are usually early succession plants that reproduce fast and in large numbers. Fire tolerant species have morphological characteristics that give them a lower probability of being injured or killed by fire. NNIP that are in this group would likely excel with the implementation of the prescribed fire program; the only one on the Winn Ranger District is King Ranch bluestem.

Fire intolerant plant species can be destroyed completely by fire; however, it usually takes several fires to accomplish this destruction, and depends on fire severity. Some fire intolerant species, such as Chinese privet, can with stand fire due to the lack of fuels where they grow.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 31 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Brazilian Vervain Brazilian vervain is a perennial herb that has spread into the United States from South America (Godfrey and Wooten, 1981). It blooms and fruits from May to October (Diggs et al., 1999). This plant usually grows in disturbed, open sites such as old fields, waste places, fields, roadsides, ditches, as well as in coastal prairies (Correll & Johnston, 1970; Godfrey and Wooten, 1981; and Radford et al., 1968). Brazilian vervain is common along roadsides, ditches, and fields in the KNF.

Brazilian vervain grows throughout most of the southeastern states of the United States, as well as in Missouri, California, Oregon, and Hawaii (NRCS, 2014). This species has been found in every Louisiana parish (Thomas and Allen, 1998). Although it is a common invader of southwestern Louisiana prairies, it disappears over time (Allen and Thames, 2007). Brazilian vervain is common along roadsides, ditches, and fields in the KNF including but not limited to the Winn Ranger District.

Chamber Bitter Chamber bitter is an annual forb originating from tropical eastern Asia. It was first recorded in the United States in 1944. It flowers throughout the growing season (Diggs et al. 2006). It is weedy and invades nurseries and greenhouses (Neal 2000), gardens, fields, ditches, wet clearings, floodplain forests, and other waste places (Godfrey and Wooten 1981).

Chamber bitter has spread throughout the southeastern United States, as well as in Illinois and Puerto Rico, and many of the Pacific Islands (NRCS, 2014). This plant colonizes disturbed sites, produces abundant seeds, and spreads aggressively. It does not appear to have spread into stands from disturbed areas, although some infestations have apparently persisted even when they become shaded. Chamber bitter is becoming increasingly widespread on the KNF; populations on the Winn seem to be increasing. It is mainly found along roadsides and in disturbed areas.

Chinese Privet Chinese privet is a semi-evergreen shrub that was introduced as an ornamental from China in 1852. It is still widely sold in nurseries, especially in the southern United States (Miller et al., 2010; NRCS, 2014). This shrub produces numerous flowers from April to June and abundant fruit from July to March. Chinese privet colonizes disturbed habitats and tolerates a wide variety of conditions. It prefers mesic soils with abundant sunshine, but can grow in shade. It is found in fields, along fences, at forest edges, along streams and bayous, and in bottomland States (Miller et al., 2010; NRCS, 2014).

Chinese privet is widespread throughout the southeastern United States and also occurs in Missouri and in states along the Atlantic coast as far north Massachusetts (NRCS, 2014). This species spreads through seed dispersal by birds and other animals and can also colonize by root sprouts. Chinese privet can form dense thickets that crowd out native vegetation. It is particularly destructive to riparian forests (Miller et al., 2010; NRCS, 2014).

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 32 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Once established, this species is very difficult to control. In order to eradicate existing plants, the entire plant, including the roots, must be killed or it will resprout. The use of prescribed fire to control this plant has been ineffective. Fires kill large stems, but plants resprout vigorously afterwards. Even if plants are destroyed, this species produces large seed banks that can recolonize sites. It is much easier to control Chinese privet at early stages of infestation. Mechanical removal and herbicide treatment can effectively eliminate this species in small areas (Munger, 2003). Chinese privet is widespread on the District.

Golden Bamboo Golden bamboo is a woody, perennial grass that can grow from 16 to 40 feet in height. It flowers and produces fruit only rarely (Miller et al., 2010). This plant was introduced to the United States from China in the late nineteenth century. It was planted as an ornamental to control erosion and for use as fishing poles (Diggs et al., 2006). Persisting from cultivation and then escaping, this grass is usually found near old homesteads. It forms dense colonies, spreading from rhizomes (Allen et al., 2004; Miller et al., 2010).

Golden bamboo grows throughout most of the southeastern United States as well as in Maryland, Oregon, and California. It has been recorded as occurring in fourteen parishes throughout Louisiana, although it is probably more widespread (NRCS, 2014). This grass spreads by rhizomes and can form dense colonies that crowd out native vegetation (Diggs et al., 2006; Miller et al., 2010). Once established, infestations of this plant can be very difficult to remove. Golden bamboo infestations can burn very hot with prescribed fires. Plants are top-killed by fire, but established infestations re-sprout rapidly. Little research has been done about the effect of fire regimes on this species (Gucker, 2009). There are currently two mapped populations of golden bamboo on the Winn Ranger District in compartments 21 and 62.

Japanese Climbing Fern Japanese climbing fern is a perennial vine originating from Asia and tropical Australia. It was introduced to the United States in the 1930’s and is still planted as an ornamental (Miller et al., 2010). This plant produces abundant spores from June to September (Weakley, 2008). It is found most often in disturbed, open, mesic areas such as roadside ditches and areas near bridges. This fern also occurs at forest road edges and swamp margins, and can invade open woodlands and riparian forests (Miller et al., 2010).

In the United States, Japanese climbing fern has been recorded as present in the states of the southeastern coastal plain. It ranges from North Carolina south to Florida, then west to Texas (NRCS, 2014). Plants spread rapidly by tiny wind-borne spores. Vines persist and can spread by rhizomes. This species can invade open timber stands and plantations. Plants can grow very rapidly once established (Lott et al., 2003), and vines can eventually form thick mats of vegetation that smother trees and shrubs (Miller et al., 2010). Japanese climbing fern is becoming increasingly widespread on the Winn Ranger District.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 33 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Japanese Honeysuckle Japanese honeysuckle is a semi-evergreen, perennial, woody vine. It was introduced from Japan in the early nineteenth century as an ornamental. It is still planted in wildlife food plots and also for erosion control. This vine blooms from April to August and produces fruit from June to March. Japanese honeysuckle occurs in a wide variety of forest types and is shade tolerant (Miller et al., 2010). However, it becomes established most easily in disturbed areas with sufficient light and moisture (Munger, 2002). Japanese honeysuckle is common on Winn Ranger District but occurs primarily in disturbed areas that are shaded or in open, moist areas such as ditches.

Japanese honeysuckle is widespread throughout most of the continental United States and Hawaii, except in the northwest and in some northern states of the Midwest (NRCS, 2014). Plants persist through woody rootstocks, spreading by rooting at nodes and through seed dispersal by birds and small mammals. Seeds do not remain viable for very long, and plants are not easily established. Plants can mature and reproduce in as early as two years, and they fruit prolifically. This plant is difficult to eradicate once established (Miller et al., 2010; Munger, 2002).

Fire suppression appears to have contributed to the spread of Japanese honeysuckle. Plant communities, in which fires occur frequently and repeatedly, such as Upland Longleaf Pine Forest, have been observed to have fewer and more smaller infestations of this species. Japanese honeysuckle can re-sprout and proliferate after fire, but repeated fires appear to severely limit its regrowth. Additionally, this species seems less likely to establish itself in areas having abundant grasses (Munger, 2002). Japanese honeysuckle is common on Winn Ranger District, but occurs primarily in disturbed areas that are shaded or in open, moist areas such as ditches.

Japanese Lespedeza Japanese lespedeza is a perennial forb originally from Asia that has been planted in the United States since 1846. It has been used to control erosion, as a cover crop, and for hay and pasture. This species flowers from July to October and produces mature seed in late autumn. It is found in disturbed sites along roadsides, in old fields, and in waste places, as well as in open, dry woodlands and open, rocky sites (Diggs et al., 1999; and Gucker, 2010a). Japanese lespedeza is common on the Winn Ranger District but is usually confined to dirt roads and road shoulders.

Japanese lespedeza is widespread throughout most of the eastern and central United States (NRCS, 2014). It has been widely planted and can naturalize in a number of habitats including open pinelands, mixed hardwood pine woodlands, and oak hickory woodlands. It is a pioneer species, rapidly invading disturbed sites, but it is usually crowded out by succeeding vegetation in a few years. Few studies have been done regarding fire effects on Japanese lespedeza. However, it appears that winter fires cause this plant to increase in abundance, while spring burns severely reduce or eliminate it (Gucker, 2010a). Japanese lespedeza is common on the District, but is usually confined to dirt roads and road shoulders.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 34 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Johnsongrass Johnsongrass is a warm-season, perennial grass (FNA, 2003; Howard, 2004). It is native to the Mediterranean region of Europe, Asia Minor, and Africa. It was introduced to the United States as a forage crop in South Carolina in the 1830’s, becoming established in Alabama by the 1840’s (Howard, 2004). In Louisiana, this grass blooms and fruits from April to November (Allen et al., 2004), setting seed from May to March (Miller et al., 2010). Johnsongrass can survive in a wide variety of habitats but is best established in areas that are warm, moist, and disturbed. It is most likely to invade agricultural lands or old pastures, in areas such as ditches, canals, and washes. However, it can invade natural areas such as floodplains, prairies, and savannas (Howard, 2004). On the KNF, this plant usually is found along roadside ditches. It has also been found along roadsides in calcareous prairies of the Winn Ranger District.

Johnsongrass has escaped cultivation across most of the United States and is most invasive in the southeast, California, New Mexico, and Hawaii. It also has been found in 53 countries worldwide. Plants spread through seed dispersal by planting, animals, wind, water, and agricultural equipment. Colonies of plants form extensive systems of underground rhizomes which make the plants difficult to eradicate. This grass can self-pollinate and is a prolific seed- producer, so seed banks can also make this plant hard to control (Howard, 2004). It can out- compete native herbs and small trees, eventually excluding native vegetation (Miller et al., 2010).

Fires top kill Johnsongrass, but its rhizomes usually survive fire. It appears to be affected by the timing of fires. In Georgia, a late winter prescribed burn increased the proliferation of Johnsongrass. In Texas, a natural mid-spring fire increased growth of little bluestem and reduced growth of Johnsongrass (Howard, 2004). This grass does not tolerate hot and dry conditions, and drought can destroy plants. It is also generally not tolerant of prolonged cold temperatures, although a few ecotypes can survive colder weather. Johnsongrass is currently found in compartments 24, 51, and 112 of the Winn Ranger District.

King Ranch Bluestem King Ranch bluestem is a perennial grass (Allen et al., 2004) that is native to Europe and Asia. It was introduced in the southwestern United States for erosion control and for forage (FNA, 2003). It flowers from April to November in Louisiana (Allen et al., 2004). This plant is found along roadsides, in rangeland pastures, and in other waste areas (FNA, 2003). Several cultivars of this plant have been introduced from various Asian countries. The “King Ranch” variety was probably introduced from China in the 1940’s. It is less cold tolerant than other types, and seems best-adapted to clay soils or rocky limestone.

King Ranch bluestem is found in most of the southern states in the continental United States (FNA, 2003). It is considered naturalized in most of the United States but is described as an exotic, invasive grass in Texas (Diggs et al., 2006; Texas Invasives, 2006). Widely planted, it spreads from prolific seeds. It can also spread vegetatively. Normally it is a tuft grass, but can become rhizomatous if mowed or grazed. In Texas, it is very weedy and crowds out native vegetation (Diggs et al., 2006). This grass has been found growing near roadsides on a few of the

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 35 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Winn Ranger District’s prairies. King Ranch bluestem is controllable by timed mowing, growing season burning, and/or herbicide treatment (Simmons et al., 2007; Texas Invasives, 2006).

Paper Mulberry Paper mulberry is a shrub or small tree that grows up to 50 feet high. Originally from Japan and China, it was introduced to the United States in the eighteenth century as a rapidly growing shade tree. This species flowers from April to May, with male and female flowers borne on separate trees. Fruit appears on female trees from July to August, although fruiting is rare in the southeast states. Paper mulberry spreads primarily by root sprouts and can grow very rapidly. It can form thickets and dense stands in disturbed areas such as fencerows and forest edges (Miller et al., 2010).

Paper mulberry is found throughout the southeastern United States, as well as along most of the east coast states and in the central states as far north as Illinois, Missouri, and Kansas (FNA, 1997; NRCS, 2014). In the southeast, infestations are usually scattered and may form dense thickets or be composed of isolated individuals (Miller et al., 2010) On the Winn Ranger District, a few infestations of single, small trees have been found.

Santa Maria Santa Maria is an annual or short-lived perennial herb originating from Central and South America. It flowers from summer to fall. This species invades disturbed sites such as pastures, roadsides and overgrazed rangelands. It is less likely to invade areas with well-established vegetation but can invade sites with reduced ground cover, which likely results from drought. Although this plant tolerates a wide variety of soils, in Australia it grows best on alkaline clay- loam or heavy clay soils (Correll and Johnston, 1970; Cronquist, 1980).

Santa Maria is an aggressive weed and is found in the south central United States and northeastern states, as well as in Florida and Hawaii (NRCS, 2014). This plant has been recorded in about half of the parishes of Louisiana, most in the eastern half of the state (Thomas and Allen, 1996). One individual plant has been found along the Gum Springs Horse Trail near a prairie.

Santa Maria does not spread through vegetative parts, but through seeds. Plants can germinate and set seed rapidly, with some plants producing four of five cycles of seeds in one year. One plant can produce up to 100,000 seeds per year. Infestations can persist if seeds are deeply buried in the soil, and some seeds can germinate after eight years. Seeds are spread through animal and machine dispersal, as well as being carried by water (ARMCANZ, 2000). Once established, Santa Maria produces chemicals that inhibit the growth of other plants near it, so it can out- compete native vegetation. This plant has the potential to degrade natural plant communities (ARMCANZ, 2000). One plant of this species has been found along the Gum Springs Horse Trail near a prairie.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 36 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Sericea Lespedeza Sericea lespedeza is a perennial herb that was introduced the United States from Japan in the late nineteenth century. Widely planted for erosion control and wildlife plots, it has escaped cultivation. It blooms from July through September and sets seed from October through March. This species is found in open, dry to moist sites such as roadsides, fields, savannas, and forest openings (Miller et al., 2010).

Sericea lespedeza is widespread in the eastern and central United States (NRCS, 2014). It spreads slowly but persists in a wide variety of habitats. Reproduction is through seeds that have a low germination rate. However, seeds remain viable for decades (Miller et al., 2010; Munger, 2004). Although there is no published information about fire effects specific to Chinese lespedeza, it has been observed that established plants resprout after fire and that seed germination may be enhanced by fire if temperatures are not too hot. Once established, this species can crowd out native grasses and can persist for many years, even when becoming shaded by woody vegetation (Gucker, 2010b). Sericea lepesdeza is commonly found on the District along roadsides and in open areas.

Shrubby Lespedeza Shrubby lespedeza is a perennial forb that grows from a woody base. It was introduced from Japan as an ornamental in the late nineteenth century. It was used later for soil stabilization and is currently planted in wildlife food plots. This species flowers from June to September and produces fruit from August to March (Miller et al., 2010). This species persists in wildlife plots and can also be found along roadsides and fences, in fields, and in open woods (Radford et al., 1968; Weakley, 2008).

Shrubby lespedeza is found throughout the southeastern United States, as well as in most of the northeastern and midwestern states (Miller et al., 2010; NRCS, 2014). This species persists where planted and can spread to nearby stands, even into shady areas. Burning seems to encourage spreading of this plant (Miller et al., 2010). Shrubby lespedeza can form dense thickets that crowd out other plants. It is difficult to eradicate because it can re-sprout from root crowns, and seeds remain viable for years (Evans et al., 2005). This species persists in wildlife plots on the District and can also be found along roadsides and fences, in fields, and in open woods.

Silktree Silktree is a small, deciduous tree that was introduced to the United States from Asia as an ornamental in the eighteenth century. It flowers from May to July. Abundant seeds are produced in beanlike pods from June to February. This plant prefers open conditions at dry to wet sites, but can persist in shade (Miller et al., 2010).

Silktree has become widespread in the United States. It is found throughout the southeast, but is also found in most of the eastern, midwestern, and southwestern states (NRCS, 2014). This species reproduces by forming colonies from root sprouts and also spreads its seeds along waterways or through animal dispersal. Seeds can remain viable for years. This species usually

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 37 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment spreads along stream banks (Miller et al., 2010). On the Winn Ranger District, silktree is common at scattered locations, usually along roads and right-of-ways. Few studies have been done studying fire effects on silktree. However, existing evidence suggests that this tree is not suppressed by fire and that seed germination and re-sprouting increase after burning (Meyer, 2009). Although it is widespread, this tree’s distribution has remained scattered on the District.

Tallow Tree Tallow tree is a small, deciduous tree that was introduced to the United States in the late eighteenth century from Asia. The United States Department of Agriculture actively promoted the planting of this species to establish a local soap industry in Gulf Coast states in the early twentieth century. Tallow tree is still sold and planted as an ornamental. Plants typically flower from April to June and produce abundant fruit from August to December (Meyer 2011; Miller et al., 2010). Tallow tree tends to invade wet, open sites such as ditches, stream banks, and river banks (Miller et al., 2010). It can grow in both fresh water and saline conditions and tolerates flooding. Once established, it will also tolerate arid conditions. It grows rapidly in full sun, but can persist and spread under shade (Bogler and Batcher, 2013). It appears to be limited in its spread by long-term cold weather, although it will tolerate hard frosts that do not last long (Bogler and Batcher, 2013; Meyer, 2011).

Tallow tree has naturalized throughout most of the southeastern U.S. and is reported to be invading California (Bogler and Batcher, 2013). It is widespread in Louisiana, having been found in 58 parishes (Allen et al., 2002). It spreads through seed dispersal by birds and by water, as well as through prolific root sprouting (Bogler and Batcher, 2013; Meyer, 2011; Miller et al., 2010). Tallow tree grows and reproduces rapidly, outcompeting and shading out native, riparian trees. It can alter the soil chemistry of sites it invades. It drastically alters ecosystems that it invades, often converting vegetation to essentially one species. This tree can come to dominate bottomland forests. It can also invade marshes and wet prairies, changing them from ecosystems dominated by herbs to woody plant ecosystems (Bogler and Batcher, 2013; Meyer, 2011).

Tallow tree is very difficult to control. It is listed as a noxious weed in 45 states including Louisiana, Mississippi, and Florida. In early stages of invasion when plants are small, mechanical removal and prescribed fire can be used effectively to remove it. However, larger, more mature infestations of this species become resistant to burning, and prescribed fire becomes a less effective tool for control. Trees may be top killed but can re-sprout rapidly and prolifically. Seed banks also allow this species to re-establish itself. Herbicide treatments combined with other methods seems to be fairly effective, but removal of extensive stands can be costly and labor intensive (Bogler and Batcher, 2013). Only a handful of tallow trees currently occur on the Winn Ranger District.

Trifoliate Orange Trifoliate orange is a deciduous shrub or small tree that grows up to 20 feet high. It was introduced from China and Korea for use as an ornamental, for fence rows (it has vicious thorns), and as rootstocks for grafting citrus plants. This plant has persisted, escaped, and spread in Louisiana (Allen et al., 2002; Miller et al., 2010). Trifoliate orange blooms March through May and bears small orange-like fruit from July to October (Miller et al., 2010; Radford et al., 1968).

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 38 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Fruits have numerous seeds (Allen et al., 2002). This plant spreads basal sprouting and by seed dispersal by animals. It forms dense, impenetrable thickets and stands, preferring open, well- drained sites on acid soils (Miller et al., 2010).

Trifoliate orange has been found in the southeastern states of the US, as well as in several east coast states as far north as Pennsylvania (NRCS, 2014). It has been found in 49 Louisiana parishes (Allen et al., 2002). On the Winn Ranger District, trifoliate orange forms a large, dense thicket covering several acres in a riparian area. It has also has been found at scattered sites nearby.

3.1.2 IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 1: PROPOSED ACTION

3.1.2.1 General Vegetation Under the Proposed Action, prescribed burns would be conducted during the growing and dormant seasons. Within the project area, the growing season burns would reduce fuel loads, reduce the hardwood understory of the stand, increase species diversity, promote seedling establishment, and promote the growth of various shade intolerant herbaceous species. Growing season burns would kill most hardwoods less than three inches in diameter at breast height. Larger, more mature hardwoods would survive low intensity fires through pine/hardwood or hardwood stands. Frequent growing season burns would also kill the roots of young hardwood species, thus eliminating sprouts (USFS, 2000a).

Fire affects plant species and communities by triggering the release of seeds; altering seedbeds; temporarily eliminating or reducing competition for moisture, nutrients, heat and light; stimulating vegetative reproduction of top-killed plants; stimulating the flowering and fruiting of many shrubs and herbs; and influencing community composition and successional stages through its frequency and/or intensity.

Fire can enhance the cycle of nutrients by releasing nutrients bound in dead plant material, making them available for new plant growth. While fire encourages new growth of many plant species, it can also alter plant community composition. Fire can be used to clear residual plants from a landscape, and when used in conjunction with other management tools, to negatively impact non-native plants or other invasive species that dominate certain habitats to the extent that habitat quality is compromised.

Dormant season burns would be utilized to reduce fuel loads within the project area. These fires would improve wildlife habitat and promote sprouting of young hardwood species for wildlife browse. Burning in hardwood stands would promote increased species diversity within the understory of these forests and reduce the density of hardwood saplings and shrub species.

Prescribed fire would be used to reduce fuel loading, as well as for a broader range of resource objectives, and could in the long-term reduce the severity and intensity of wildfire, which in turn could reduce impacts to vegetation. Proper ecosystem function would be sustained because fire plays an essential role in maintaining serial stages of plant succession. Prescribed fires would help to create and maintain the open, park-like understory historically common within pine and

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 39 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment pine/hardwood forests. Overall, prescribed burns would improve the health of the forest ecosystems in which the burns are conducted.

MIS for the longleaf pine landscapes are adapted to frequent fires, thus the proposed prescribed fire program would benefit the landscape by maintaining the open, park-like community and restoring species diversity to the landscape. Within the shortleaf pine/oak-hickory landscapes, the Proposed Action would create a somewhat open midstory with increased species diversity and age classes. The vegetation within the mixed hardwood/loblolly pine landscapes would not be substantially altered. Effects of prescribed burns on many of the MIS for this landscape are undocumented in past forest-wide monitoring or are unknown. However, through monitoring, the Forest Service would be able to document the effects for each species. The riparian landscape MIS would not be significantly impacted by the implementation of the Proposed Action since the areas that support the riparian MIS are typically too moist to carry a prescribed fire.

3.1.2.2 Sensitive and Conservation Species Due to the large number of affected species, the impact analysis for sensitive and conservation plants are analyzed according to the natural community in which a plant is found.

The biggest threat to TESC plants in the bayhead swamp and wooded seep, calcareous forest, hardwood slope forest, Jackson calcareous prairie, mixed hardwood-loblolly forest, shortleaf pine/oak-hickory forest, small stream (riparian) forest, western hillside seepage bog, western upland longleaf pine forest, and western xeric sandhill woodland communities is competition by trees, shrubs and vines. Fire plays a role in the dynamics of these natural communities but depends on the level of soil moisture. As with most natural communities, many hardwood trees and evergreen shrubs that grow in these areas have the capacity to resprout and recover or have reached a large enough stem diameter to withstand the effects of fire. In addition, there are no longer sufficient fuels within some of these sites to carry fire with enough intensity to kill some of this competing vegetation. This would lead to further loss of TESC plants due to shading and competition for nutrients and water.

Dormant and growing season prescribed burns would cause varying amounts of injury and mortality to vegetation. Due to the damaging effects of fire to susceptible hardwoods and shrub species, these surface fires would improve habitat conditions for the TESC plants found in natural communities. Most of these species have evolved some degree of fire in this natural community, and so would benefit from positive fire effects such as maintenance of suitable habitat and removal of litter to allow seed germination, and most respond to fire by flowering and producing seed.

Indirect impacts from the Proposed Action should be beneficial. Prescribed fire would help control woody vegetation, which would improve the habitat for all TESC plant species by eliminating competing and shading vegetation. This would provide TESC plant species additional space, nutrients, water and light to thrive. No negative indirect impacts are anticipated.

Since fire does not play a crucial role in the cypress-tupelo swamp community, there would be no effects of this alternative on TESC species.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 40 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Where TESC occur within habitats conducive to fire, prescribed fire could damage or kill some individual plants; however, these impacts would be minimal and the overall impacts to the species population would be beneficial. Prescribed burning would decrease competition from fire intolerant species, provide more fertile seedbeds, and return valuable nutrients to the soils more rapidly. The extent of impacts to individual plants and root systems of these species would be determined by the time, frequency, and intensity of the prescribed fires. Aerial portions of the plants, shallow root systems, and exposed seeds could be damaged or killed by prescribed fire. However, these impacts to the population as a whole would be small and would not cause a trend to federal listing or loss of viability of the species. A summary of the effects of the Proposed Action alternative on each TESC species can be found in the Flora BE in Appendix A.

3.1.2.3 Non-Native Invasive Species The effect of fire on NNIP population appears to be highly variable and dependent on a variety of factors including, fire-induced vegetative reproduction and regeneration, fire-enhanced seedling germination and establishment, improvements in soil nutrient regime, and increases in soil temperature.

The response of individual NNIP to fire varies substantially between, and within, species and is dependent on the parameter being measured. Moreover, this response is influenced by a variety of fire parameters including intensity, severity (e.g., amount of organic matter consumed), residence time, soil heating, season of burn, and time since last fire, all of which can vary significantly among fires and within a fire. These variations can and will cause differences in the response of individual species and the community as a whole. In addition, numerous physical and climatic factors (e.g., fuel condition, weather, slope, and aspect) as well as biological factors (plant morphology and physiology) influence post-fire effects on plant communities. This includes direct effects such as the ability of individual species to resist the heat of a fire (depending on age and seasonality) and the mechanisms by which they recover after fire.

Finally, in addition to fire parameters and individual species response, numerous external factors such as post-fire weather, post-fire animal use, and plant competition can also determine how species will respond to fire. Common effects include grass and forb mortality, increased flowering and seed production, increased and decreased productivity, reduced/increased vigor and abundance of dominant species as well as numerous communal effects, including increased forb layer diversity and cover, when compared to long-term unburned communities.

A summary of the effects of the Proposed Action alternative on each NNIP can be found in the Flora BE in Appendix A.

Brazilian Vervain Brazilian vervain would continue to spread as it currently does. Although it can invade timber stands and rare plant habitats such as prairies, it disappears over time. Prescribed fire helps native plants in fire-maintained communities out-compete this species.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 41 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Chamber Bitter Most of the actions associated with this alternative would create widespread disturbed habitat that this herb would be likely to invade; however, an increased prescribed fire program with increase burn intervals and increased intensity should be effective in controlling its spread.

Chinese Privet Chinese privet would continue to spread as it has under the current fire regime. Plants would resprout and regrow after fires. Seed banks would recolonize sites where plants are destroyed. Seeds would continue to be dispersed by birds and other animals. If the fire interval and intensity is increased, prescribed fire could help decrease Chinese privet.

Golden Bamboo Golden bamboo would probably continue to spread at the same rate as it does currently. Fires may slow the spread of this grass by top killing, but this plant quickly resprouts. This species rarely flowers or sets seeds; it spreads relatively slowly through its rhizomes. Golden bamboo is likely to be controlled with increased fire intensity and frequency.

Japanese Climbing Fern Japanese climbing fern would continue to spread as it currently does. Prescribed fire slows the spread of this vine because it top kills this plant. Growing season burning is probably most effective because plants are killed when fertile, so fewer spores are released.

Japanese Honeysuckle The current status of Japanese honeysuckle would decrease overtime. Regular prescribed fire seems to control it in most cases. This vine is largely confined to disturbed rights-of-way, firelines, and roadsides. It does sometimes invade riparian areas where streams cross roads and rights-of-way.

Japanese Lespedeza Japanese lespedeza would initially grow due to disturbance, but if burns were repeated over time, naturally succession should take over and a decline should be seen.

Johnsongrass Johnsongrass would be expected to decline with prescribed fire. Johnsongrass does not tolerate hot and dry conditions, and drought can destroy plants.

King Ranch Bluestem King Ranch bluestem would continue to spread along roads throughout the project area as it does currently. Although infestations are dense near roadsides, this species does not appear to have spread very far into the prairies where it has been found. It appears that growing season burning has helped to keep it in check. However, because it spreads vegetatively, fire aids in the spread of this plant.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 42 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Paper Mulberry Paper mulberry would probably not become widespread. Most infestations are single, small trees. It appears that regular prescribed fire keeps this tree small.

Santa Maria Santa Maria would probably continue to spread as it does currently. It is probable that fire, especially growing season fire, does help to control the spread of this weed since burning would destroy fertile material in this species.

Sericea Lespedeza Sericea lespedeza would continue to spread as it has under the current fire regime. Plants would resprout after fires, and infestations would continue to spread as seed germination is enhanced by dormant season burns. Growing season burns may control infestations better by top killing fertile plants and destroying seed banks. Increased repetition (re-burn interval of 1-3 years) of burns is likely over time to decrease populations.

Shrubby Lespedeza Shrubby lespedeza would probably continue to spread initially; however, repetitive burning could decrease its spread especially when growing season burns are implemented, which would slow its spread by burning flowers and immature fruit.

Silktree Silktree would continue to spread as it has done under the present fire regime. Fire would top kill the trees, but disturbance caused by the fires would allow them to establish at other sites. However, fire applied at shorter internals and greater intensity could help to drastically reduce populations.

Tallow Tree Tallow tree would continue to spread as it does currently. Prescribed fire probably has slowed the spread of this tree by top killing infestations and preventing them from enlarging rapidly. Repeated high intensity burns are likely to obtain better kill rate than light burns.

Trifoliate Orange Trifoliate orange would probably continue to spread in riparian sites but would be somewhat suppressed in drier sites with prescribed fire.

3.1.3 IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 2: NO ACTION

3.1.3.1 General Vegetation Under the No Action alternative, vegetation would not be directly impacted as there would not be a prescribed burn program. Existing conditions would remain status quo. However,

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 43 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment implementation of the No Action alternative within the pine and pine/hardwood stands would eventually allow the hardwood and shrub components in the understory to increase, shading out the favored herbaceous ground cover and leading to the loss of prairies and bogs. Species diversity within these stands would decrease, and the health and existence of the ecosystem would be jeopardized.

Within hardwood stands, the understory would become dense, species diversity would decrease, and wildlife values of the Forest would decrease. Since lack of fire favors fire-intolerant species over fire-dependent ones, plant habitat and diversity would be altered over the long-term. In all forest types, the fuel loads would increase to hazardous levels and increase the possibility of catastrophic wildfire, which would have great adverse impacts on vegetation.

3.1.3.2 Sensitive and Conservation Species Several TESC species occur within habitats dependent on fire for their continued existence. These species would be adversely impacted by the implementation of the No Action alternative. Fire intolerant species would increase in the area and shade out the more fire tolerant sensitive and conservation species. Other sensitive and conservation species occurring in mesic bottomland habitats, and other habitats not conducive to fire, would not be adversely affected by this alternative. A summary of the effects of the No Action alternative on each TESC species can be found in the Flora BE in Appendix A.

Implementation of Alternative 2 would not result in any direct effects to TESC species in the bayhead swamp and wooded seep, calcareous forest, hardwood slope forest, Jackson calcareous prairie, mixed hardwood-loblolly forest, shortleaf pine/oak-hickory forest, small stream (riparian) forest, western hillside seepage bog, western upland longleaf pine forest, and western xeric sandhill woodland communities; however, there would be negative indirect effects on all TESC plant species. This alternative would allow continued encroachment of woody vegetation (such as sweetgum) and NNIP (such as Japanese honeysuckle and Chinese privet) into these areas, which would displace any TESC plant species. Over time, the No Action alternative could result in the extirpation of some or all of the TESC plant species from these natural communities.

Since fire does not play a crucial role in the cypress-tupelo swamp community, there would be no effects of this alternative on TESC species.

3.1.3.3 Non-Native Invasive Species Mitigation measures, treatments, and surveys that may have been part of the Winn Prescribed Fire Program for NNIP would not occur. As a result, weed infestations that might have been detected and treated would go unnoticed and continue to expand unless detected by other surveys or independent observations. A summary of the effects of the No Action alternative on each NNIP can be found in the Flora BE in Appendix A.

Brazilian Vervain Brazilian vervain would probably spread more slowly. Open habitat for this plant to colonize would shrink if fire is suppressed.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 44 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Chamber Bitter Chamber bitter would continue to spread along roads and disturbed right-of-ways in the project area. Lack of burning would allow this plant to produce seeds unchecked.

Chinese Privet Chinese privet would spread faster than it is currently spreading. Without fire, plants would not be top killed. These shrubs would produce seeds at an even faster rate.

Golden Bamboo Golden bamboo would probably spread more quickly. Without fire to check its growth, infestations of this plant would spread faster.

Japanese Climbing Fern The suppression of fire would allow Japanese climbing fern to spread more aggressively at first. However, fire suppression would eventually reduce the numbers of openings this plant is likely to colonize.

Japanese Honeysuckle The suppression of fire would allow Japanese honeysuckle to spread more aggressively. It could invade timber stands and rare plant habitats.

Japanese Lespedeza Japanese lespedeza would probably continue to spread as it does currently. It would likely continue to be found primarily in disturbed areas. Lack of fire would decrease disturbed habitats for this plant to colonize. It would continue to be present along roadsides and rights-of-way.

Johnsongrass Johnsongrass would continue to spread without fire.

King Ranch Bluestem King Ranch bluestem would continue to spread along roads throughout the project area.

Paper Mulberry Paper mulberry may spread more quickly. Trees could grow larger and may spread vegetatively or even become fertile and spread by seeds. Lack of fire may allow this plant to become more invasive.

Santa Maria The spread of Santa Maria would probably increase. Without fire to keep it in check, this plant could spread rapidly through its seeds.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 45 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Sericea Lespedeza The spread of sericea lespedeza would likely continue in openings created by other projects and natural disturbance. Once established, it could crowd out native grasses and persist for many years, even when becoming shaded by woody vegetation.

Shrubby Lespedeza Shrubby lespedeza would continue to spread quickly because it can colonize shady areas.

Silktree Silktree would continue to spread, but perhaps at a slower rate because lack of fire would reduce disturbed habitats for this plant to invade. Existing trees would have the chance to get larger and seed production may increase. It is likely that this tree would become more widespread in riparian areas without prescribed fire.

Tallow Tree The lack of prescribed fire would allow tallow tree to spread more rapidly. Fire somewhat controls infestations of this tree on a landscape scale. No burning would allow this tree to take hold without any controls.

Trifoliate Orange Trifoliate orange would probably spread faster in drier, upland sites.

3.1.4 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Vegetation in the project area has been, and continues to be, cleared and/or disturbed for such purposes as construction of roads, infrastructure development, forestry and logging, prescribed fire and wildfire, habitat management, and invasive species management. These activities involve removal, trampling, or destruction of vegetation; disturbance of ground cover; and introduction of invasive species. Many of these actions also contribute to soil compaction and erosion, potentially making it more difficult for native plant species to re-inhabit an area after disturbance. Additionally, pressure from human presence and recreation includes trampling of vegetation due to pedestrian traffic, and concentrated areas of foot traffic which removes vegetation and fragments habitat and vegetative populations. Past management activities and disturbances, such as homesteading, military use (including landscaping with certain species that are still present in the project area), grazing, vegetation treatments, recreation uses, infrastructure development and maintenance, road maintenance and travel along roadways, have contributed to the establishment and distribution of NNIP in the project area.

Beneficial effects of past, present, and future actions include improved habitats and vegetation community structure and function due to habitat management, such as thinnings for RCW habitat, and restoration of ecological function with the management of invasive species. Since 2003, most decision documents have included the control of NNIP. These decisions were beneficial management actions that supported management control objectives for NNIP on the

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 46 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Forest. Treating infestations with herbicides has reduced infestations in some areas and reduced the risk of noxious weeds spreading into new areas.

The distribution of vegetation on the landscape naturally changes over time with gradual processes like erosion or climate change. Global climate change, drought, fire, plant diseases, and spread of exotic plants shape landscape-scale vegetation patterns. When combined with fire, increased pressure from these forces could alter vegetation patterns.

Adverse vegetation impacts associated with the prescribed burn program would be small as compared to cumulative past, present, and foreseeable future effects, but beneficial effects would be larger. Cumulative impacts from the Proposed Action would vary with the nature and frequency of burns, and impacts would be expected to be short in duration and adverse, as well as moderate and beneficial.

3.2 WILDLIFE

3.2.1 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

3.2.1.1 Proposed, Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive Species A Biological Evaluation for fauna was prepared in accordance to FW-009, page 2-8 of the Forest Plan (USFS, 1999a) to document likely effects of the proposed forest management activities on the viability of Proposed, Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive (PETS) species. Detailed information for each of these species is provided in the Fauna BE in Appendix B.

Occurrences of PETS species within the project area were determined through the review of the following:

 LNHP Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species and Natural Communities lists for Grant, Natchitoches, and Winn Parishes (as of 10/2014).  USFS R8 PETS Species list (as of 10/2014).  USFWS T&E list for Louisiana (as of 10/2014).  RCW pre-breeding roost checks for WRD (as of 04/2014).  Wagner soil model for LPS habitat suitability.  Various general biological field assessments performed by District wildlife personnel for recent WRD projects.  Recorded information gathered from District personnel sightings. Table 3-2 presents the PETS species listed for the KNF that were analyzed for this project.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 47 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Table 3-2. Proposed, Endangered, Threatened, Sensitive, and Conservation Species listed for Louisiana possibly located on the Winn Ranger District of KNF. STATUS State (LNHP) USFWS USFS Status/ Scientific Name Common Name Status Status Rank Macrochelys temminckii Alligator Snapping Turtle S3 Setophaga ruticilla American Redstart S1 Aimophila aestivalis Bachman’s Sparrow S S3 Haliaeetus leucocephalus Bald Eagle S E/S2N,S3B Eptesicus fuscus Big Brown Bat S1,S2 Notropis hubbsi Bluehead Shiner S S2 Orconectes blacki Calcasieu Painted Crayfish S S2 Pogonomyrmex comanche Comanche Harvester Ant S2 Accipiter cooperii Cooper’s Hawk S2B,S3N Chaetodipus hispidus Hispid Pocket Mouse S2 S2,S3B, Lophodytes cucullatus Hooded Merganser S4N Sterna antillarum Interior Least Tern E E E/S1B Orconectes maletae Kisatchie Painted Crayfish S S2 Ursus americanus luteolus Louisiana Black Bear T T T/S2 Margaritifera hembeli Louisiana Pearlshell Mussel T T E/S1 Pleurobema riddellii Louisiana Pigtoe Mussel S S1,S2 Pituophis ruthveni Louisiana Pine Snake C S S2,S3 Plethodon kisatchie Louisiana Slimy Salamander S S1,S2 Seiurus motacilla Louisiana Waterthrush S3,S4B Myotis septentrionalis Northern Long-eared Bat T T S1 Pandion haliaetus Osprey S2B, S3N Faxonella creaseri Ouachita Fencing Crayfish S S2 Corynorhinus rafinesquii Rafinesque’s Big-Eared Bat S -- Picoides borealis Red-cockaded Woodpecker E E E/S2 Faxonella beyeri Sabine Fencing Crayfish S S1,S2 Schoolhouse Springs Leuctran Leuctra szczytkoi S S2 Stonefly Lasionycteris noctivagans Silver-haired Bat S1 Myotis austroriparius Southeastern Myotis S -- Strophitus subvexus Southern Creekmussel S S1 Southern Red-backed Plethodon serratus S1 Salamander Elliptio dilatata Spike S2, S3 Ammocrypta clara Western Sand Darter S S2 Sitta carolinensis White-breasted Nuthatch S2 Helmitheros vermivorus Worm-eating Warbler S4B

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 48 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

STATUS State (LNHP) USFWS USFS Status/ Scientific Name Common Name Status Status Rank Sparbarus flavus Yellow Brachycercus Mayfly S2 Federal and State Status: E = Endangered, T = Threatened, C = Candidate species, S = Sensitive State Rank: S1 = critically imperiled, S2 = imperiled, S3 = rare, S4 = apparently secure, S5 = demonstrably secure, SA = accidental in Louisiana, SH = of historical occurrence in Louisiana, SR = reported from Louisiana, SU = possibly in peril in Louisiana, SX = believed to be extirpated from Louisiana, SZ = transient species in which no specific consistent area of occurrence is identifiable (B or N may be used as qualifier of numeric ranks and indicating whether the occurrence is breeding or non- breeding)

3.2.1.2 Conservation Species Conservation species were not included in the Fauna BE; therefore, the following brief descriptions of each of these species are provided as a baseline for the analysis. A list of the conservation species not analyzed as being a PETS species on the Winn Ranger District is presented in Table 3-3.

Table 3-3. Conservation Species (not analyzed as PETS) possibly located on the Winn Ranger District, KNF. Scientific Name Common Name State Rank Macrochelys temminckii Alligator Snapping Turtle S3 Setophaga ruticilla American Redstart S1 Eptesicus fuscus Big Brown Bat S1S2 Pogonomyrmex comanche Comanche Harvester Ant S2 Accipiter cooperii Cooper’s Hawk S2BS3N Chaetodipus hispidus Hispid Pocket Mouse S2 Lophodytes cucullatus Hooded Merganser S2,S3B, S4N Seiurus motacilla Louisiana Waterthrush S3S4B Pandion haliaetus Osprey S2B, S3N Lasionycteris noctivagans Silver-haired Bat SNA Plethodon serratus Southern Red-backed Salamander S1 Elliptio dilatata Spike S2, S3 Sitta carolinensis White-breasted Nuthatch S2 Helmitheros vermivorus Worm-eating Warbler S4B Sparbarus flavus Yellow Brachycercus Mayfly S2 State Rank: S1 = critically imperiled, S2 = imperiled, S3 = rare, S4 = apparently secure, S5 = demonstrably secure, SA = accidental in Louisiana, SH = of historical occurrence in Louisiana, SR = reported from Louisiana, SU = possibly in peril in Louisiana, SX = believed to be extirpated from Louisiana, SZ = transient species in which no specific consistent area of occurrence is identifiable (B or N may be used as qualifier of numeric ranks and indicating whether the occurrence is breeding or non- breeding)

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 49 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Alligator Snapping Turtle The alligator snapping turtle’s habitat consists of primarily freshwater rivers, sloughs, lakes, swamps, bayous, and associated tributaries. These turtles are highly aquatic and rarely exit the water except during nesting when they venture only a few meters from water’s edge. Ongoing threats include habitat alteration and fragmentation, water pollution, deliberate harvest for human consumption, and incidental catch by commercial fishers. Overharvesting and habitat alteration are the major threats (NatureServe, 2014).

American Redstart The American redstart prefers mature and second-growth wooded habitats including deciduous and mixed deciduous-coniferous stands with small openings and thickets. This bird requires closed canopy and prefers dense midstory and understory and well-developed undergrowth. Primary threats are degradation and fragmentation of suitable habitat and associated increased cowbird parasitism and nest predation (NatureServe, 2014).

Big Brown Bat Big brown bats are considered forest wide indicators of mid/late successional mixed hardwood/ loblolly pine forests. Although not common in the southern United States, the big brown bat is widespread throughout Louisiana. This species can be found in various wooded and semi-open habitats. Summer roosts generally occur in buildings, and clusters of individuals may be found in an attic, outbuilding, or storm sewer. The big brown bat is a generalist in foraging habitat, feeding over land and water. Current forestry practices may have a negative impact on tree- roosting bat species, and foraging activity has been shown to decrease with increasing urbanization, possibly because of lower insect abundance (NatureServe, 2014).

Comanche Harvester Ant This ant prefers open, well-drained areas with lots of sun. Primarily a desert dweller, the Comanche harvester ant has been sighted on sandy areas in Winn Parish. None have been confirmed on Kisatchie National Forest.

Cooper’s Hawk Cooper’s hawks often use pine plantations for nesting and may achieve their highest nesting density in such habitat. The nest sites are usually found in large tracts of relatively mature forests, either deep within a dense stand or near an opening. The Cooper’s hawk uses the thick cover of a dense forest for nesting and hunting, but large openings may also be used to locate prey when foraging. While many suggest that the main solution to recovery for this species appears to be an international ban on the use of DDT and related pesticides, controlling habitat destruction is cited in other references (NatureServe, 2014).

Hispid Pocket Mouse The hispid pocket mouse is found in grassy fields, usually covered with a moderate stand of herbaceous vegetation such as broomsedge (Andropogon spp.). Sleeping and birthing occur in underground burrows dug into sandy or loamy soils (NatureServe, 2014).

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 50 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Hooded Merganser The hooded merganser is found in freshwater streams, lakes, swamps, marshes, and estuaries and nests usually in tree cavities in forested regions near water (NatureServe, 2014).

Louisiana Waterthrush The Louisiana waterthrush favors large tracts of mature, deciduous or mixed forests with moderate to sparse undergrowth, near rapid flowing streams. This species may also occur along sluggish streams and rivers, and infrequently in swamps with standing pools of water. The Louisiana waterthrush forages on the ground, always near streams, where insects and other small invertebrates are gleaned from the surface of rocks, mud, and water. Potential threats include forest fragmentation and activities that cause reductions in forest canopy cover or negatively impact aquatic insect communities (NatureServe, 2014).

Osprey Osprey can be found in close proximity to permanent water reservoirs. They typically build large stick nests on living or dead trees and also use numerous man-made structures. Osprey are now recovering in many areas following severe declines resulting from organochlorine biocide use, which is still continued to be used in Central and South America (NatureServe, 2014).

Silver-haired Bat The silver-haired bat prefers forested areas adjacent to lakes, ponds, and streams. Summer roosts and nursery sites are in tree foliage, cavities, or under loose bark, and sometimes in buildings. Habitat loss and fragmentation as a result of clear-cutting and other causes of deforestation constitute one of the greatest concerns to these tree bats (NatureServe, 2014).

Southern Red-backed Salamander The southern red-backed salamander seeks shelter under logs, rocks, and leaf litter. This species prefers cool temperatures and occurs in mesic forests during dry summer months, well away from water bodies. Intensive harvest of mature forest greatly reduces salamander density in the logged areas, and population recovery occurs slowly (NatureServe, 2014).

Spike Spike can be found in medium streams to large rivers primarily in shoal habitat of unimpounded streams and rivers but can occasionally be found in tailwaters of dams and in lakes under some conditions (NatureServe, 2014).

White-breasted Nuthatch The white-breasted nuthatch is most common in open forests of mature trees, primarily oak or pine. The species may also occur in bottomlands, forest edge habitats, parks, campuses, and residential areas. The white-breasted nuthatch prefers mature hardwood trees, with natural cavities for nesting and roosting (NatureServe, 2014).

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 51 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Worm-eating Warbler Breeding habitat of the worm-eating warbler is in bottomland hardwoods, with a rich understory of broadleaf evergreen shrubs or saplings. Nesting occurs on the ground and large tracts of unfragmented mature forests are required for successful reproduction. Wintering habitat is in mature, moist forests that contain a dense understory of broadleaf evergreen cover. Dependence on large forests for nesting may make this species highly vulnerable to population decreases (NatureServe, 2014).

Yellow Brachycercus Mayfly The yellow brachycercus mayfly’s habitat is likely to be clean coastal plain creeks or medium rivers (Natureserve, 2014).

3.2.1.3 Featured Game Species Game species that occupy the Winn Ranger District are the eastern wild turkey, northern bobwhite quail, white-tailed deer, and gray and fox squirrels.

Eastern Wild Turkey The wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) inhabits forests of late successional stages and has a relatively large home range. It has an affinity for mature forests with a diverse mix of hardwoods. Wild turkeys nest on the ground in open, park-like forests during the summer months (NatureServe, 2014).

Northern Bobwhite Quail The northern bobwhite quail (Colinus virginianus) is associated with open pine stands or early successional habitats, such as abandoned fields, hedgerows, thickets, and forest margins. This species nests on the ground in thick cover and feeds on seeds, fruits, nuts, and occasionally on small insects (NatureServe, 2014).

White-tailed Deer The white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) represents an early seral stage of all forested habitat types. Although the species is highly adaptable to varying environmental conditions and can be found in all forest age classes, it is primarily a browser on plants with the greatest quantities within early forest stages (NatureServe, 2014).

Gray and Fox Squirrels Both the gray (Sciurus carolinensis) and fox (Sciurus niger) squirrel are present throughout Louisiana. These species of squirrels inhabit forests rich in plant diversity and pine/hardwood mixes where mast-bearing trees and shrubs are found. The fox squirrel is usually in thin forest stands, whereas the gray squirrel is generally found in areas of dense, mature hardwoods (NatureServe, 2014).

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 52 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

3.2.1.4 Terrestrial Management Indicator Species The Forest Service has collected population data for Management Indicator Species (MIS) for the KNF (MIS Report) as part of the Forest Plan and VM-FEIS (USFS, 1999a; USFS, 1999b; USFS, 1989a; Wagner and Hightower, 2005). The Forest Plan identified certain vertebrate and/or invertebrate species present in the Winn Ranger District as MIS (Forest Plan, Table 5-2, pages 5-15 through 5-19).

Twenty wildlife species are listed in the Forest Plan as terrestrial management species for habitats they represent (Forest Plan, Table 5-2, pages 5-15 through 5-19). Of the 20 species listed, 12 are presented in Table 3-4. The eight remaining species, red-cockaded woodpecker, Bachman’s sparrow, Cooper’s hawk, Louisiana waterthrush, white-breasted nuthatch, worm- eating warbler, and northern bobwhite quail are discussed in the Fauna BE (Appendix B) and Sections 3.2.1.2, and 3.2.1.3 of this EA.

Table 3-4. Terrestrial Management Indicator Species for the Winn Ranger District. Common Name Scientific Name Habitats Represented Prairie Warbler Dendroica discolor Longleaf pine/shortleaf pine/oak- hickory forest Red-headed Woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus Longleaf pine forest Summer Tanager Piranga rubra Shortleaf pine/oak-hickory forest Eastern Wood-pewee Contopus virens Shortleaf pine/oak-hickory forest Pileated Woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus Shortleaf pine/oak- hickory/hardwood-loblolly pine/riparian forest White-eyed Vireo Vireo griseus Hardwood-loblolly pine/riparian forest Yellow-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus americanus Hardwood-loblolly pine/riparian forest Hooded Warbler Wilsonia citrina Hardwood-loblolly pine forest Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina Hardwood-loblolly pine forest Acadian Flycatcher Empidonax virescens Riparian forest Kentucky Warbler Oporornis formosus Riparian forest Northern Parula Parula americana Riparian forest Source: USFS, 1999a

Population trends for all forest MIS are monitored at the Forest Plan level and reported annually in the Forest’s Monitoring and Evaluation Report. Annual forest-wide validation monitoring evaluates the cumulative effects of planned actions combined with past management actions on MIS population trends, and provides a context for evaluating the effects of management on future MIS trends.

The following descriptions give the habitat requirements of each terrestrial MIS not analyzed in previous sections of this EA. Landscape community types are described under Vegetation in Section 3.1.1.1.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 53 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Prairie Warbler The prairie warbler is a bush-gleaning insectivore inhabiting abandoned fields with scattered saplings, scrubby thickets, cutover or burned-over woods, woodland margins, and other sapling- shrub growth (Hamel, 1992). It is a neotropical migrant, present only during breeding season. The prairie warbler represents the shrubby conditions found in early stages of cleared or burned woodlands.

Wagner and Hightower (2005) determined that counts of the species were too low to estimate long- or mid-term trends within the Forest. However, at the Forest level, a decline in short-term trends was detected. In general, overall prairie warbler numbers are expected to decrease on the Forest as a whole, but will remain unchanged within the longleaf pine landscape type.

Red-headed Woodpecker The red-headed woodpecker is a cavity-nesting, insectivore-omnivore that prefers open woods, groves, and open swamps (Hamel, 1992). The presence of the red-headed woodpecker indicates late successional stages of mature forests.

Monitoring detected that species abundance has been stable within the Forest over the short- and mid-term trends. However, no data was available to estimate the long-term trends within the Forest. The trends for species abundance on the Forest are projected to remain unchanged (Wagner and Hightower, 2005).

Summer Tanager The summer tanager is a tree-nesting, tree foliage-gleaning insectivore. It prefers open to medium-growth woods, usually in dry soils within pinewoods (Hamel, 1992). The summer tanager is another species that represents mid-to-late successional habitats.

The summer tanager is a neotropical migrant present within the Forest only during the breeding season. Monitoring for this species detected a stable mid-term abundance within the Forest and a slight decline in short-term abundance within the Forest. Within the Forest, the abundance of preferred habitat is not expected to change. This, coupled with the abundance of summer tanagers on the Forest, suggests that there is no concern of species decline within the Forest (Wagner and Hightower, 2005).

Eastern Wood-pewee The eastern wood-pewee is a tree-nesting, hawking insectivore inhabiting open to medium- growth woods in dry areas (Hamel, 1992). It represents mature forests with a relatively open canopy.

The eastern wood-pewee is a neotropical migrant and is present within the Forest only during the breeding season. Long-term trends of species abundance on the Forest could not be estimated with the data available (Wagner and Hightower, 2005). As for mid-term trends, the data collected suggested that the species abundance is stable on the Forest. In the short-term trends,

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 54 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment data suggested that the abundance of the eastern wood-pewee is declining within the Forest. The habitat and population for this species is expected to remain unchanged.

Pileated Woodpecker The pileated woodpecker nests in cavities of dead trees and inhabits mature and extensive forests (Hamel, 1992). Pileated woodpeckers represent the primary excavators and secondary cavity users of mature forest conditions.

Pileated woodpecker monitoring showed a stable mid-term trend in abundance within the Forest and an increase in the abundance over the short-term (Wagner and Hightower, 2005). Monitoring showed that the pileated woodpecker is a habitat generalist of the mid-late and late successional habitats. The pileated woodpecker is an indicator whose persistence and stability in abundance is believed to indicate the relative availability and trends in these conditions.

White-eyed Vireo The white-eyed vireo is a bush-nesting migrant during its breeding season. This species prefers dense thickets, especially where moist, and along swamp borders and openings (Hamel, 1992). The white-eyed vireo represents the early successional stage for mixed hardwood-loblolly pine forests.

The white-eyed vireo is a neotropical migrant present in the Forest only during the breeding season. Monitoring showed a stable trend of abundance within the Forest over the mid- and short-term (Wagner and Hightower, 2005). Estimates of a long-term trend could not be established due to the lack of data. Preferred habitat for the white-eyed vireo is expected to decline slightly, which may cause a slight decline in species abundance on the Forest, but it is anticipated that this species will continue to be the most common species on the Forest.

Yellow-billed Cuckoo The yellow-billed cuckoo is a neotropical migrant that nests in trees and is a gleaning insectivore. Its primary habitat includes broadleaf forests, especially in thick vegetation (Hamel, 1992). The yellow-billed cuckoo is present within the Winn Ranger District only during the breeding season and represents the mid-to-late successional habitats within the mixed hardwood forests.

Monitoring indicated an increase in abundance over the mid-term and a stable short-term trend in abundance within the Forest (Wagner and Hightower, 2005). No long-term trends were detected for the Forest. With an expected increase in preferred habitat on the Forest, the yellow-billed cuckoo is expected to maintain relatively high abundance.

Hooded Warbler The hooded warbler inhabits forests with a rich understory layer, such as those found in mature pine forests (Hamel, 1992).

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 55 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

The hooded warbler is a neotropical migrant present in the Forest only during the breeding season. Data gathered on the hooded warbler indicated that the abundance of the species on the Forest was stable over the short- and mid-term (Wagner and Hightower, 2005). Due to the stable abundance of the species, and an increase in its preferred habitat on the Forest, species abundance is expected to persist on the Forest.

Wood Thrush The wood thrush is a neotropical migrant present in the Winn Ranger District only during its breeding season. It prefers deciduous or mixed forests with a fairly well-developed deciduous understory (Hamel, 1992). The wood thrush is a bush-nesting, terrestrial gleaning insectivore.

There is no data available to calculate long-term trends on the Forest. However, mid-term data suggests that species abundance on the Forest has decreased (Wagner and Hightower, 2005). Short-term trends show a stable abundance. With a slight increase of habitat capacity, the wood thrush is expected to persist on the Forest.

Acadian Flycatcher The Acadian flycatcher is a neotropical migrant that inhabits moist, deciduous forests that are located near streams. The species is present on the Winn Ranger District only during its breeding season. The Acadian flycatcher represents the small-stream riparian habitat within hardwood forests.

The short-term and mid-term Forest trends indicate that the abundance of the Acadian flycatcher is stable (Wagner and Hightower, 2005). Long-term trends could not be determined from the data available. Habitats used by Acadian flycatchers are expected to increase on the Forest. These increases in habitat, combined with a stable abundance of Acadian flycatchers on the Forest, suggest that this species should persist.

Kentucky Warbler The Kentucky warbler, a neotropical migrant, is a ground-nesting insectivore. The species is found on the Winn Ranger District only during its breeding season and inhabits rich, moist deciduous forests located near streams (Hamel, 1992). The Kentucky warbler represents the large-stream riparian habitat within deciduous forests. Even though the preferred habitat of this species has decreased on the Forest from 5.4 percent in 1995 to 4.5 percent in 2003, this species utilizes a variety of Forest habitats. The amount of usable habitat on the Forest increased to 71 percent of the Forest by 2010 (Wagner and Hightower, 2005).

According to mid-term trends, the abundance of the Kentucky warbler on the Forest is stable, whereas short-term trends indicate an increase in abundance (Wagner and Hightower, 2005). Data were not available to estimate long-term trends on the Forest. An apparent high abundance within the Forest, relative to Louisiana, suggests that the Forest provides important habitat for the species.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 56 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Northern Parula The northern parula is a neotropical migrant found in the Winn Ranger District only during the breeding season. It inhabits swamps and bottomland forests where Spanish moss is common (Hamel, 1992).

Forest wide trends indicate that species abundance is stable, but a negative trend was detected within Louisiana. Overall habitats used by the species declined on the Forest between 1995 and 2000 and were expected to continue to decline through 2010 (Wagner and Hightower, 2005).

3.2.1.5 Aquatic Management Indicator Species Potentially affected aquatic habitats within the Winn Ranger District are swift-flowing sand/gravel bottom and slow-flowing silt/clay bottom streams, and impoundments. Seven wildlife species are listed in the Forest Plan (USFS, 1999a) as aquatic management species (Forest Plan, Table 5-2, pages 5-19). These species are presented here in Table 3-5.

Table 3-5. Aquatic Management Indicator Species for the Winn Ranger District. Common Name Scientific Name Habitats Represented Brown Madtom Noturus phaeus Swift-flowing streams, sand/gravel bottom Redfin Darter Etheostoma whipplei Swift-flowing streams, sand/gravel bottom Louisiana Pearlshell Margaritifera hembeli Swift-flowing streams, sand/gravel Mussel bottom Pirate Perch Aphredoderus sayanus Slow-flowing streams, silt/clay bottom Blackspotted Topminnow Fundulus Slow-flowing streams, silt/clay olivaceus bottom Largemouth Bass Micropterus salmoides Impoundments and ponds Sunfish Lepomis spp. Impoundments and ponds Source: USFS, 1999a

Sandy substrates and low gradients typical of coastal plain streams generally characterize the Forest waterbodies. Seasonal rains cause water levels to alternate within most streams, with the wetter months during winter and spring, and the dryer months during late summer and fall. Streamside Habitat Protection Zones (SHPZ) and Riparian Area Protection Zones (RAPZ) were created to protect and enhance these resources and are not available for timber production. Fishes and other aquatic organisms utilize the streams as spawning and nursery habitats.

Natural and anthropogenic (man-made) disturbances can have strong effects on aquatic biota. Aquatic systems in the southeastern United States are impacted by a variety of anthropogenic disturbances, including channelization, reservoir construction, point-source pollution, exotic species introductions, and agricultural and silvicultural activities (Allan, 1995).

The following descriptions give the habitat requirements of each aquatic MIS:

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 57 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Brown Madtom The brown madtom is found in small, swift-flowing streams within the Forest and inhabits woody debris and undercut banks associated with high flow. The relative abundance of this species has not shown a decline over time in the Forest.

Redfin Darter The redfin darter inhabits swift-flowing riffles and pools in small to medium-sized streams within the Forest. There was no appreciable decline in the relative abundance of this species during 1960-2000 and populations are expected to remain stable (Wagner and Hightower, 2005).

Louisiana Pearlshell Mussel This species inhabits perennial streams and uses structures in the water body to avoid being swept downstream during flood events. The Louisiana pearlshell mussel has been registered as a rare species since the 1970s and was listed in the Federal Register as a threatened species in 1993. The species is found throughout the Forest and recruitment shows that it is successfully reproducing. The population of the Louisiana pearlshell mussel is expected to remain safe as long as protection measures remain in place (Wagner and Hightower, 2005).

Pirate Perch The pirate perch is found in slow-moving streams within the Forest, and relative abundance has shown a slight increase over time. The increase in relative abundance, in addition to its short life span indicates little concern for the viability of pirate perch populations within the Forest.

Blackspotted Topminnow This species is found throughout the Forest inhabiting slow to moderate-flowing pools. Relative abundance of the blackspotted topminnow has shown a marked increase over time in the Forest.

Largemouth Bass The largemouth bass is distributed statewide in Louisiana and inhabits lakes, ponds, and large streams. Populations of this species have fluctuated, as is typical in impoundments. Viability concerns are minimal due to the sport fish management practices conducted on the species.

Sunfish Sunfish are distributed statewide in Louisiana and inhabit the littoral zone of impoundments and ponds. Populations of these species have fluctuated, as is typical in impoundments. Viability concerns are minimal due to the sport fish management practices conducted on the species.

3.2.2 IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 1: PROPOSED ACTION Additional discussion of the general effects of fire management on wildlife and fish can be found in the USFS (1999b) on pages 4-39 through 4-41 and in USFS (2000c).

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 58 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

3.2.2.1 Proposed, Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive Species A summary of effects to PETS from each alternative are presented in Tables 3-6 and 3-7. Specific descriptions of the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects to each of the PETS species is presented in the Fauna BE (Appendix B).

Table 3-6. Potential Effects to Proposed, Threatened, and Endangered Species Possibly on the Winn Ranger District. Species Proposed Action Alternative 2 Red-cockaded Woodpecker 2 3 Louisiana Black Bear 1 1 Interior Least Tern 1 1 Northern Long-eared Bat 2 1 Louisiana Pearlshell Mussel 1 1 Legend: 1—No effect; 2—Not likely to adversely affect; 3—Likely to adversely affect.

Table 3-7. Potential Effects to Sensitive Species possibly on the Winn Ranger District. Proposed Species Action Alternative 2 Bachman’s Sparrow 3 4 Bald eagle 1 1 Bluehead Shiner 1 1 Calcasieu Painted Crayfish 1 1 Kisatchie Painted Crayfish 1 1 Louisiana Pigtoe Mussel 1 1 Louisiana Pine Snake 3 4 Louisiana Slimy Salamander 1 1 Ouachita Fencing Crayfish 1 1 Rafinesque’s Big-Eared Bat 3 1 Sabine Fencing Crayfish 1 1 Schoolhouse Springs Leuctran Stonefly 1 1 Southeastern Myotis 3 1 Southern Creekmussel 1 1 Western Sand Darter 1 1 Legend: 1-No impact; 2 - Beneficial impacts; 3 - May impact but not likely to cause a trend to federal listing or a loss of viability; 4 -Likely to result in a trend to federal listing or a loss of viability.

Under the Proposed Action, prescribed burns would be conducted during both the growing and dormant seasons. Within the proposed project area, the growing season burns would reduce the hardwood understory of the stand and promote the growth of various shade-intolerant herbaceous species.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 59 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Dormant season burns would be utilized to reduce fuel loads within the proposed project area. These fires would improve wildlife habitat and promote growth of herbaceous vegetation for wildlife browse. Burning in hardwood stands would promote increased species diversity within the understory of these forests and reduce the density of hardwood saplings and shrub species.

The Proposed Action would have no direct, indirect, or cumulative effects on the bald eagle, interior least tern, Louisiana pearlshell mussel, Louisiana black bear, Sabine fencing crayfish, Ouachita fencing crayfish, Calcasieu painted crayfish, Kisatchie painted crayfish, bluehead shiner, schoolhouse springs leuctran stonefly, Louisiana Slimy Salamander, or Louisiana pigtoe mussel.

The endangered RCW is not likely to be adversely affected by the Proposed Action. Prescribed burns have the potential to injure or kill individual birds, nestlings, or eggs, especially during the nesting season by burning existing cavity trees. These impacts would be minimized by hand raking around each cavity tree within the project area prior to burning to remove fuels from the base of the trees. Figure 3-1 shows the effectiveness of hand raking around each tree. The overall impacts to the RCW and its preferred habitat from the implementation of prescribed burns would be beneficial to the species by maintaining the preferred habitat of the species and improving the overall health of the ecosystem (USFS, 2000c).

Figure 3-1. Effectiveness of Hand Raking Around Trees.

Since the Proposed Action would not directly affect aquatic habitats, there would be no direct effects expected on the western sand darter or the southern creekmussel. However, indirect effects in the form of increased sediment loads in streams from the erosion of adjacent terrestrial habitat after burns could potentially impact individuals and the preferred habitat of these species. By implementing Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines developed to protect streamside and riparian habitat, these impacts would be minimized, if not eliminated. Therefore, the Proposed Action would have no impact on these aquatic species.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 60 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Species such as Rafinesque’s big-eared bat, northern long-eared bat, southeastern myotis, Louisiana pine snake, and Bachman’s sparrow could potentially be directly affected by the prescribed fires, but the indirect impacts would be beneficial for each of these species. Therefore, it was determined that the Proposed Action may impact individuals of these species, but is not likely to cause a trend to federal listing or loss of viability; or is not likely to adversely affect (northern long-eared bat).

3.2.2.2 Conservation Species The Proposed Action would have no direct, indirect, or cumulative effects on worm-eating warbler, Louisiana waterthrush, white-breasted nuthatch, osprey, hooded merganser, Comanche harvester ant, yellow brachycercus mayfly, or American redstart.

No direct effects are expected for Cooper’s hawk. The combination of dormant and growing season burns would indirectly affect species such as Cooper’s hawk and hispid pocket mouse by reducing understory vegetation, promoting the establishment of herbaceous ground cover, and the increasing food production.

Individuals of big brown bat, silver-haired bat, hispid pocket mouse, and southern red-backed salamander could be injured or killed by prescribed fires; however, these species would likely escape to refuge areas during these fires, minimizing the direct effects on these individuals.

Indirect effects to the southern red-backed salamander, spike, and alligator snapping turtle could include sedimentation within the preferred habitats of these species from increased erosion potential of adjacent burned terrestrial habitats (USFS, 2000c).

3.2.2.3 Featured Game Species Eastern Wild Turkey Under the Proposed Action, individual eastern wild turkey nests could be lost to prescribed burning during the growing season. Although eggs and hatchlings may be vulnerable to growing season burns, there would be little adverse long-term effects to the wild turkey because this species is capable of re-nesting (USFS, 2000c). Any adverse effects would be negligible on the population and outweighed by the beneficial effects of growing season burns. Prescribed burning during the growing season would stimulate the growth of grasses and forbs, increase seed production, and maintain an open understory.

Prescribed burns conducted during the dormant season would favor the production of legumes, reduce external parasites, maintain brood habitat for poults (young turkey), and increase the amount of insects available for food. Dormant season burns increase openings in the forest, which in turn, increases food production (USFS, 2000c). Winter burns would also help establish a diverse herbaceous understory and promote fruit production (USFS, 1989a).

Northern Bobwhite Quail The implementation of the Proposed Action would maintain the early seral stage favored by the northern bobwhite quail. The burns conducted during the growing season would possibly destroy

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 61 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment some individual nests of the northern bobwhite quail; however, they would not significantly decrease the reproduction of the species due to bobwhite quails re-nesting two to three times during the summer (USFS, 2000c). These burns would stimulate the growth of grasses and forbs and increase seed production for foraging.

Prescribed burns conducted during the dormant season would favor the production of legumes, reduce external parasites, maintain brood habitat, and increase the amount of insects available for food. Winter burns would also maintain an open understory and promote fruit production (USFS, 1989a and USFS, 2000c).

White-tailed Deer The Proposed Action would have beneficial effects on white-tailed deer by increasing the quantity and palatability of legumes and other browse. The growing and dormant season burns would also increase the amount of cover available within the Forest between prescribed burning rotations.

Gray and Fox Squirrel The Proposed Action would have no effects on the gray squirrel. Prescribed burning of older pines during the late winter is a recommended management tool for the fox squirrel. Therefore, the dormant season burns would have beneficial effects on this species.

3.2.2.4 Terrestrial Management Indicator Species Prairie Warbler The Proposed Action would have beneficial effects on the prairie warbler. This species is associated with cutover or burned-over woods and requires a shrub/scrub habitat. Prescribed burning within longleaf pine stands would return the stand to an early successional stage and is expected to enhance the quality of the prairie warbler habitat.

Red-headed Woodpecker The Proposed Action may have adverse effects to the red-headed woodpecker population. Although no effects are expected to adult birds, growing season prescribed burns could be detrimental to woodpecker nests and nestlings. Since red-headed woodpeckers share some nesting preferences and habitats with the RCW, red-headed woodpeckers may incur similar benefits from pre-fire protection measures. This species may also incur some beneficial effects from the prescribed burns due to an increase in food production.

Summer Tanager Currently, the habitat within the project stands is not suitable for the summer tanager. Because this species occupies the mid and overstory of the forest canopy, the Proposed Action would have minimal adverse effects on the summer tanager.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 62 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Eastern Wood-pewee The eastern wood-peewee is associated with an open canopy and early seral habitat types. The Proposed Action would have no direct or indirect effects on individuals of this species, but the preferred habitat is expected to increase with prescribed burns. Therefore, the Proposed Action would have beneficial effects on the species because it would promote the development of a healthier forest suitable for the eastern wood-pewee.

Pileated Woodpecker The pileated woodpecker inhabits mature forests, nests in cavities in dead or living overstory trees, and forages within the midstory and overstory. The Proposed Action may cause temporary adverse effects on the pileated woodpecker by reducing foraging habitat and prey.

White-eyed Vireo The Proposed Action would have temporary adverse effects on the white-eyed vireo at the time of the prescribed burn. However, the species would benefit overall from an increase in shrubby understory growth, encouraging a possible increase in nesting habitat. Because this species is a cavity-nester, growing season prescribed burns could be detrimental to nests and nestlings. However, re-nesting would be possible if nest disturbance did occur.

Yellow-billed Cuckoo The yellow-billed cuckoo is mostly associated with bottomland hardwood forests; therefore, the Proposed Action would have no effects on the species.

Hooded Warbler The Proposed Action would have temporary adverse effects on the hooded warbler and may cause a short-term reduction in species abundance.

Wood Thrush The Proposed Action would have temporary adverse effects on the wood thrush and may cause a short-term reduction in species abundance. Prescribed burns would result in a reduction of mid- story vegetation, which is a habitat requirement of wood thrushes. However, the Proposed Action would have minimal adverse effects to the species due to their flexibility of nest placement.

Acadian Flycatcher The Proposed Action would have no effects on the Acadian flycatcher or its breeding densities because the species prefers habitats near water sources.

Kentucky Warbler Under the Proposed Action, Kentucky warbler nests may be lost to prescribed burning during the growing season. However, any adverse effects would be negligible on the population and outweighed by the beneficial effects of the prescribed burn. The Kentucky warbler would benefit overall from the prescribed increase in food production.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 63 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Northern Parula The northern parula is associated with bottomland hardwood forests, as well as pond areas and swamps; therefore, the Proposed Action would have no effect on the species.

3.2.2.5 Aquatic Management Indicator Species The implementation of the Proposed Action would have no direct effects on the aquatic MIS within the project area. Indirect and cumulative effects may be caused by an increase in sediments entering the streams which the aquatic species may utilize. However, these impacts would be minimized or eliminated through the implementation of standards and guidelines listed in the Forest Plan for the protection of streamside and riparian habitats. This alternative is not expected to contribute to adverse cumulative effects on the aquatic MIS.

3.2.3 IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 2: NO ACTION

3.2.3.1 Proposed, Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive Species A summary of effects to PETS from each alternative are presented in Tables 3-6 and 3-7. Specific descriptions of the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects to each of the PETS species is presented in the Fauna BE (Appendix B).

Alternative 2 would have no direct, indirect or cumulative impacts on bald eagle, Louisiana pearlshell mussel, Louisiana black bear, Louisiana slimy salamander, western sand darter, bluehead shiner, schoolhouse springs leuctran stonefly, Louisiana pigtoe mussel, southern creekmussel, Sabine fencing crayfish, Calcasieu painted crayfish, Kisatchie painted crayfish, Ouachita fencing crayfish, Rafinesque’s big-eared bat, northern long-eared bat, interior least tern or southeastern myotis (USFS, 2000c).

Alternative 2 would likely cause adverse effects to the RCW in the form of indirect impacts to preferred habitat. The no-burn alternative would lead to an increase of understory vegetation, and the habitat would eventually be rendered unsuitable to the RCW.

Because Bachman’s sparrow and Louisiana pine snake prefer open, herbaceous understories, not burning suitable habitat periodically would allow shrubs to overtake the understory and render it unsuitable for these species. These indirect effects may impact individuals of these species and would likely cause a trend to federal listing or a loss of viability. Specific to the Louisiana pine snake, to allow these conditions would not be consistent with the terms of the Candidate Conservation Agreement between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Defense (Fort Polk and the Joint Readiness Training Center), Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries and the Association of Zoos and Aquariums, which was amended and revised in August 2013.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 64 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

3.2.3.2 Conservation Species Alternative 2 would have no direct effects on any of the conservation species. Under this alternative, none of the proposed management activities would be conducted within the project area. Indirect impacts from the elimination of fire on such species as Cooper’s hawk and hispid pocket mouse, that prefer open herbaceous habitats, would decrease the suitability of these habitats by allowing the woody understory to develop. The remaining conservation species would not be indirectly or cumulatively affected by the alternative.

3.2.3.3 Featured Game Species Eastern Wild Turkey Alternative 2 would exclude fire and degrade the health of the ecosystem over time. Understory species would begin to dominate and shade out the herbaceous species and fire tolerant species favorable to the eastern wild turkey. Availability, amount, and nutritional value of forage would decrease with the exclusion of fire (USFS, 1989a and USFS, 2000c).

Northern Bobwhite Quail Alternative 2 would cause the existing habitat to degrade and become unsuitable for the northern bobwhite quail. Understory species would begin to dominate and shade out the herbaceous species and fire tolerant species favorable to the northern bobwhite quail. Availability, amount, and nutritional value of forage would decrease with the exclusion of fire (USFS, 1989a and USFS, 2000c).

White-tailed Deer Alternative 2 would not decrease the quantity of suitable habitat for this species but would decrease the habitat quality.

Gray and Fox Squirrel Alternative 2 would have no effects on the gray or fox squirrel.

3.2.3.4 Terrestrial Management Indicator Species Prairie Warbler The prairie warbler inhabits forests associated with prescribed burns and cutover activities, also known as shrub/scrub habitats. Alternative 2 would limit the amount of habitat preferred by this species and have adverse impacts on the prairie warbler.

Red-headed Woodpecker Alternative 2 would result in adverse indirect effects on the red-headed woodpecker. The no- burn alternative would lead to an increase of understory vegetation and the habitat would eventually be rendered unsuitable to the species.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 65 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Summer Tanager Alternative 2 would have no effects on the summer tanager.

Eastern Wood-pewee Alternative 2 would have no effects on the eastern wood-pewee.

Pileated Woodpecker Alternative 2 would have no effects on the pileated woodpecker.

White-eyed Vireo Alternative 2 would have no effects on the white-eyed vireo.

Yellow-billed Cuckoo Alternative 2 would have no effects on the yellow-billed cuckoo.

Hooded Warbler Alternative 2 would have beneficial effects on the hooded warbler. The species favors hardwood forests with dense, rich understory; therefore, the no-action alternative would increase the habitat associated with the hooded warbler.

Wood Thrush Alternative 2 would have no effects on the wood thrush.

Acadian Flycatcher Alternative 2 would have no effects on the Acadian flycatcher.

Kentucky Warbler Alternative 2 would have no effects on the Kentucky warbler.

Northern Parula Alternative 2 would have no effects on the northern parula.

3.2.3.5 Aquatic Management Indicator Species Alternative 2 would have no effects on the aquatic MIS.

3.2.4 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Wildlife and habitat in the project area have been, and continue to be, subject to disturbance and alteration from prescribed burning and periodic wildfire, visitor use, construction and development, vehicle use, forestry and logging, habitat management and restoration, and invasive species. Wildlife impacts related to these activities include disturbance, displacement, and mortality of individuals; interruption of breeding; the loss, fragmentation, and degradation of

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 66 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment habitat; invasive species which outcompete native species, particularly vegetation that then alters and degrades habitat; and human presence and activity which increases noise and disturbs wildlife. Past, current, and future development adjacent to the Forest reduces wildlife habitat and fragments wildlife corridors and edge habitat. However, beneficial cumulative effects also exist from habitat management and restoration, such as thinning projects and longleaf pine release. Wildlife and habitat impacts associated with the burn program would be small as compared with the cumulative effects of past, present, and foreseeable future actions. Cumulative impacts from the Proposed Action would vary with the nature and frequency of prescribed burns, and impacts would be expected to be adverse as well beneficial, but small or negligible. The No Action alternative does not meet the purpose and need, and could contribute greater adverse long term direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts in the event of catastrophic wildfires.

3.3 SOILS

3.3.1 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT Soils are a fundamental component of the Forest environment. They are generally considered nonrenewable resources because of the length of time required for their formation. The diverse soils on the Forest were produced by the interaction of climate, living organisms, geologic parent material, relief, and landscape position.

In the National Hierarchy of Ecological Units, the Winn Ranger District is located within the Western Coastal Plains Subsection (USFS, 1999b). This subsection consists of the rolling hills of west-central Louisiana and portions of east Texas. Although the uplands of this area were historically dominated by longleaf pine communities typical of acidic loams, they included significant areas of shortleaf pine / oak-hickory on less acid, clayey soils; mixed hardwood loblolly pine on stream terraces, and riparian forest on alluvial floodplains.

The project area is composed of five major Landtype Associations (LTA). An LTA is an ecological unit ranging in size from about 25,000 acres to as much as 500,000 acres and are more finite subdivisions of their respective subsections. An LTA is typically uniform in land-surface form, sub-surface geology, soil patterns, and historical vegetation. The majority of the project area is composed of the High Terrace Rolling Uplands, the Undulating Clayey Uplands, the Alluvial Floodplains and Streams Terraces, and the Winn Rolling Uplands LTAs. A small percentage of the project area is located within the Red River Alluvial Plain LTA. Soils in these LTAs are described as follows (USFS, 1999b):

High Terrace Rolling Uplands This LTA occurs on small portions in the northwestern and southwestern corners of the Winn District on 18,000 acres. Consisting mostly of Pleistocene age formations, this LTA lies primarily on quaternary high terrace deposits — tan-to-orange clays, silts, and sands containing large amounts of gravel. They were most likely deposited by braided river complexes, in this case the Red River complex. The LTA contains numerous drainages and associated Holocene alluvium.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 67 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Soils in this LTA formed mostly in loamy sediments. The Ruston and Smithdale soils on ridge tops and sideslopes of the rolling areas typically have fine sandy loam surfaces overlaying sandy clay loam or clay loam subsoils. These soils are well-drained with moderately low runoff potential. They have moderate plant-available water. Moderately well-drained Malbis soils with similar textures are located on broad ridgetops and interfluves. The Glenmora and Beauregard soils on the undulating areas and flats typically have silt loam surfaces over silty clay loam subsoils.

These soils are moderately well-drained with moderately high runoff potential, and they have moderate to high plant-available water. Subsoils are characterized as moderately permeable. Although the soils in this LTA are low in plant nutrients and organic matter, the soils on the flat and undulating areas are among the Forest’s most productive soils for growing pine.

About 10 percent of this LTA contains frequently flooded Guyton alluvial floodplain soils, which occur on the narrow floodplains of small perennial and intermittent streams. The nutrients and plant-available water of these loamy soils are relatively high, and drainage is typically poor to somewhat poor.

Undulating Clayey Uplands Several small geologic formations are a composite, forming this LTA. The Vicksburg group, Jackson group, Cane River, and Cook Mountain are the primary surface formations; all deposited during the Tertiary period. Most are Eocene age formations and can be generally characterized as having lignitic, sideritic and/or glauconitic clays. This LTA contains numerous drainages with associated Holocene alluvium.

This LTA generally contains moderately well-drained and somewhat poorly drained clayey soils on gently to strongly sloping ridge tops and sideslopes. Runoff potential is high. The predominant soils within this LTA have relatively high plant nutrients and plant-available water. Their subsoils are very slowly permeable. Erosion hazard is severe on sideslopes. Included in this LTA are large areas of Vaiden and Hollywood soils with alkaline subsoils. Other major soils are Bellwood, Cadeville, and Metcalf. Also included are small areas of Kieffer soils with calcareous subsoils, which comprise the Kieffer prairies. About 8 percent of this LTA contains frequently flooded Guyton alluvial soils on narrow floodplains.

Alluvial Floodplains and Streams Terraces Recent alluvium and prairie terrace make up the primary surface formations within this LTA. They were deposited during the Quaternary period. The recent alluvium sediments found in the valley bottoms are of Holocene age. The prairie terraces were deposited during the late Pleistocene epoch. These formations can be generally characterized as having gray to brownish- gray clay with varying amounts of silt, sand and gravel.

The soils of this LTA formed in loamy and silty alluvial stream deposits. Soils in the large, level floodplains are variable but generally contain poorly drained loams with plentiful plant-available water. These soils typically have silt-loam surfaces over silty clay-loam subsoils. The associated wide and nearly level stream terrace soils consist of moderately well to poorly drained silts and

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 68 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment loams with high-to-moderate plant-available water. Floodplain and stream terrace soils are relatively high in plant nutrients.

Winn Rolling Uplands The primary surface geology within this LTA is believed to be the Cockfield formation. This formation is a member of the Eocene age Claiborne group, generally characterized as having brown lignitic clay, silts, and sands.

Soils in the Winn Rolling Uplands LTA formed in clayey and loamy sediments. These moderately well-drained clays and moderate- to well-drained loams have moderately permeable subsoils. Runoff potential is moderately high; plant nutrients are low. Clayey Sacul soils on ridgetops and sideslopes are high in plant-available water. Loamy Savannah soils on broad ridgetops and gentle sideslopes have moderate plant-available water. Fine, sandy-loam surfaces typify both soils. Also included are large areas of sandier Boykin soils. About 12 percent of this LTA contains frequently flooded, poorly drained alluvial soils on narrow floodplains.

Red River Alluvial Plain This LTA corresponds most closely to the relatively small areas of the Forest occurring on the Red River alluvial floodplain. Recent alluvium and natural levees are Holocene age, deposited by past and present courses of the Red River during the Quaternary Period. These formations are generally characterized as having reddish brown clay, silty clay, and silt with varying amounts of sand and gravel.

Soils in the Red River Alluvial Plain LTA formed in clayey alluvial river deposits. Moreland and Perry soils are somewhat poorly drained and poorly drained. They lie on broad, level flats, on backswamps, and on natural levees of the floodplains. Large areas of these soils are alkaline, high in organic matter, and relatively high in plant nutrients. Yorktown soils are found on old stream channel scars and depressional areas of the floodplain. These soils are very poorly drained and are wet year-round. Available water capacity is low to moderate on these soils, but the frequency of lengthy flooding and wetness characteristic of most of these soils provides a lot of available water. The resulting anaerobic soil conditions on much of this LTA favor the establishment of forested wetland vegetation. Most soils in this LTA are hydric, which is a criterion for classifying these areas as wetlands.

The soils series along with corresponding characteristics and prescribed burning suitability for soils located within the project area are presented in Table 3-8. Soil series found within the uplands of the project area are Beaureguard, Bellwood, Betis, Bienville, Boykin, Briley, Caddo, Cahaba, Cadeville, Frizzell-Guyton, Glenmora, Gore, Hollywood, Keithville, Kieffer, Kolin, Malbis, Mayhew, Metcalf, Natchitoches, Osier, Oktibbeha, Ruston, Sacul, Savanah, Shatta, Smithdale, and Vaiden. The Guyton soil series is found within the floodplains of the project area.

In this table, the rating for prescribed burns is given, followed by the limiting factor(s). Ratings do not indicate whether prescribed burning should or should not occur. Rather, they indicate the relative amount of mitigation or costs needed to protect the soil resource and to successfully implement a chosen activity, should activity occur. These soil ratings are often taken into

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 69 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment account in the planning phase. On any soils, the steeper the slope, the greater is the soil’s susceptibility to erosion. Soil compaction is greatest on clayey soils and least on sandy soils. Soil moisture also plays a role in compaction with wetter soils being more susceptible to compaction. Typically most of the compaction has occurred after two to three passes have been made over an area and occurs most severely in the first three inches of soil. Compaction also becomes less as the amount of slash, litter, and duff remains on the site increases. Compaction would be minor under good conditions, but would increase if the use of heavy equipment were to occur when soil moisture is high. All soils are more susceptible to compaction during times of saturated soil conditions. Those soils with higher water tables and those that are subject to flooding will have longer periods of saturated soil conditions during which they would be more susceptible to compaction. Most soils will eventually recover from compaction; however, it may take 12-40 years.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 70 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Table 3-8. Soil Series Characteristics and Prescribed Burning Suitability for FY 2016through 2025, Winn Ranger District. Surface Subsurface Slope Erosion Compaction Flood- Soil Series Texture Texture Range Hazard Hazard Plain Drainage Land Form Prescribed Burns Beauregard Silty Silty 1-5% Moderate Severe N Moist Upland flat Good Bellwood Loamy Very fine 1-5% Moderate Severe N Moist Ridge top Good Bellwood Loamy Very fine 5-12% Severe Severe N Moist Side slope Fair: erosion Poor: droughtiness, low Betis Sandy Sandy 1-5% Moderate Slight N Droughty Ridge top fertility surface Poor: droughtiness, low Betis Sandy Sandy 5-12% Severe Slight N Droughty Side slope fertility surface Stream Fair: low fertility Bienville Sandy Sandy 1-5% Slight Slight N Droughty terrace surface, droughtiness Fair: low fertility Boykin Sandy Loamy 1-5% Slight Slight N Dry Ridge top surface, droughtiness Fair: low fertility Boykin Sandy Loamy 5-20% Moderate Slight N Dry Side slope surface, droughtiness Fair: low fertility Briley Sandy Loamy 1-5% Slight Slight N Dry Ridge top surface, droughtiness Caddo Silty Silty 0-1% Slight Severe N Wet Upland flat Good Cadeville Loamy Fine 1-5% Moderate Severe N Moist Ridge top Good Stream Cahaba Loamy Loamy 1-5% Slight Moderate N Dry terrace Good Cadeville Loamy Fine 5-12% Severe Severe N Moist Side slope Fair: erosion Stream Frizzell-Guyton Silty Loamy 0-2% Slight Severe N Moist terrace Good Glenmora Loamy Silty 1-5% Slight Severe N Moist Upland flat Good Guyton Siley Silty 0-1% Slight Severe Y Wet Floodplain Good Gore Loamy Fine 1-5% Moderate Severe N Moist Ridge top Good Gore Loamy Fine 5-12% Severe Severe N Moist Side slope Fair: erosion Stream Guyton Silty Silty 0-1% Slight Severe N Wet terrace Good Guyton Silty Silty 0-1% Slight Severe Y Wet Floodplain Good Hollywood Silty Fine 1-5% Moderate Severe N Moist Ridge top Good

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 71 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Surface Subsurface Slope Erosion Compaction Flood- Soil Series Texture Texture Range Hazard Hazard Plain Drainage Land Form Prescribed Burns Keithville Loamy Silty 1-5% Moderate Severe N Moist Upland flat Good Kieffer Loamy Silty 1-5% Slight Severe N Moist Upland flat Good Kolin Silty Silty 1-5% Moderate Severe N Moist Upland flat Good Malbis Loamy Loamy 1-5% Slight Severe N Moist Upland flat Good Mayhew Loamy Fine 1-5% Slight Severe N Wet Upland flat Good Metcalf Loamy Silty 0-2% Slight Severe N Moist Upland flat Good Natchitoches Loamy Very fine 5-12% Moderate Moderate N Dry Side slope Good Oktibbeha Silty Very fine 1-5% Slight Severe N Moist Upland flat Good Oktibbeha Silty Very fine 5-15% Severe Severe N Moist Upland flat Fair: erosion Osier Sandy Sandy 0-2% Slight Moderate N Wet Lower slope Good Ruston Loamy Loamy 1-5% Slight Moderate N Dry Ridge top Good Sacul Loamy Fine 1-5% Slight Severe N Moist Ridge top Good Sacul Loamy Fine 5-20% Moderate Severe N Moist Side slope Good Savanah Loamy Loamy 1-5% Moderate Severe N Moist Upland flat Good Shatta Loamy Loamy 1-5% Slight Severe N Moist Upland flat Good Smithdale Loamy Loamy 5-20% Moderate Moderate N Dry Side slope Good Vaiden Fine Very fine 1-5% Slight Moderate N Moist Ridge top Good Source: USFS, 2010a

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 72 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

3.3.2 IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 1: PROPOSED ACTION Soil productivity could be adversely affected through erosion, compaction, nutrient leaching, and nutrient displacement when prescribed burning occurs. The erosion process involves three separate components that are a function of sediment size and transport medium (water or air) velocity. They are: (1) detachment, (2) transport, and (3) deposition. Erosion occurs when sediments are exposed to water or air and velocities are sufficient to detach and transport the sediments (USFS, 2005). Monitoring soils subsequent to any treatment would determine whether erosion/sedimentation mitigation is needed.

For any soils, the steeper the slope, the greater is the soil’s susceptibility to erosion. The soil erosion ratings for soils in the Winn Ranger District are depicted in Table 3-8 for all the soils types that would be burned from 2016 to 2025.

All soils are more susceptible to compaction during times of saturated soil conditions. Those soils with high water tables, and those that are subject to flooding, would have longer periods of saturated soil conditions during which they would be more susceptible to compaction. Compaction ratings for soils in the project area are shown in Table 3-8.

Effects of prescribed burning on soil erosion are also dependent on fire severity (USFS, 1989a). Fire severity is a qualitative term that is used to describe ecosystem responses to fire that generally reflects the amount of energy (heat) that is released by a fire and the degree that it affects the soil and water resources. Fire intensity is a term that is used to describe that rate at which a fire produces thermal energy (flame length) (USFS, 2005).

Under this alternative, prescribed burns would be conducted during both the dormant season and growing season. Weather conditions during the dormant season are generally more conducive to low intensity fires. Because of the nature of these type burns, soil exposure and resulting erosion are generally negligible. Effects from soil erosion are expected to be minimal with the implementation of the management requirements and design criteria outlined in Sections 2.4 and 2.5, Soil Productivity and Air Quality.

The soil chemical characteristics most commonly affected by fire are organic matter, carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus, sulfur cations, cation exchange capacity, pH, and buffer power. Prescribed burning causes small increases in soil pH and available nutrients (phosphorus, and exchangeable calcium and magnesium) in the top two to four inches of mineral soil. The combustion of organic matter during a fire and the subsequent release of soluble cations tend to increase pH slightly because basic cations are released during combustion and deposited on the soil surface. The increase in soil pH is usually temporary depending upon the original soil pH, amount of ash released, chemical composition of the ash, and wetness of the climate (USFS, 2005).

Available nitrogen in soil is a key element in soil quality and is considered the most limiting nutrient in wildland ecosystems (USFS, 2005). Although burning tends to volatilize nitrogen in the combustion of fine and medium size fuels, the increases in nitrogen fixation in the soil would compensate for losses to the atmosphere (USFS, 1989a). There would be some loss of nitrogen

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 73 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment and other volatile material from the forest floor that could have been incorporated into the soil. Some loss of mineral nutrients that become water-soluble could occur through leaching or runoff.

There is a possibility that some destruction of microorganisms, damage to soil structure, and loss of infiltration capacity would occur. The extent to which these impacts occur depends primarily upon the temperature of the burn. Intense heat normally occurs only in small, widely scattered concentrations of heavy logging slash that would have been incorporated into the soil over time (USFS, 1989b). However, depending on fire severity, organisms in the organic forest floor can be killed outright, although those in the deeper soil horizons, or insolated unburned locations, survive. Fire also modifies the habitat of microorganisms by destroying organic matter, altering soil temperature and moisture regimes, and changing postfire vegetation communities (USFS, 2005).

Effects to soil nutrients from prescribed burning would be minimal with implementation of the Proposed Action. Long-term studies show no substantial decreases in ecosystem nitrogen due to prescribed burns (Pritchett, 1987). Fire effects on the total nitrogen level in soils are small, if detectable, despite variations in fire intensities (Richter et al., 1982). Soil phosphorous, potassium, calcium, and magnesium increase after burning (USFS, 1979; Austin and Baisinger, 1955). These increases are temporary, and soil nutrients return to non-burn levels in two years, with calcium taking longer (Austin and Baisinger, 1955). Repeated burning of pine forests over long periods may have pronounced effects on the maintenance of soil fertility. Some loss of minerals occurs through leaching and runoff (USFS, 1989). Long-term burning effects on nitrogen are combined with effects on soil biota, physical properties, and organic matter to judge overall risk to soil productivity. Risk to soil productivity from understory burns depends on their frequency and season. For three to four year understory burns, risk from dormant season burns is minimal on good and fair soils and low on poor soils, where they prevent long-term soil recovery. Most of the soils within the project area have a good suitability rating for prescribed burning. Risk from growing season burns can be mitigated somewhat by alternating them with dormant season burns. This would reduce the risk to low on good to fair soils and increase the risk to high on poor soils (USFS, 1989). If measurements indicated that increased bare ground is being exposed and less vegetative cover is present following the burns, which indicates that nutrients were becoming depleted, fire frequency would be reduced.

Proposed burning activities would result in minimal soil disturbance with the exception of fireline areas. Existing barriers (roads, streams, and permanent firelines) would be utilized whenever possible to minimize soil compaction and erosion. Design criteria would ensure erosion control is a part of standard prescribed fire implementation. It is expected that erosion and compaction effects from implementing the Proposed Action would be typical and within levels that maintain soil productivity. Monitoring and adjusting fire frequency would insure that loss of soil productivity would be minimal.

3.3.3 IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 2: NO ACTION Under the No Action alternative, there would not be a prescribed burn program, and the buildup of hazardous fuels would increase over time, potentially resulting in disastrous wildfires. Some

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 74 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment areas would be severely burned by wildfires, which could result in a loss of soil productivity. Impacts from such severe fires would result from loss of vegetation cover that leaves soils exposed and susceptible to accelerated erosion from wind and rain, or disturbance from people and equipment. Extremely hot fires can consume organic matter in the soils (as opposed to a layer of organic litter on top of the soil but not yet incorporated into the soil profile) and change the soil chemistry so that soils become hydrophobic and unable to absorb water.

Suppression actions have the potential to increase soil erosion because vegetation and organic litter are removed for fire lines or consumed by the fire. Erosion would be greatest along stretches of fire line that run down rather than along the contour of the slope; however, standard erosion control measures would also be implemented during wildfire suppression activities. Soil compaction and disturbance would occur both with hand line and with mopping up after the fire.

The effects on soils described for the Proposed Action would also occur during wildfires that may occur under this alternative, but likely to a greater extent. Overall effects on soils from this alternative would range from minimal to severe depending on the frequency and severity of wildfires.

3.3.4 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Cumulative impacts on soils in the project area would be expected from past, present, and foreseeable future activities such as prescribed burning and periodic wildland fire, infrastructure development, forestry and logging, road repair and construction, and visitor use. Adverse impacts would include soil compaction, channelization of runoff from impervious surfaces, erosion of soils and mass movement, and loss of ecological function where soils are under impervious surfaces. Adverse soils impacts associated with the prescribed burn program would be small as compared to cumulative past, present, and foreseeable future effects. Cumulative impacts from the Proposed Action would vary with the nature and frequency of prescribed burns, and impacts would be expected to be small, and both adverse and beneficial. The No Action alternative could contribute greater adverse cumulative impacts in the event of catastrophic wildfires.

3.4 WATER QUALITY AND AQUATIC RESOURCES

3.4.1 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT Watersheds within the project area include Saline Bayou, Antoine Creek, Upper and Lower Dugdemona River, Iatt Creek, Nantachie Creek, and Little River. Several waterbodies traverse the project area, including Eight Mile Creek, Bear Creek, Gravel Creek, Choctaw Creek, Dry Choctaw Creek, Saline Bayou, Cypress Creek, Mile Branch, Malaudos Creek, Big and Hill Creek, Iatt Creek, Range Creek, Wolf Creek, and Nantachie Bayou among others. Most waterbodies are perennial or intermittent streams that drain the project area. Perennial streams are characterized by well-sustained relatively constant flow during dry periods of summer months. Intermittent streams, of which most are first through third order streams within the project area, do not retain continuous flow and tend to dry up during July through October. Ephemeral drainages or swales are typically located above stream channels and flow only during and immediately after rainfall.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 75 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

The essential water quality parameters for streams within the Forest are measured chlorides, sulfates, total dissolved solids, dissolved oxygen, the pH factor, temperature, and fecal coliform. Data collected by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Forest Service show almost all the Forest’s surface water meeting or exceeding standards set for recommended stream uses. Surface water failing to meet quality standards is found in areas whose watersheds are degraded.

Water resources in the LTAs found in the Winn District are described as follows (USFS, 1999b):

High Terrace Rolling Uplands Clear water, shallows with frequent deep pools, and significant amounts of large woody debris characterize streams in this LTA. Stream bottoms are generally sandy. Perennial streams in this LTA are characterized by well-sustained, relatively constant base flows in dry months, low flood peaks, and low suspended sediment loads. Less than 10 percent of the streams are perennial. Stream gradients range from 1.91 to 16.00 percent. Mean depths vary from 8.6 to 51.3 centimeters (cm), while the flow rate spread is from 1.03 to 30.00 cm per second.

Brown madtoms, the known host fish for the threatened Louisiana pearlshell mussel larvae occur in most of these streams around woody material. The redfin shiner is also common to most of these streams. This fish is classified as an intolerant due to its sensitivity to siltation and low dissolved oxygen levels. The piscivorous green sunfish and warmouth also appear to be prevalent in this LTA, probably due to their preference for deep pools. Similarly, bluegills are also common in this LTA. Fish diversity in this LTA averages 14 to 17 species per stream. Darters, which are found in streams of this LTA, generally require higher quality habitats with good flows, high dissolved oxygen and low levels of siltation.

The Louisiana pearlshell mussel, a federally-listed threatened species, is known to occur on the Forest only within this LTA. It is found within 15–20 streams that drain into the Red River. The Sabine shiner is the main fish species of concern in this LTA. This minnow has declined in much of its historic range.The main impacts to this fish are thought to be from excessive siltation.

Undulating Clayey Uplands Streams within this LTA are generally slow-flowing and shallow, with silt-covered hard-clay bottoms frequently having deep holes. They are characteristically dry channels with scattered pools during the dryer months of July-October. Water is often turbid, and is moderatein pH and specific conductance.

Species diversity and fish biomass appear comparatively less than in other LTAs. Fish and other aquatic organisms in this LTA are likely to be more silt-tolerant because of natural substrate composition. Bluntnose darters are common in this LTA because of their ability to thrive in sluggish streams with clay bottoms.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 76 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Alluvial Floodplains and Streams Terraces Stream bottoms are generally silty. Water clarity varies, some stretches may resemble blackwater streams which are coffee-colored due to acidic swamp drainage. Water pH may be slightly lower in these streams than in other LTAs. Annual high winter-spring floods overflow much of the floodplain, producing numerous scattered temporary ponds. This LTA contains a large portion of the Forest’s wetlands.

Fish biomass and species diversity is relatively high. These streams appear to be heavy with piscivores: green sunfish, warmouth, largemouth bass, redfin, and chain pickerel are common. Bluegill, dollar sunfish, and pirate perch also predominate. Darters are extremely rare, probably due to the sluggish nature and low dissolved oxygen levels of these streams.

Winn Rolling Uplands This LTA generally provides high recharge potential to the Sparta and Cockfield aquifers. Drainage density is relatively high, with 3.9 stream miles per square mile. Streams within this LTA have little gradient and are rarely perennial. Low-order streams are flanked by coarse sands in upland ridges and terraces. Narrow ravines and gullies may be present. Sediments in these streams are generally coarser than those found along major streams. Channels in this LTA are generally dry in the summer months, with scattered pools.

During sampling, dissolved oxygen varied from 3.5 to 7.5 ppm. During at least one quarter of the sampling year, oxygen levels were less than the 5.0 ppm minimum necessary to a healthy fish population. The pH values ranged from 6.0 to 7.6, while alkalinities and total dissolved solids showed up at 7–19 ppm and 10–40 ppm respectively.

Fish diversity is relatively low, with an average of 8 to 10species noted. Only one darter was found in six samples. Most fish found were tolerant, able to acclimate to severe habitat conditions. These streams are dominated by sunfish species.

Red River Alluvial Plain Much of this LTA is swampy, with relatively lengthy water detention producing a wetland character. Water passing through is therefore of good quality and relatively clear, though it may be dark in appearance due to the high organic content from acidic swamps. Because the red clayey soils are flat, saturated and frequently flooded, most of the LTA is considered wetland. Drainage density is the highest on the Forest with about 4.1 stream miles per square mile. Due to the wetland nature of this LTA, it has many perennial streams.

Dissolved oxygen levels range from 6.0 to 11.5 ppm, and pH from 6.4 to 7.7. Alkalinity and total dissolved solids are indicated to be 3–14 ppm and 10–30 ppm respectively. Fish diversity ranges between 8 and 11 species. Some darters and the uncommon Sabine shiner, both of which require higher water quality conditions, may occur. The bluehead shiner and squawfoot are conservation species known to occur in Bayou Boeuf.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 77 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

The Saline Bayou is designated as both a Louisiana Natural and Scenic Rivers System and as a National Wild and Scenic River (USFS, 1999b; National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, No Date). According to LDEQ water quality inventory, waters of Saline Bayou (LA subsegment 100803) fully support “secondary contact recreation”, “fish and wildlife propagation” and “agricultural uses,” but do not support “secondary contact recreation”. Suspected causes for such impairment consist of fecal coliform from rangeland grazing, waterfowl, and other wildlife (LDEQ, 2012). In addition, waters of Bayou Nantaches (LA subsegment 100901) fully support “primary and secondary contact recreation” and “agricultural uses,” but do not support “fish and wildlife propagation.” Suspected causes for such impairment consist of dissolved oxygen from natural sources and total dissolved solids from agricultural activities (LDEQ, 2012). Definitions for these designations can be found in LDEQ (2012) and USFS (1999b).

3.4.2 IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 1: PROPOSED ACTION Prescribed burning would reduce forest fuels, dense undergrowth, and slash produced by thinning, thereby increasing surface runoff and streamflows. The burning of concentrated fuels (e.g., slash and large woody debris) can cause substantial damage to soil and water resources, although these long-term effects are limited to only a small proportion of the landscape where fuels are piled or windrowed. Small fires and fires of low intensity would be expected to have very little effect on water quality and aquatic resources. Fires that become large could have greater short to long-term effects due to increased ash and woody debris deposited into waterways. This type of deposition could increase turbidity downstream from the fire. Loss of vegetation could lead to increased erosion and sediment loading in surface water resources. However, these effects are considered normal and natural in fire-adapted ecosystems and would be within the normal range of variability. It is when high severity fires burn large portions of a watershed that impacts could exceed the natural range of variability and cause substantial adverse effects. An event that exceeds the natural range of variability could cause sediment loading that is higher than historic rates and the transport capacity of the affected channels, initiating channel adjustments that may require a substantial duration of time for recovery.

Prescribed burns would be conducted during appropriate weather conditions to maintain a low or moderate intensity fire. Moderate prescribe burns that retain ground cover but top kill most plants should produce small increases in streamflow and channel sediment and small increases in surface runoff and erosion (USFS, 1989a).

The main effects of prescribed burning on water resources are the potential for increased runoff due to rainfall events. When surface runoff increases after burning, it may carry suspended soil particles, dissolved inorganic nutrients, and other materials into adjacent streams and other waterbodies, thus reducing water quality. Sediment yields usually are highest the first year after a fire and then decline in subsequent years (USFS, 2005). Generally, a properly planned and implemented prescribed burn would not adversely affect water quality or quantity of ground or surface water.

Through changes in soil and vegetation cover, fire influences the volume of water and the rate at which water flows in watersheds. Some slopes are steep or extremely unstable, and some soils are highly erodible because of the underlying geology and parent material. If highly erodible

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 78 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment soils are located on steep slopes or in geologically unstable areas, fire can have severe consequences on a watershed if vegetation cover is removed and heavy rains fall on bare slopes.

Fire within riparian zones may remove vegetation that traps sediment in runoff from adjacent upland systems, increasing chances for water quality degradation. Removal of streamside vegetation could also cause increases in water temperatures resulting from losses of shade and a reduction in cover habitat for fish. However, prescribed fire would be managed to avoid or minimize potential adverse impacts by maintaining, wherever possible, an unburned strip along the water source.

The effects on wetlands would include increased sediment in wetlands downstream from the treatment areas. This effect would be minimized by the use of filter strips around wetlands. There could also be temporary increases in the amount of water in wetland areas following rainfall, due to increased streamflow and runoff following a prescribed burn.

There could be an indirect effect on floodplains in areas where the floodplain is a part of the filter strip around a protected stream. In these areas, the floodplain could accumulate some sediment from erosion taking place in the treatment area. The purpose of a filter strip is to provide an area for sediment to settle out before reaching the stream. It is important to maintain streamside buffer strips whenever possible, especially when developing prescribed fire plans, as buffer strips will capture much of the sediment and nutrients from burned upslope areas (USFS, 2005). Due to limited slope in the project area, the amount of any such sediment deposited in the floodplain would be minimal.

Effects from prescribed burning would be minimal with the incorporation of management requirements and design criteria as outlined in Sections 2.4 and 2.5 Soil Productivity and Water Quality. These management requirements are designed to minimized erosion and sedimentation resulting from prescribed burning.

Monitoring would be conducted to ensure that the Proposed Action would be accomplished as planned. More specifically, this would include monitoring of prescribed burns to ensure that filter strips are protected and that equipment crosses at designated stream crossings.

3.4.3 IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 2: NO ACTION Water quality would be subject to influences and processes already taking place. Changes in water yields would occur in response to storms, fire, and other natural processes. Without prescribed burning, the buildup of hazardous fuels would increase over time and could result in disastrous wildfires. Severe burns can result in greater increases in runoff and decreases in infiltration.

In forested environments, the magnitude of the effects of fire on water quality would be much greater after a wildfire than after a prescribed burn because of the larger amount of fuel consumed in a wildfire. Higher intensity fires are expected to cause more sedimentation and ash flow into lakes and streams following heavy rains because more vegetation has been removed and would take longer to reestablish and stabilize bare soils. Soils that are heavily burned also

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 79 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment may become hydrophobic, which in turn can increase runoff, suspended sediments, and ash into lakes and streams.

3.4.4 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Cumulative impacts on water quality and aquatic resources in the project area would be expected from past, present, and foreseeable future activities such as prescribed burning and periodic wildland fire, infrastructure development and impervious surfaces, forestry and logging, habitat management and restoration, herbicide use, and visitor use. Adverse impacts from these activities include altered water levels, flow rates, and downstream water discharge; increased erosion and sediment loading into receiving waters; degraded water quality (i.e., turbidity, temperature, dissolved oxygen, and nutrient levels); draining, filling, or sedimentation of wetlands resulting in wetland losses and/or changes to functions and values (i.e., floodwater attenuation and contaminant filtration); recreational use pressure from activities such as boating and fishing contributing to water quality degradation from boat engine fuel leaks, introduction of bacteria from human use, and introduction of invasive species. Erosion and sedimentation of surface water from construction during development of these projects could have adverse effects on surface water, and thus fish and aquatic habitat. Additional impacts could occur from erosion of hiking trails, runoff from the roads, and accidental fuel spills. There are also impacts on individual fish from the heavy recreational fishing; however, the fisheries are managed so as not to adversely affect overall fish populations. Adverse impacts on fish habitat associated with the prescribed burn program would be small as compared to cumulative past, present, and foreseeable future effects. Cumulative impacts from the Proposed Action would vary with the nature and frequency of prescribed burns, and impacts would be expected to be adverse on a small area and short in duration. The No Action alternative could contribute greater adverse cumulative impacts in the event of catastrophic wildfires.

3.5 AIR QUALITY

3.5.1 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT In 1977 the Clean Air Act amendments established three classes of air quality, to protect visibility and other air quality-related values from significant deterioration in designated areas. Class I air quality standards are the strictest in the country. The Act designated national wilderness areas of more than 5,000 acres as mandatory Class I if they existed as of August 7, 1977, the date of the Act. All remaining national forest lands were designated as Class II. The only wilderness on the Kisatchie National Forest is Kisatchie Hills, established in 1980 and located on the Kisatchie Ranger District. All lands on the Forest are therefore categorized as Class II areas.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was given the authority for air quality protection with the provision to delegate this authority to the State as appropriate under U.S. law. The Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) has been delegated most of the authority for air quality protection in Louisiana. However, the State Forester’s office coordinates all prescribed burning in the State. Louisiana has developed a set of voluntary smoke management guidelines for this voluntary program.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 80 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

The Winn Ranger District is in a rural setting. Major land uses are timber and agriculture, which contribute to the existing air quality of the Ranger District. Prescribed burning of timberlands and pastureland is a temporary source of air pollution in the project area. However, the air quality is generally good in winter and spring as rapidly changing weather patterns tend to keep the atmosphere well mixed. Periods of occasional stagnation during summer and fall may cause natural and man-made pollutants to build up (USFS, 2010a).

The Clean Air Act (42 USC 7401-7671q), as amended, gives the EPA the responsibility to establish the primary and secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) (40 CFR Part 50) that set acceptable concentration levels for seven criteria pollutants: particulate matter with a diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers (PM10), particulate matter with a diameter less than or equal to a nominal 2.5 micrometers (PM2.5), sulfur dioxide (SO2), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), ozone (O3), and lead (Pb) (USEPA, 2014). PM2.5 is the wood smoke pollutant of concern. When Forest Service smoke screening guidelines are followed, no off-site violation of standards should occur.

Primary standards set limits to protect public health, including the health of "sensitive" populations such as asthmatics, children, and the elderly. Secondary standards set limits to protect public welfare, including protection against decreased visibility, damage to animals, crops, vegetation, and buildings. Short-term NAAQS (1-, 8-, and 24-hour periods) have been established for pollutants contributing to acute health effects, while long-term NAAQS (annual averages) have been established for pollutants contributing to chronic health effects. Each state has the authority to adopt standards stricter than those established under the federal program; however, many states accept the federal standards, including Louisiana.

Federal regulations designate air quality control regions (AQCR) that have concentrations of one or more of the criteria pollutants that exceed the NAAQS as nonattainment areas. Federal regulations designate regions with levels below the NAAQS as attainment areas. Maintenance regions are areas that have previously been designated nonattainment and have been re- designated to attainment for a probationary period through the implementation of maintenance plans to lower levels of pollutants. All areas of the Kisatchie National Forest, including the Winn Ranger District are in attainment (USEPA, 2014).

The relevant regulatory requirement is that federal agencies are not allowed to take any action that would interfere with a state’s implementation plan to maintain or to achieve compliance with those air quality standards. Federal action must be “in conformity” with whatever restrictions or limitations the state has established for air emissions necessary to attain compliance with NAAQS.

The Clean Air Act contains the legislation that mandates the general conformity rule to ensure that federal actions in nonattainment and maintenance areas do not interfere with a state’s timely attainment of the NAAQS. The general conformity process requires a determination of whether an action would increase emissions of criteria pollutants above preset threshold levels (40 CFR 93.153). The thresholds are referred to as de minimis criteria and vary depending upon the pollutant, the severity of the nonattainment, and geographic location. The term de minimis means “so small as to be negligible or insignificant.” If an action is below the de minimis emission

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 81 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment threshold, then a conformity determination is not required. De minimis emissions are total direct and indirect emissions of a criteria pollutant caused by a federal action in a nonattainment or maintenance area at rates less than specified applicability thresholds. If the de minimis criteria are exceeded, then a conformity determination must be made. In addition, the general conformity rule applies if the emissions are regionally significant. Regionally significant emissions are defined as the total direct and indirect emissions of a federal action that represents 10 percent or more of an area's total emissions for a criteria pollutant.

3.5.2 IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 1: PROPOSED ACTION Smoke and the chemicals produced by prescribed burning have a variety of effects upon air quality. The primary products of combustion of organic materials include carbon dioxide, water vapor, carbon monoxide, particulate matter, hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides, and trace minerals. About 90 percent of smoke particles from prescribed fires are PM10 and PM2.5 (EPA, 1998). In addition to the compounds considered pollutants in smoke, smoke also contains and distributes elements, compounds, and minerals considered to be biological building blocks necessary for the creation and production of plant tissues. Nutrients which were previously stored in vegetative or woody matter, such as carbon, phosphorus, nitrogen, calcium, and potassium, while mostly released as ash, are also carried in smoke and fall to the earth's surface over a broad geographic area. Although not widely studied, it is hypothesized these nutrients may stimulate plant production in areas receiving the fallout from fires.

The Clean Air Act mandates that federal land managers have an affirmative responsibility to protect air quality related values including visibility, plants, animals, soils, water quality, cultural resources, and public health from adverse pollution impacts. During prescribed burning, high concentrations of carbon monoxide, other gases, and particulate matter can be released affecting air quality. Air quality standards for allowable emissions are based on health effects to humans. These standards are intended to protect sensitive members of the population with adequate safety margins. Effects to humans from smoke are usually limited to firefighters working on a prescribed fire. The Forest would manage smoke in compliance with federal, state, and local requirements so as to minimize its effects on visitors, firefighters, adjoining lands and neighbors, natural and cultural resources, and roads. The greatest threat to air quality would be smoke impacts on sensitive receptors (e.g. residences, visitors).

In addition to health effects, wildfire smoke could affect visibility. Fire management activities in the Forest which result in the discharge of air pollutants are subject to, and must comply with, all applicable federal, state, interstate, and local air pollution control requirements. Smoke mitigation measures for prescribed fires would be employed to minimize impacts to visibility and air quality within the Forest and surrounding areas.

Smoke events associated with prescribed burns could be short-lived, on the order of a few hours to a few days for any given burn. Ignition design and timing can minimize smoke production and avoid periods where inversions are likely so that burning would not generate much smoke. The Forest would coordinate with the appropriate state officials to ensure all applicable smoke management practices are implemented and to alert adjoining land owners that a prescribed burn would be occurring. Air quality would be expected to return to very good to excellent quality

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 82 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment after prescribed fires are extinguished, especially since the majority of burning would have been completed during the first few hours. The amount of time for regional air quality to return to pre- disturbance condition depends on the prevailing winds and the movement of air masses.

Direct adverse impacts to air quality from prescribed fire under this alternative would include release of particulates and smoke into the airshed and the potential for a slight (not measurable) increase in fugitive dust from fire management activities. Smoke particulates could remain suspended in the atmosphere for a few days to several months. Very small particulates can travel great distances and add to regional haze conditions. Inversions could occur and smoke from fires may linger in the valleys for a period of time. There could be an intermittent and short-term exceedance of air quality standards (especially particulates) resulting in small short-term, localized impacts to air quality. On a regional basis, effects to air quality would generally be small, short-term, and adverse as quantities of pollutants, primarily particulates, are released to the atmosphere and travel beyond project area boundaries. Indirect adverse effects from these air emissions would include reduced visibility along roadways, reductions in recreation values due to visibility limitations, smoke and odors, and possible health effects to sensitive receptors, such as residents and visitors.

Prescribed burning conducted under proper management can prevent severe impacts to air quality by reducing the acres that could burn catastrophically in future wildfires.

Each prescribed fire plan would include smoke trajectory maps, smoke dispersal factors, and identifying smoke-sensitive areas. Fire weather forecasts would be used to correlate ignitions with periods of optimal combustion and smoke dispersal. Burning would only occur when conditions are predicted for adequate smoke dispersal away from smoke sensitive areas or when mitigation for smoke sensitive targets has taken place. Monitoring of smoke effects has demonstrated that prescribed burn planning is effective in managing local effects from smoke (USFS, 1999b). Mitigation measures would be defined in the plan and arrangements made prior to ignition to ensure that designated resources are available if needed to implement the mitigation measures. Prescribed fire would not be implemented when atmospheric conditions exist that could permit degradation of air quality to a degree that negatively affects public health. Federal and state air quality standards will be the basis for this decision.

Following the management requirement measures and design criteria presented in Sections 2.4 and 2.5, Air Quality would mitigate the effects of adverse impacts on air quality from prescribed burning so that overall effects are expected to be minimal.

3.5.3 IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 2: NO ACTION Without a prescribed burn program, it is possible that large scale or catastrophic wildfires may occur. Impacts on air quality would be similar to those described under the Proposed Action, but greater impacts could be expected as large quantities of smoke carrying pollutants, primarily in the form of particulate matter, would be released to the atmosphere. Indirect adverse effects from these emissions would include impaired visibility along roadways, reductions in recreational values at scenic vistas, and potential health effects to residents and visitors.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 83 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

The increased risk of catastrophic wildland fire, which could result under the No Action alternative, could eventually lead to large acreages burned, large amounts of smoke production, and greater impacts on air quality.

3.5.4 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS A wide range of activities in the project area, such as vehicular traffic, use of recreational boats and vehicles, use of heavy equipment during construction and logging, and smoke from prescribed fires and wildfires produce various amounts of air pollutants and have periodic adverse impacts on air quality. Cumulative effects of smoke from other sources, such as fireplace or campfire emissions, could have adverse impacts during inversions. Estimated emissions generated by the prescribed burn program would be de minimis during project activities and very small as compared to cumulative past, present, and foreseeable future effects. Prescribed burns are limited, so they would not interfere with a region’s timely attainment of the NAAQS. Burning of acres across the Winn Ranger District would be spread over time and space to minimize local cumulative smoke effects. The greatest concern regarding air quality is particulate matter resulting from prescribed fires. Regional and global effects to air quality would be small due to the relatively small scale of these actions. Therefore, implementation of the prescribed burn program would not contribute appreciably to adverse cumulative air quality impacts and would be considered minimal. The No Action alternative could contribute greater adverse cumulative impacts in the event of catastrophic wildfires.

3.6 CLIMATE CHANGE

3.6.1 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT A growing body of scientific research, published in peer reviewed journals and synthesized by groups such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the U.S. Climate Change Science Program, depicts a global climate that is changing. The following elements of climate change are known with near certainty (IPCC, 2013):

1. Human activities are changing the composition of Earth’s atmosphere. Increasing levels of greenhouse gases, like carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere since pre-industrial times, are well-documented and understood. 2. The atmospheric buildup of CO2 and other greenhouse gases is largely the result of human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels. 3. An “unequivocal” warming trend of about 1.0 degrees to 1.7 degrees Fahrenheit occurred from 1906-2013. Warming occurred in both the northern and southern hemispheres and over the oceans. 4. The major greenhouse gases emitted by human activities remain in the atmosphere for periods ranging from decades to centuries. It is virtually certain that atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases will continue to rise over the next few decades. 5. Increasing greenhouse gas concentrations tend to warm the planet.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 84 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

In addition to increases in global average air temperatures, the IPCC reports that the earth’s warming trend has also resulted in increases in global average ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global average sea level. There have also been changes in the patterns of precipitation. Furthermore, the IPCC concluded that it is very likely that over the past 50 years, cold days, cold nights, and frosts have become less frequent over most land areas, and hot days and hot nights have become more frequent. It is also likely that over most land areas heat waves have become more frequent and that heavy precipitation events have also become more frequent (USFS, 2012a). According to IPCC (2007), however, it is uncertain how much warming will occur, how fast that warming will occur, and how the warming will affect the rest of the climate system including precipitation patterns.

Some researchers have also speculated that increasing temperatures in conjunction with uncertain precipitation scenarios may result in increased fire occurrence, intensity, and duration both regionally and locally. The highly uncertain outcome of varying scenarios of climate change, and its effect on fire occurrence and behavior, makes climate change very difficult to quantify in a dynamic environment such as fire.

Climate change across the region will gradually impact Forest resources. These changes may be incremental but over time (50-100 years) the cumulative effects may be substantial to certain species or habitats. Blunden et al. (2011) documented 2013 as among the ten warmest years on record, with 2012 as the warmest for the United States. Further, they report that atmospheric carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide all continued to increase in 2013. As in previous years, each of these major greenhouse gases once again reached historic high concentrations.

U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP, 2014) reported average temperatures are projected to increase by about 4.5° F in the southeastern U.S. by the 2080s. Models predict southeastern states will have less precipitation in winter and spring, and the frequency, duration, and intensity of droughts will be more severe. Warming temperatures projected for the next 50- 100 years will result in declines in forest growth and agricultural crops. Lower soil moisture and higher temperatures may lead to intense wildfires, drying of wetlands, and outbreaks of insect pests like the southern pine beetle. Sea level rise poses widespread and continuing threats to both natural and built environments and to the regional economy. Increasing temperatures and the associated increase in frequency, intensity, and duration of extreme heat events will affect public health, natural and built environments, energy, agriculture, and forestry.

There is much we do not know about how the climate will change and how a changing climate will affect the environment. Uncertainty is a result of a lack of knowledge of how climate will respond to the changing chemistry of the atmosphere, and how the atmosphere will change in the future. There are many climate change models in use and they vary considerably in their assumptions and the strength of different feedback mechanisms.

3.6.2 IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 1: PROPOSED ACTION Forests have emerged as important factors in climate change. Trees store, or sequester, significant amounts of carbon, thereby helping offset the large amounts of carbon dioxide emitted by factories, motor vehicles, and other sources. When trees burn to the ground or die,

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 85 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment much of that carbon is returned to the atmosphere. It can take decades for forest regrowth to sequester the amount of carbon emitted in a single fire.

However, the use of prescribed burning to manage forests may help the United States reduce its carbon footprint. Results of a recent study (Wiedinmyer and Hurteau, 2010) found that such burns, used by forest managers to reduce underbrush and protect bigger trees, release substantially less carbon dioxide emissions than wildfires of the same size. Wildfires often consume large trees that store significant amounts of carbon. Prescribed fires are designed to burn underbrush and small trees, which store less carbon. By clearing out the underbrush, these controlled burns reduce the chances of subsequent high-severity wildfires, thereby protecting large trees and keeping more carbon locked up in the forest.

Wiedinmyer and Hurteau (2010) used a regional fire emissions model to estimate the potential reduction in fire emissions when prescribed burning is applied in dry, temperate forested systems of the western U.S. Daily carbon dioxide (CO2) fire emissions for 2001−2008 were calculated for two cases: a default wildfire case and one in which prescribed burning was applied. The study found that wide-scale prescribed fire application can reduce CO2 fire emissions by 18−25% in the western U.S., and by as much as 60% in specific forest systems.

The results of the Wiedinmyer and Hurteau (2010) study can be extrapolated to the southern U.S., indicating that prescribed fire application can reduce CO2 fire emissions in the project area as well. Periodic controlled burns used to manage many natural areas, such as longleaf pine ecosystems, do not release a great deal of carbon relative to what is stored in the forest stand. Thus prescribed burning is a strategy to help lower overall carbon dioxide emissions. Burning away the fuel load that has built up over time under controlled conditions means that the threat of unnaturally severe fires is lessened and overall carbon dioxide releases are reduced.

The carbon that is released during prescribed burning would then be recaptured in new plant growth fairly quickly. Low-intensity fires tend to stimulate regrowth of grasses and other species that quickly accumulate carbon in both leaves and roots after controlled burns.

Prescribed burns can help lessen climate change and maintain biodiversity because they:

 Consume only surface fuels  Leave organic matter in soil intact  Leave behind a layer of ash which protects soil and logs  Release a relatively small amount of CO2 by comparison to uncontrolled fires  Help prevent large, uncontrolled fires Although it would contribute beneficially, it is not expected that the Proposed Action would substantially alter the effects of climate change in the project area. Overall, the impacts of the Proposed Action alternative on global carbon sequestration and atmospheric concentrations of CO2 would be miniscule.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 86 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

3.6.3 IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 2: NO ACTION When fires are excluded from forests that are designed to burn, plants grow freely and carbon accumulates. In fire-adapted landscapes, such as in the project area, with frequent summer lightning storms, it's not a matter of whether the forest will burn, but rather when and how it will burn. Accumulated undergrowth adds to the potential for severe drought-year fires that can consume undergrowth, oxidize soil carbon, kill large trees and possibly threaten communities. It is these types of fires, those that hit forest habitats really hard, that contribute substantially to increasing levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, in combination with the burning of fossil fuels. Large forest fires can contribute a significant percent of an area’s CO2 annual emissions, in some cases exceeding anthropogenic sources.

Under the No Action alternative, without a prescribed burn program, large, uncontrolled fires could burn everything, even canopies of the tallest trees, essential organic material in soil, seeds (also in soil), logs, and other carbon-accumulating features. Eventually, a tall forest could be converted to woodland and shrub land with a long-term or permanent loss of stored carbon.

Although it would contribute adversely, it is not expected that the No Action alternative would substantially alter the effects of climate change in the project area. Impacts from climate change and warmer temperatures on Forest habitats and management may not be apparent for many years. Substantial climate impacts within the 10-year time frame of this program are not expected, nevertheless, the trend is apparent.

3.6.4 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS

Carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions generated by project activities are expected to contribute to the global concentration of greenhouse gases that affect climate change. Projected climate change impacts include air temperature increases, sea level rise, changes in the timing, location, and quantity of precipitation, and increased frequency of extreme weather events such as heat waves, droughts, and floods. The intensity and severity of these effects are expected to vary with each prescribed burn.

Because greenhouse gases from project activities mix readily into the global pool of greenhouse gases, it is not currently possible to discern the effects of this project from the effects of all other greenhouse gas sources worldwide, nor is it expected that attempting to do so would provide a practical or meaningful analysis of project effects. Potential regional and local variability in climate change effects add to the uncertainty regarding the actual intensity of this project’s effects on global climate change. Further, emissions associated with this project are extremely small in the global atmospheric CO2 context, making it impossible to measure the incremental cumulative impact on global climate from emissions associated with this project.

The potential for cumulative effects is considered negligible because the prescribed burn program under the Proposed Action would not result in measurable direct and indirect effects on global climate patterns. The No Action alternative could contribute greater adverse cumulative impacts in the event of catastrophic wildfires.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 87 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

3.7 SOCIOECONOMICS

3.7.1 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT Wildland Fire Suppression The cost of fighting wildland fires in the United States has risen over the years due to increased size and occurrences of wildland fires. One of the reasons behind the increase in acreage burned is the increase in available fuels on the natural landscape. Frequent and widespread prescribed burning keeps forest fuels at low energy levels, limiting wildland fire suppression costs.

The Winn Ranger District burns approximately 72 percent of its prescribed burning acres during the dormant season and the remaining 28 percent during the growing season each year. An effective annual burning program reduces fuel loading and therefore lessens the size, frequency, costs, and hazards of suppressing wildland fires. Wildfire figures and estimates for KNF are presented in Table 3-9.

As noted in both the FY 2009 Monitoring and Evaluation Action Plan and Report and FY 2012 Monitoring and Evaluation Report for the Kisatchie National Forest, wildland fire preparedness funding continued to be below the most efficient level. As a result, wildland fire losses were not being minimized due to the funding shortfall. Resources identified in National Fire Management Analysis System (NFMAS) continue to be made available in accordance with budget funding level. The NFMAS is the tool used in planning and developing forest fire suppression direction.

The acceptable range identified for wildland fires on KNF is 2,108 acres per year. As shown in Table 3-9, fewer acres of the Forest than this acceptable range burned in wildland fires in 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2012; more acres burned in 2009, 2011, and 2014; and substantially more acres burned in 2010. The number of wildland fires, average size per fire, and total acreage affected were lowest in 2007 and highest in 2010 (USFS, 2009; USFS, 2012b).

Prescribed Burn Treatments As shown in Table 3-10, while a smaller area was treated during the dormant season in 2012 than was in 2009, a larger area was treated during the growing season in 2012 than was in 2009. Overall, an additional 2,268 acres were treated in 2012. The estimated cost of burn treatments was $100,984 higher in 2012 than in 2009. Costs were calculated using a rate of $24 per acre during the both dormant and growing seasons.

Burn treatments represented 17 percent of the total 2009 budget allotted for forest fuel reduction ($3,396,443). Burn treatments represented about 22 percent of the total 2012 and 2014 budget allotted for forest fuel reduction, $2,917,289 and $2,597,351 (respectively). The number of acres and the dollars spent on burn treatments were highest in 2014. While the overall budget for KNF has decreased about 3 percent each year since 2009, the percent of the budget allocated for prescribed burning has increased by 5 percent since 2009.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 88 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Table 3-9. Wildland Fire Suppression Costs. Item Measured 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 20131 2014 Acres burned from wildland 1,677 675 2,077 2,761 7,124 1,719 1,719 n/a 3,369 fires Number of 75 44 44 68 126 154 52 n/a 51 wildland fires Average size of wildland fire 22 15 47 41 83 23 33 n/a 66 (acres) Estimated cost $333,400 $135,000 $415,400 $552,200 $2,096,8002 $682,200 $343,800 n/a $673,800 of suppression Source: U.S. Forest Service, 2015. 1Records for 2013 have been lost. 2The Wrangler wildland fire affected 4,363 acres.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 89 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Table 3-10. Prescribed Fire Treatment Acreages and Estimated Costs. 2009 2012 2014 Treatment Estimated Estimated Estimated Type Acres Cost Acres Cost Acres Cost Dormant Season 19,418 $446,032 15,057 $361,368 16,350 $392,400 Growing Season 4,854 $116,496 11,483 $275,592 7,286 $174,864 TOTAL 24,272 $562,528 26,540 $636,960 23,636 $567,264 Source: USFS, 2009 and 2012.

3.7.2 IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 1: PROPOSED ACTION Wildlife Suppression and Prescribed Burn Treatments The number of wildland fires, average size per fire, and total acreage affected were lower in 2012 than 2009. The cost of suppressing wildland fires on the KNF decreased $208,400 from 2009 to 2012. Meanwhile, the total acreage and associated cost for prescribed burns increased from 2009 to 2012, specifically during the growing season.

Under the Proposed Action, burn treatments would occur on a total of 234,054 acres during the 10-year period. As shown in Table 3-11, the proposed action would follow the historical trend: an increase in acres treated during the growing season as well as an overall increase in acres treated with prescribed burning. Projected costs are based on $24 per acre during both the dormant and growing seasons.

Table 3-11. 2016-2026 Treatment Types and Cost Estimates – Proposed Action. Type of Treatment Acres Estimated Cost Dormant Season 169,110 $4,058,640 Growing Season 64,944 $1,558,656 TOTAL 234,054 $5,877,072 Annual Average 23,405 $587,707 Source: USFS, 2007

The average cost for wildland fire suppression is approximately $200 per acre as compared to approximately $24 per acre for prescribed burn treatments. However, these figures are not directly comparable as burn treatments are preventative measures and wildland fire suppression activities are reactive. Also, wildland fire suppression estimates do not include the potential cost to rehabilitate damage to properties, energy and recreation infrastructure, fire-susceptible species, and municipal watersheds. Prescribed burn treatments that reduce hazardous fuel loads tend to limit the size and frequency of wildland fires and therefore suppression costs (USFS, 2013b; USFWS, 2012). The nominal cost per acre for wildfire suppression is higher, but the value per acre for burn treatments is higher. By having an effective annual burning program, fuel

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 90 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment loading is reduced and therefore lessens the size, frequency, costs, and hazards of suppressing wildland fires, as well as tree/stand mortality.

3.7.3 IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 2: NO ACTION Under this alternative, there would be no direct social or economic effects to the KNF or the local economy. Fire management actions would be limited to prevention, wildland fire suppression, and implementation of the prescribed burn program in units for which other valid NEPA documentation and project plans exist. However, a decrease in prescribed burning could cause the buildup of hazardous fuels over time and increase wildland fire suppression costs in the future. Additional costs would be incurred if natural resources and properties were damaged as a result of wildland fires. Catastrophic wildfires and lack of prescribed fire would create dense vegetation conditions not conducive to the majority of non-consumptive uses, thus causing adverse impacts.

3.7.4 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future actions in the area could marginally impact KNF fire management costs or timber sales. Cumulative impacts from the Proposed Action are expected to be both adverse and beneficial, and negligible. Manual, mechanical, prescribed fire, and herbicide vegetation management treatments to attain desired forest conditions would generally add to adverse or beneficial impacts discussed under the proposed action. This assumes that the Winn Ranger District would continue to share fire management and wildland suppression costs with other districts; benefiting directly or indirectly from actions that would affect timber sales. The No Action alternative could contribute greater adverse cumulative impacts with wildland fires increasing in frequency and size and therefore suppression cost.

3.8 RECREATION

3.8.1 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT The KNF is the second largest supplier of public recreation lands in the State of Louisiana. The Winn Ranger District offers many developed and dispersed recreational opportunities resources with three main recreation areas, five developed bayou access sites, and one hunter camp. The district also maintains approximately 46 miles of trails suitable for hiking, biking, horseback riding, and canoeing uses. The 2010 National Visitor Use Monitoring (NVUM) results reported 363,000 general KNF area visits. Twice as many people visited the KNF for dispersed recreation uses than for developed recreation uses (USFS, 2010b).

Developed Recreation Developed recreation is recreation that occurs in sites that are built or constructed for recreation experiences such as campgrounds, picnic areas, etc. The Gum Springs Recreation Area (including campground and day use facilities); the Gum Springs Horse Camp, and the Cloud Crossing Recreation Area (including campground and day use facilities) are the three main recreation areas in the district. The Winn Ranger District administers two developed recreation areas at the Gum Springs Recreation Complex (the campground/day use facilities and a horse camp/trailhead). The Gum Springs Recreation Campground offers tent and Recreational Vehicle (RV) sites. The Cloud Crossing Campground and Group Pavilion offers tent or RV sites and is

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 91 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment located adjacent to the Saline Bayou National River Corridor. The Saline Bayou Canoe Trail is floatable except during the drought periods of late summer.

Dispersed Recreation The undeveloped areas of the KNF support dispersed recreation activities such as hunting, walking or hiking, fishing, wildlife viewing, primitive camping, horseback riding, biking, etc. or activities requiring minimal constructed facilities. The 2010 NVUM survey of people using the KNF reported that viewing wildlife (47 percent), hiking/walking (40 percent), and hunting (39 percent) were the three activities with the greatest percentage of participation (USFS, 2010b).

The district also offers three trails: Gum Springs Horse Trail (approximately 24 miles of horse trail, biking and hiking available as well), a 20-mile canoe trail on Saline Bayou, and a three- mile hiking trail following a section of Saline Bayou. The Gum Springs Horse Trail is located directly across from the Gum Springs Campground entrance. Two horse trails are available: the Blue Loop (5.2 miles) and the Yellow Loop (19 miles). The Blue and Yellow Loops are also available to mountain bikers and hikers.

In 1986, 20 miles of the Saline Bayou was designated as a scenic segment in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. The typical dark waters are ideal for quiet canoeing, fishing, and floating, and the Saline Bayou Hiking Trail follows the bayou for three miles. The Saline Bayou National Wild and Scenic River Corridor is also designated as part of the Louisiana Natural and Scenic Rivers System (USFS, 1999a).

In addition to canoeing, fishing, and floating on the Saline Bayou, the Winn Ranger District offers over 27 miles of hiking, biking, and horseback trails. Saline Lake is located on the Natchitoches/Winn Parish border. This 8,400-acre wooded lake is ideal for largemouth bass, white perch, catfish, and sunfish.

The typical deer season on the KNF runs from October 1st through January 31st. It opens with archery season, progresses to primitive firearms season, and finishes with all types of firearms. Rabbit, squirrel, quail, migratory game birds and waterfowl, feral hogs, coyotes, armadillos, and beavers are also hunted during the same time period with some exceptions (USFS, 2014b).

Recreation Opportunity Spectrum The Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) system defines eleven recreation opportunity classes that provide different settings and opportunities for recreation use. The project area includes lands in four of the eleven classes. (Note: The number of acres in one of the classes is almost zero, so discussion of this class has been omitted.) Table 3-14 shows the ROS classifications for the Winn Ranger District lands in the project area.

Goal 4 associated with recreation in the KNF Revised Land and Resources Management Plan is to: Provide for scenic quality and outdoor experiences which respond to the needs of forest users and local communities. Provide access to a wide variety of recreational opportunities and facilities. Objective 4-2 is to: Provide visitors the opportunity to pursue a wide variety of developed and dispersed recreation activities, with a minimum amount of regulation, consistent

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 92 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment with the assigned ROS class (USFS, 1999a). The ROS class objectives are included in Table 3- 14.

Table 3-14. ROS Classifications and Objectives. ROS Objective Classification ROS Land Characteristics (acres) Semi-Primitive Predominantly natural appearing environments 10% Non-motorized Roads and trails are present with motorized use Moderate evidences of sights and sounds of people MA 10, special interest areas, research natural areas, walk-in areas Semi-Primitive Evidence of past human activities may be present 13% Motorized Human influences should mimic natural occurrences Primitive roads and trails are present with motorized use Structures are rare and isolated MA 7 and designated old-growth areas Roaded Natural Evidence of past human activities 77% Modified Natural setting may have modifications, range from being easily noticed to strongly dominate to observers with in the area Roads and trails are present with motorized use Structures are generally scattered but small clusters evident to travel route observers may exist Opportunities for both motorized and non-motorized recreation are possible MA1 (forest products), MA 3 (native community restoration, MA 5 (RCW/native community restoration) and MA6 (RCW and wildlife habitats) Source: Poole, 2015

Most of the Winn Ranger District falls in the Roaded Natural Modified ROS class. Access, remoteness, naturalness, facilities and sites, social encounters, visitor impacts and visitor management are managed to meet the ROS objectives for these classes, recognizing that there are some visitor impacts; the area is “roaded” with less solitude than other ROS classes; social encounters will occur on roads and trails; there may be some modification by humans to the natural environment, etc. Both of these classes accommodate the large range of dispersed uses in the Winn Ranger District and help to support and assure those experiences.

Scenic Integrity Objectives Objective 4-1 of the KNF Revised Land and Resources Management Plan is to: Create and maintain landscapes having high scenic diversity, harmony, and unity for the benefit of society through the application of the Scenery Management System, and consistent with assigned scenic integrity objectives (SIO). Under this system of identification, the forest land base is divided into five SIO classifications, and each KNF Ranger District designates acreages and percentages of

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 93 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment land proposed for prescribed burning. Table 3-15 displays the acres and percent of lands in each SIO classification.

Table 3-15. SIO Classification of Winn Ranger District.

SIO Classification Acres Percent Very High 0 0 High 46,398 28 Moderate 3,341 2 Low 116,020 70 Very Low 850 Less than one percent Source: Poole, 2015

These ratings define the acceptable range of human-caused alteration to the landscape. The integrity of the landscape is also measured by the degree of the alteration in line form, color, and texture of the natural, natural-appearing and other landscape features.

3.8.2 IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 1: PROPOSED ACTION Developed Recreation Under the Proposed Action, prescribed burning would temporarily hinder the access and enjoyment of the recreational facilities and resources within proposed burn units. Access to facilities such as campgrounds, picnic areas, and trails would be restricted in the short-term. Boating, floating, and fishing access would not be affected since none of the proposed treatment areas occur adjacent access points for Saline Lake (i.e., Sand Point Launch, Hwy 156 Launch, Cloud Crossing Launch, Hwy 126 Launch, and Pearfield Launch) or the Saline Bayou/Saline Bayou National Wild and Scenic River.

Additionally, the District would post a map showing the location of prescribed burns at Horsehead Trail if a prescribed burn were to affect a portion of the horse trail, allowing recreationists to re-route their ride (or bike/hike) as appropriate. Fire personnel would patrol the trail for several days after a burn, cutting any trees that may have fallen across the trail and replacing new trail markers as needed.

Dispersed Recreation The total number of recreation visitor days could decrease in the short-term. Prescribed burning on approximately 18,000 to 22,000 acres that would occur per year during the dormant season would begin in December or January. As such, prescribed burning during the dormant season would likely overlap with only a few weeks of deer hunting season (except for bow hunting) in January. Prescribed burning during both the dormant and growing season (January to end of May) would overlap with the turkey hunting season (March to April). For safety reasons, the Winn Ranger District generally avoids conducting prescribed burns during the first week of turkey hunting season.

Smoke accumulations on relatively calm days could reduce visibility in downwind areas and disturb or displace recreationists. Windier days would disperse smoke faster and keep visibility

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 94 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment higher, but may affect larger areas (USFS, 1999a). Light burns create a charred appearance on tree trunks and lower limbs that would last three to four months. With more intense burns and in hot spots, more of the tree would be charred and the effect could last three to five years or more, which could alter the aesthetic appeal of the recreational area in the long-term.

Vegetation and prescribed fire treatments maintain landscapes with high scenic diversity (USFS, 2012b). As such, no SIO or ROS would be degraded as a result of the Proposed Action. The majority of the acreage included under the Proposed Action is designated as Roaded Natural Modified. The Proposed Action is compatible with the Roaded Natural Modified classification.

Prescribed burning of the proposed areas within the Winn Ranger District could enhance the overall recreational value of the Winn Ranger District. On a statewide scale, deer populations continue to be below the habitats’ carrying capacity, and herd densities are too low to provide adequate aesthetic enjoyment for non-consumptive users. Pursuant to prescribed burn treatments, browse resources for deer and other wildlife could increase the likelihood of sighting opportunities. The newly burned areas would also likely provide a more diverse forest mosaic or maintain open forested conditions with more opportunity for views and vistas (USFS, 1999). New plant growth would ameliorate erosion control as well as enhance the aesthetic view; post- burn conditions ideal for longleaf pine and grass communities would replace areas previously overgrown with undesirable vegetation. Prescribed burning reduces available fuel loads, thereby minimizing the frequency and size of wildland fires and the associated damage. Reduction of underbrush also facilitates access for hikers and non-motorized recreationists to undeveloped areas.

3.8.3 IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 2: NO ACTION Under the No Action alternative, there would be no direct effects on developed or dispersed recreation. Fire management actions would be limited to prevention, wildland fire suppression, and implementation of the prescribed burn program in units for which other valid NEPA documentation and project plans exist. However, a decrease in prescribed burning could cause the buildup of hazardous fuels over time and increase the frequency and size of wildland fires. Damage to recreational facilities, as well as natural resources, would adversely affect the visitor experience. Further, large wildland fires can drastically alter the scenic landscape as well as its recreational resources. The forest understory would become dense and possibly limit access to pedestrian activities and uses.

3.8.4 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Past, present, and foreseeable future actions that contribute to cumulative impacts are those that change recreational sites in ways that limit a user’s ability to enjoy the site as they are accustomed to. Such actions include urban and rural development, road construction, silviculture and timber harvesting activities, and other land use changes. Such past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future actions in the area could marginally impact recreational activities. Cumulative impacts from the Proposed Action are expected to be minor and adverse in the short-term and beneficial in the long-term. The cumulative, short-term impacts to recreation would likely be more adverse under the Proposed Action than under the No Action. The opposite would be true in the long-term. The cumulative impact under the No Action Alternative would be negligible.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 95 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Manual, mechanical, prescribed fire, and herbicide vegetation management treatments to attain desired forest conditions would generally add to the short-term adverse or long-term beneficial impacts discussed under the Proposed Action. The No Action alternative could contribute greater adverse cumulative impacts with wildland fires increasing in frequency and size and potentially damaging recreational facilities as well as landscapes and vistas.

3.9 HERITAGE RESOURCES

3.9.1 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT This project is consistent with the National Historic Preservation Act and Archaeological Resources Protection Act. In keeping with the Programmatic Agreement among the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Kisatchie National Forest, the Louisiana State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), and federally recognized tribes concerning the management of historic properties on the national forest lands in Louisiana to ensure that historic properties are not affected, Forest management actions are preceded by an archaeological resource inventory of the proposed Area of Potential effect (APE) and consultation with the Louisiana SHPO and the appropriate Tribal Historic Preservation Officers (THPOs) (36CFR800.14 and Forest Plan, page 4-105) on the National Forest System Lands in Louisiana.

Prescribed burning of previously burned areas during the growing or dormant season is an undertaking that is exempt from full Section 106 review or consultation under terms of the KNF Programmatic Agreement (PA) and 36 CFR 800, pursuant to Stipulation V. (J) of the PA.

For purposes of this review, the APE includes all lands currently managed by the KNF Winn Ranger District. This incorporates a total of 164,774 acres, divided in a total of 114 management units referred to as “compartments”.

Previous investigations and review of GIS archaeological sites layers show that there are a total of 861 cultural resources that have been identified within the APE. Of these, 121 are considered historic properties and are therefore protected by the USDA Forest Service pending further investigation (36CFR Part 800). The remaining 740 cultural resources identified within the APE have all been determined ineligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), in consultation with the Louisiana Division of Archaeology (LDOA) and federally- recognized Tribes. Of these 740 resources, a total of 486 have been assigned Smithsonian trinomials by the LDOA, and 254 are considered to be “Isolated finds” that are not accorded trinomials. Given that all of these 740 cultural resources have been determined “not eligible” for NRHP listing, none are subject to further protection or management by the USDA Forest Service. The existing documentation and recordation of these resources is sufficient for purposes of compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation act, and no further cultural resource management actions are necessary for these resources.

3.9.2 IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 1: PROPOSED ACTION The heritage resources considered potentially eligible for inclusion on the NRHP would be protected in accordance with management requirements specified in Section 2.4. These resources

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 96 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment would be avoided and protected through mitigation in areas where land-disturbing activities ((36CFR800.4)(d)(2)) are allowed. In addition, a 25-meter buffer would be provided around the resource area to minimize indirect effects due to soil erosion.

Prescribed burns are low intensity fires conducted to enhance wildlife habitat and to remove slash/ground litter to lessen damage from possible wildfires. Other objectives include maintenance of open stand conditions, site preparation for planting, and hazardous fuel reduction. Most areas in which these burns are used have been burned repeatedly in past years. Documentation and past experience suggest that low intensity fires would not likely affect prehistoric sites and historic wooden features that have been previously burned. Where previous firelines are re-used, the heritage staff would be contacted during burn plan implementation to advise if known protected sites are located on or adjacent to existing firelines. Forest Service personnel have indicated that few new firelines would be necessary in most areas; instead, the use of existing bladed lines, roads, and other natural fire breaks would be utilized as control lines whenever possible. Any new firelines would have clearance under the section 106 review process prior to implementation.

In the event that additional or previously unknown archaeological resources are discovered at any time during project implementation, the activity in that location would cease immediately, and the District Archaeologist would be notified. The activity in that location would be suspended until an evaluation of the resource has been made by a qualified Archaeologist, in consultation with the Louisiana SHPO, the appropriate THPOs, and the ACHP (36CFR800.3). A copy of the Limited Review Checklist for heritage resources is included in Appendix C.

A more detailed discussion of the general effects of fire management on heritage resources can be found in the FEIS on page 4-106 (USFS, 1999b).

3.9.3 IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 2: NO ACTION There would be no historic properties affected ((36CFR800.4)(d)(1)) with implementation of the No Action alternative. Present conditions would persist. Fuel sources would build up over time, potentially leading to a catastrophic fire that could drastically alter the forest landscape, leading to soil erosion, soil loss, and damage to heritage resources.

3.9.4 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Past, present, and future actions that would contribute cumulative impacts to heritage resources include any ground-disturbing activities, such as large construction projects and logging, wildfires, and looting and vandalism. Ground-disturbing actions could create adverse, cumulative impacts to heritage resources and the intensity could range from negligible to large as they may diminish the integrity of the resource or change one or more character defining features of a resource that is listed or eligible for listing on the NRHP. Impacts associated with human activities include exposure of buried sites, changes in artifact condition, destruction of artifacts or structures, loss of context of artifacts, site covering, and contamination of sites. Wildland fires also contribute to cumulative losses of heritage resources available for scientific study, the practice of traditional tribal activities, and visitor enjoyment. Additionally, natural erosion and exposure over time contribute to cumulative effects on heritage resources.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 97 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Based upon the intensity of the surveys conducted and the management requirements applied, there is no reasonable expectation of cumulative effects on heritage resource sites considered to be eligible or potentially eligible for placement or listing on the NRHP. To have a cumulative effect, sufficient information would have to be lost over time and over the Forest, such that understanding of prehistoric and historic settlement activities would be lost.

Impacts on heritage resources associated with the prescribed burn program would be small as compared with the cumulative effects of past, present, and foreseeable future actions. Cumulative impacts from the Proposed Action would be expected to be adverse and negligible or non-existent. The No Action alternative could contribute greater adverse cumulative impacts in the event of catastrophic wildfires.

3.10 PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY

3.10.1 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT As hazards exist with prescribed burn implementation, firefighter and public safety is always the highest priority. It is important to understand predicted fire behavior prior to conducting prescribed burns so that personnel implementing the burns can take all necessary safety precautions. Prior to the ignition of any prescribed fire on the District, all the burn parameters of the approved prescribed fire burn plan must be met to ensure a safe and effective prescribed fire. In addition, a forest-wide press release would be aired on the local television stations addressing prescribed fire on the districts. On the day of the prescribed burn, contacts would be made with the local fire and law enforcement and Louisiana office of Forestry about the location and size of the burn. Assuring public and staff safety would take priority over other activities.

Smoke on roads in and adjacent to the Forest is of concern. A growing amount of residential development is located near the Forest as well. Smoke from sources on and off the Winn Ranger District can be a safety issue to the visiting public and nearby residents. The flaming front of a fire can put unsuspecting members of the public at risk. For this reason, areas affected by fire will be closed to the public. There is always a risk that curious District visitors will actually approach a fire rather than avoid it. Adjacent and nearby landowners will be notified when fires are a threat to residential areas.

3.10.2 IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 1: PROPOSED ACTION Prescribed burning could have short-term, adverse effects on public health and safety. Smoke may affect local sensitive areas such as hospitals, churches, schools and other residences scattered throughout the area. Smoke inhalation can pose a threat to human health & safety. Smoke from prescribed fire is composed of hundreds of chemicals in gaseous, liquid, and solid forms. The chief inhalation hazard appears to be carbon monoxide (CO), aldehydes, respirable particulate matter with a median diameter of 2.5 micrometers (PM2.5), and total suspended particulates (TSP). Adverse health effects of smoke exposure begin with acute, instantaneous eye and respiratory irritation and shortness of breath, but can develop into headaches, dizziness, and nausea lasting up to several hours. A study of firefighter smoke exposure found that most smoke

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 98 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment exposures are not considered hazardous, but a small percentage routinely exceed recommended exposure limits for carbon monoxide and respiratory irritants (USFS, 2000b).

Implementation parameters applied to areas of prescribed burning would minimize or eliminate public human health and safety concerns resulting from smoke exposure and fire injuries. Elements of the prescribed fire plan that relate to ensuring a safe burn include such measures as fuel moisture, wind speed, rate of fire spread, and estimated flame lengths. Management of smoke would comply with burn plan parameters that ensure adequate opportunity for smoke dispersal. The safety of Forest Service personnel and the public would be protected by following proper safety procedures including wearing personal protective equipment, using qualified personnel, implementing the burn plan, following smoke management guidelines, traffic signaling, and area reconnaissance to find potential Forest visitors in the burn area. The effects of smoke and gases could pose a hazard to sensitive individuals, but burning would be performed when conditions would minimize these effects. Therefore, adverse effects to workers and public from exposure to smokes and gases are considered to be minimal.

When using prescribed fire, mitigation measures, such as construction or use of existing fire lines, the presence of fire equipment and resources, and adherence to prescribed fire plans would minimize the potential for an out-of-prescription burn or escape. Prescribed fires that escape control lines could threaten private timber lands and residential, commercial, or industrial areas. While the potential for a fire escape always exists when conducting prescribed fires, the potential is extremely small. Recent statistics summarized by the National Interagency Fire Center report that approximately one percent of prescribed fires on federal lands required suppression activities of some kind. In most cases, these prescribed fires jumped a control line and suppression tactics were successfully used to control them. Out of the one percent of prescribed fires that required suppression, 90% were controlled without incident. Statistically, this result leaves about 0.1% of prescribed fires that required major suppression actions (Stephens, 2000).

Proper project planning, posting of trail and temporary areas closures, and patrol and monitoring before and during execution of prescribed burning would further mitigate the effects of smoke. There is no expectation for road closures throughout the project area; however, the local Sheriff’s Department has the authority to enforce road closures on a short-term basis to protect public safety. Residents would be notified prior to the burn in order to allow them enough time to vacate the area or take precautionary measures. Additionally, Forest Service personnel would monitor the burns to watch for potential hazardous situations. With these measures, effects from smoke are expected to be short-term and adverse, but minimal and within locally acceptable levels.

The use of prescribed fire would indirectly benefit public health and safety by increasing burned areas, consequently reducing fuel accumulation in some areas, thus potentially decreasing the risk of a catastrophic or stand replacing fire.

3.10.3 IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 2: NO ACTION There would be no direct effects on public health and safety as the prescribed burn program would not be implemented under this alternative. However, in the absence of prescribed burning,

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 99 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment there is an increased possibility for catastrophic wildfires to occur. Catastrophic wildfires could increase the potential for adverse impacts to firefighter and public health and safety as a result of larger fires that would be more difficult to suppress. Research (Fowler, 2003) has shown that catastrophic wildfires could result in even greater levels of air pollution than prescribed burning, which could increase adverse effects on public health and safety, such as smoke inhalation.

3.10.4 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Past, present, and future actions that could contribute to cumulative effects on public health and safety include prescribed burning and periodic wildfire, construction and development, vehicle use, hunting, and herbicide use. All of these activities have inherent risks on the safety of firefighters, staff, visitors, or local residents. Smoke from fires and emissions from heavy equipment pose health risks to sensitive receptors, as would pollution from vehicular traffic and urban development. Hunting and herbicide use have associated risks which could be avoided by following appropriate safety precautions. Past prescribed fire provides benefits to public health and safety as it reduces the risk of catastrophic fires. Prescribed burning of compartments would be spread over space and time to minimize local cumulative smoke effects. Impacts on public health and safety associated with the prescribed burn program would be small as compared with the cumulative effects of past, present, and foreseeable future actions. Cumulative impacts from the Proposed Action would be expected to be adverse and small. The No Action alternative could contribute greater adverse cumulative impacts in the event of catastrophic wildfires.

3.11 TRANSPORTATION

3.11.1 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT The transportation network on KNF includes U.S. and state highways (including federal aid primary and secondary roads); parish roads and private land access; and Forest Service roads. The transportation system also includes bridges under Forest Service jurisdiction. While federal, state and parish roads provide primary access into the national forest, Forest Service roads provide the intermediate and final avenues needed to administer, manage, and protect public lands and resources. Travel on the Forest occurs on paved roads, gravel roads, and primitive woods roads.

U.S. Highway 167 is located near the proclamation boundary along the northern portion of the Winn Ranger District and traverses the southern portion of the District south of Winnfield, LA. U.S. Highway 84 traverses the central portion of the District west of Winnfield. There are several state and local roads throughout the project area; some are paved and some are gravel. Local roads are generally dead-end roads that provide access for administrative purposes and seasonal dispersed recreation, consistent with the travel management rule.

3.11.2 IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 1: PROPOSED ACTION No new permanent or temporary roads would be constructed for prescribed burning activities, and no existing roads would be degraded. Existing roads, streams, and firelines would be used as firebreaks.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 100 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Smoke from prescribed fires can create hazardous situations on roads. The potential exists for smoke to affect traffic on U.S. Highways 84 and 167, state and local roads, and Forest Service roads adjacent to the burn areas. Disruptions, such as temporary closures of roads could result in a small decrease in visitation or displacement to another area due to limited accessibility. Short- term, temporary closures may occur due to heavy smoke, if the road crosses the burn area, or if the road is being used as a fire break. The extent of these disruptions would vary depending on the size, location, and duration of each prescribed burn. Generally, it is expected that road closures would be of short duration ranging from a few minutes to a few hours, if necessary at all.

Where visibility on local roads and highways might be affected by prescribed burning, signs would be placed in appropriate places to mitigate the effects of smoke on traffic. There is no expectation for road closures throughout the project area; however, the Sheriff’s Department has the authority to enforce road closures on a short-term basis to protect public safety. In addition, some Forest Service roads may be closed to reduce the visibility limitations associated with smoke.

3.11.3 IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 2: NO ACTION The current road status in the project area would remain at the status quo. Because the burn program would not occur under this alternative, there would be no effects from prescribed burning on transportation in the project area. However, in the absence of prescribed burning, the buildup of hazardous forest fuels could result in catastrophic wildfires throughout the project area. In the event that a wildfire does occur, affected highways and several local roads could be temporarily closed due to reduced visibility and smoke dispersion for extended periods of time.

3.11.4 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Past, present, and future actions that could contribute to cumulative effects on transportation include prescribed burning and periodic wildfire, construction and development, road maintenance, and any other activities that could cause road closures, traffic congestion, traffic delays, or impair road visibility. Smoke from past and future prescribed fires and wildfires can create hazardous situations on roads and may result in temporary road closure. Impacts on transportation associated with the prescribed burn program would be small as compared with the cumulative effects of past, present, and foreseeable future actions. Cumulative impacts from the Proposed Action would be expected to be adverse and small. The No Action alternative could contribute greater adverse cumulative impacts in the event of catastrophic wildfires.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 101 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

CHAPTER 4: CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION 4.1 LIST OF PREPARERS Kistachie National Forest Larry Kile, Fire Management Officer Dustin Dill, Assistant Fire Management Officer Albert Brazzel, Wildlife Biologist Daniel Cain, Archaeologist Sheila French, Zone Botanist David Moore, Forest Botanist Brian Rudd, Silviculturist Charles Graziadei, Prescriptionist Barbara Poole, Resource Assistant

Solv LLC Eveline Martin, Project Manager and Senior Environmental Analyst Nathalie Jacque, Environmental Analyst Chelsie Romulo, GIS Specialist

4.2 INDIVIDUALS, ORGANIZATIONS AND TRIBES CONSULTED Dr. Charles McGimsey, SHPO - State of LA Mr. Fred Hagaman, La. Dept. of Wildlife & Fisheries Mr. Michael Tarpley, Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana Mr. Terry Cole, Chocktaw Tribe of Oklahoma Mr. Randy Brewton, L.L. Brewton Timber Mr. Richard L. Johnson, Caroline Dormon Nature Preserve Ms. Frankie Rogers, Plum Creek Timber Co. Ms. Monica Sikes, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Mr. Steve Bartlett, Winn Parish School Board Mr. James Hines Mayor Kenneth Womack, Sikes Town Hall Ms. Laurie Dubriel, Tulane Environment Law Clinic Mr. Dan Armstrong, La. Dept. of Agriculture & Forestry Mr. Rick Jacob, The Nature Conservancy Ms. Amity Bass, La. Dept of Wildlife & Fisheries Mr. T.J. Kervin, Martin Forest Products Ms. Dana Masters, Jena Band of Choctaw Ms. Kimberly Walden, Chitimacha Tribe of LA Ms. Verna Bedgood, Village of Goldonna Mr. Danny Olden, Village of Georgetown Mr. Earl Barbury, Jr., Tunica-Biloxi Indians of LA Mr. Donald J. Baker, Baker Lane & Timber Mgmt. Mr. Donald J. Baker Ms. Jennifer Fairbrotuer, FSEEE

Consultation and Coordination 102 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Dr. Robert Cast, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer Mr. Jack McFarland, Winn Parish Police Jury Jeff Canerday, Mayor of Calvin Mr. Rick Bryan Mayor Lloyd Vines, Dodson Town Hall Mr. Daniel Armstrong Mayor B.R. Audirsch, Winnfield City Hall Mr. Ian Thompson, Director of the Choctaw Nation Historic Preservation Dept. Natchitoches Parish Police Jury Natchitoches Parish School Board Grant Parish Police Jury Grant Parish School Board

Consultation and Coordination 103 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

CHAPTER 5: LITERATURE CITED (Allan, 1995). Allan, J.D. 1995. Stream Ecology. Structure and Function of Running Waters. Chapman and Hall, London. 339-342 pp.

(Allen et al., 2002). Allen, C.M., D.A. Newman, and H. Winters. 2002. Trees, Shrubs, and Woody Vines of Louisiana. Allen’s Native Ventures, LLC, Pitkin, Louisiana, 333 pages.

(Allen et al., 2004). Allen, C.M., D.A. Newman, and H. Winters. 2004. Grasses of Louisiana, 3rd edition. Allen’s Native Ventures, Pitkin, Louisiana.

(Allen and Thames, 2007). Allen, C.M. and S. Thames. 2007. Observation of Vegetation Change on Cajun Prairie, a Coastal Prairie Flora in Southwestern Louisiana. Journal of Botanical Research of the Institute of Texas. 1(2): 1141-1147.

(ARMCANZ, 2000). Agriculture & Resource Management Council of Australia & New Zealand, Australian & New Zealand Environment & Conservation Council and Forestry Ministers. 2000. Weeds of National Significance, Parthenium weed (Parthenium hysterophorus) Strategic Plan. National Weeds Strategy Executive Committee, Launceston.

(Austin and Baisinger, 1955). Austin, R.C. and D.H. Baisinger. 1955. Some Effects of Burning of Forest Soils of Western Oregon and Washington. J. Forestry. 53:275-280.

(Blunden et al., 2011). Blunden, J. and D.S. Arndt, Editors. 2014. State of the Climate in 2013. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society. 95 (7), S1-S279. Available online at: http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/2014BAMSStateoftheClimate.1

(Bogler and Batcher, 2013). Bogler, D.J and M.S. Batcheler. 2013. Triadica sebifera. Bugwood Wiki. Accessed online September 2014 at: http://wiki.bugwood.org/Triadica_sebifera

(Carlile et al. 2004). Carlile, L.D., C.T. Brink, L.R. Mitchell, S.E. Puder, E.W. Spadgenski, and T.A. Beaty. 2004. An Intensively Managed and Increasing Red-cockaded Woodpecker Population at Fort Stewart, Georgia. Pages 134-138 in R.Costa, and S. J. Daniels, editors. Red- cockaded Woodpecker: Road to Recovery. Hancock House, Blaine, WA.

(Correll & Johnston, 1970). Correll, D.S. and M.C. Johnston. 1970. Manual of the Vascular Plants of Texas. Texas Research Foundation, Renner, Texas.

(Cronquist, 1980). Cronquist, A. 1980. Vascular flora of the Southeastern United States, Volume 1: Asteraceae. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.

(Diggs et al., 2006). Diggs, G.M., B.L. Lipscomb, M.D. Reed, and R.J. O’Kennon. 2006. Illustrated Flora of East Texas, Volume 1: Introduction, Pteridophytes, Gymnosperms, and Monocotyledons. Botanical Research Institute of Texas (BRIT), Fort Worth, Texas.

Literature Cited 104 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

(Diggs et al., 1999). Diggs, G.M., B.L. Lipscomb, and R.J. O’Kennon. 1999. Shinners & Mahler’s Illustrated Flora of North Central Texas. Botanical Research Institute of Texas (BRIT), Fort Worth, Texas.

(DiTomaso and Johnson, 2006). DiTomaso, J.M. and D.W. Johnson (eds.). 2006. The Use of Fire as a Tool for Controlling Invasive Plants. Cal-IPC Publication 2006-01. California Invasive Plant Council: Berkeley, CA. 56 pp.

(Evans et al., 2005). Evans, C.W., C.T. Bargeron, D.J. Moorhead, and G.K. Douce. 2005. Exotic lespedezas. Georgia Invasive Species Task Force. The University of Georgai. Available online at: http://www.gaeppc.org/weeds/lespedeza.html

(FNA, 2003). Flora of North America Editorial Committee. 2003. Flora of North America, North of Mexico, Vol. 25, Magnoliophyta: Commelinidae (in part): Poaceae, part 2. Oxford University Press, New York, New York

(FNA, 1997). Flora of North America Editorial Committee, editors (FNA). 1997. Volume 3, Magnoliophyta: Magnoliidae and Hamameliidae. Oxford University Press, New York, NY. Accessed online at: http://www.efloras.org/volume_page.aspx?volume_id=1003&flora_id=1

(Forests and Rangelands, 2014). Forests and Rangelands. 2014. The National Strategy: The Final Phase in the Development of the National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management Strategy. Accessed online September 2014 at: http://www.forestsandrangelands.gov/strategy/thestrategy.shtml

(Fowler, 2003). Fowler, C.T. 2003. Human Health Impacts of Forest Fires in the Southern United States: A Literature Review. Vol. 7. USDA Forest Service, Athens, Georgia. pp. 39-59.

(FRCC, No Date). Fire Regime Condition Class. Web Page, No Date. About FRCC. Accessed online September 2014 at: https://www.frames.gov/partner-sites/frcc/about/

(Godfrey and Wooten, 1981). Godfrey, R.K., and J.W. Wooten. 1981. Aquatic and Wetland Plants of the Southeastern United States, Dicotyledons. University of Georgia Press, Athens, Georgia.

Grace and Smith (1995). Grace, S.L. and L.M. Smith. 1995. A survey and description of the natural plant communities of the Kisatchie National Forest Vernon District. Document prepared for the Kisatchie National Forest.

(Gucker, 2010a). Gucker, C.L. 2010. Kummerowia stipulacea, K. striata. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available online at: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forb/kumspp/all.html

(Gucker, 2010b). Gucker, C. 2010. Lespedeza cuneata. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station,

Literature Cited 105 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available online at: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forb/lescun/all.html

(Gucker, 2009). Gucker, C.L. 2009. Phyllostachys aurea. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available online at: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/graminoid/phyaur/all.html

(Hamel, 1992), Hamel, P.B. 1992. The Land Manager’s Guide to the Bird’s of the South. The Nature Conservancy, Chapel Hill, North Carolina and the U.S. Forest Service, Southern Region, Atlanta, Georgia.

(Howard, 2004). Howard, J.L. 2004. Sorghum halepense. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available online at: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/graminoid/sorhal/introductory.html

(IPCC, 2013). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2013. Fifth Assessment Report. Available online at: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/

(Kral, 1983). Kral, R. 1983. A report on some rare, threatened, or endangered forest-related vascular plants of the South. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture Forest Service Technical Publication R8- TP2, Athens, GA. 1305 pp.

(Larke and Smith, 1994). Larke, J.O. and L.M. Smith. 1994. Rare Plants of Pine-Hardwood Forests in Louisiana. Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, Natural Heritage Program. Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

(LDEQ, 2012). Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality. 2012. 2012 Louisiana Water Quality Inventory: Integrated Report (305(b)/303(d)) FINAL. Available online at: http://www.deq.louisiana.gov/portal/DIVISIONS/WaterPermits/WaterQualityStandardsAssessm ent/WaterQualityInventorySection305b/2012IntegratedReport.aspx

(LNHP, 2014). Louisiana Natural Heritage Program. 2014. The natural communities of Louisiana. Louisiana Natural Heritage Program, Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, Baton Rouge, LA.

(Lott et al., 2003). Lott, M.S., J. C. Violin, R.W. Pemburton, and D. F. Austin. 2003. The Reproductive Biology of the Invasive Ferns Lygodium microphyllum and L. japonicum (Schizaeaceae): Implications for Invasive Potential. American Journal of Botany 90: 1144-1152.

(Martin and Smith, 1991). Martin, D.L. and L.M. Smith. 1991. A survey and description of the natural plant communities of the Kisatchie National Forest, Kisatchie and Winn Districts. Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, Baton Rouge, La. 372 pp.

Literature Cited 106 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

(Meyer, 2009). Meyer, R. 2010. Albizia julibrissin. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available online at: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/tree/albjul/all.html

(Meyer, 2011). Meyer, Rachelle. 2011. Triadica sebifera. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available online at: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/tree/triseb/all.html

(Miller et al., 2010). Miller, J.H., E.B. Chambliss, and N.J. Lowenstein. 2010. A Field Guide for the Identification of Invasive Plants in Southern Forests. Forest Service Southern Research Station General Technical Report SRS-119. Asheville, North Carolina.

(Munger, 2002). Munger, G.T. 2002. Lonicera japonica. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available online at: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/vine/lonjap/all.html

(Munger, 2003). Munger, G.T. 2003. Ligustrum spp. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available online at: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/shrub/ligspp/all.html

(Munger, 2004). Munger, G.T. 2004. Lespedeza cuneata. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available online at: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forb/lescun/all.html

(National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, No Date). National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. Web Page, No Date. Saline Bayou, Louisiana. Accessed online October 2014 at: http://www.rivers.gov/rivers/saline-bayou.php

(NatureServe, 2014). NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. 2014. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Accessed October 2014 at: http://explorer.natureserve.org/

(NRCS, 2014). United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2014. PLANTS Database. Accessed online at: http://plants.usda.gov/java/

(Poole, 2015). United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 16 April 2015. Personal communication with Barbara Poole, Forester and Natural Resource Specialist, Kisatchie National Forest, Winn Ranger District.

(Prichett, 1987). Prichett, W.L. 1987. Effects of Fire on Soil Properties. In: Properties and Management of Forest Soils, 2nd ed. John Wiley & Sons, Pub. Pp. 403-415.

Literature Cited 107 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

(Radford et al., 1968). Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles, and C.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the Carolinas. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.

(Richter et al., 1982). Richter, D.D., C.W. Rlaston, and W.R. Harms. 1982 Prescribed Fire: Effects on Water Quality and Forest Nutrient Cycling. Science, Vol. 215, pp. 661-663.

(Simmons et al., 2007). Simmons, M.T., S. Windhager, P. Powers, J. Lott, R.K. Lyons, and C. Schwope. 2007. Selective and Non-selective Control on Invasive Plants: The Short-term Effects of Growing-season Prescribed Fire, Herbicide, and Mowing in Two Texas Prairies. Restoration Ecology 15(4): 662-669.

(Smith, 1996). Smith, L.M. 1996. Rare and sensitive natural wetland plant communities of interior Louisiana. Louisiana Natural Heritage Program, Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, Baton Rouge, LA.

(Stephens, 2000). Stephens, S.L. 2000. Congressional Testimony on Reducing Fire Hazard in Coniferous Forests and in the Urban-Wildland Intermix. Available online at: http://www.cnr.berkeley.edu/stephens-lab/Publications/Testimony_6-00.pdf

(Texas Invasives, 2006). Texas Invasives. 2006. Invasives Database: Bothriochloa ischaemum var. songarica King Ranch Bluestem. Accessed online September 2014 at: http://www.texasinvasives.org/plant_database/detail.php?symbol=BOISS

(Thomas and Allen, 1996). Thomas, R.D, and C M. Allen 1996. Atlas of the Vascular Flora of Louisiana, Vol. II: Dicotyledons, Acanthaceae-Euphorbiaceae. Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

(Thomas and Allen, 1998). Thomas, R.D., and C.M. Allen. 1998. Atlas of the Vascular Flora of Louisiana, Vol. III: Dicotyledons, Fabaceae-Zygophyllaceae. Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

(USEPA, 2014). United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2014. The Green Book Nonattainment Areas for Criteria Pollutants. Accessed online October 2014 at: http://www.epa.gov/oaqps001/greenbk/index.html

(USFS, 2014a). United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2014. Winn Ranger District Recreation Brochure. Available online at: http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5398469.pdf.

(USFS, 2014b). United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2014. Kisatchie National Forest 2014-2015 Hunting Dates. Available online at: http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprd3814319.pdf

(USFS, 2013a). United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2013. Cut and Sold Reports for All Convertible Products by Region, State, National Forest, 1980 to 2013.

Literature Cited 108 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Washington, D.C. Available online at: http://headwaterseconomics.org/interactive/national- forests-timber-cut-sold

(USFS, 2013b). United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2013. Wildfire, Wildlands, and People: Understanding and Preparing for Wildfire in the Wildland-Urban Interface. Available online at: http://www.fs.fed.us/openspace/fote/reports/GTR-299.pdf.

(USFS, 2012a). United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2012. Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, National Forest System Land Management Planning. Available online at: http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5349141.pdf

(USFS, 2012b). United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2012. 2012 Monitoring and Evaluation Report, Kisatchie National Forest. Available online at: http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprd3795834.pdf

(USFS, 2010a). United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2010. Environmental Assessment for Fiscal Years 2011 through 2015 Prescribed Burn Program. Winn Ranger District, Kisatchie National Forest.

(USFS, 2010b). United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2010. National Visitor Use Monitoring, FY2010 Visitor Use at the Kisatchie National Forest. Available online at: http://www.southernregion.fs.fed.us/kisatchie/

(USFS, 2009). United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2009. FY 2009 Kisatchie National Forest, Monitoring and Evaluation Action Plan & Report. Available online at: http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprd3796189.pdf

(USFS, 2008). United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Regional Task Force. 2008. In: Nonnative Invasive Species in Southern Forest and Grassland Ecosystems. Accessed online October 2014 at: http://www.invasive.org/south/taskforce.html

(USFS, 2005). United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2005. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-42, Volume 4. Wildland Fire in Ecosystems: Effects of Fire on Soil and Water. Rocky Mountain Research Station. 212 pp.

(USFS, 2000a). United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2000. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-42, Volume 2. Wildland Fire in Ecosystems: Effects of Fire on Flora. Rocky Mountain Research Station. 257 pp.

(USFS, 2000b). United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2000. Smoke Exposure at Western Wildfires. Pacific Northwest Research Station. Research Paper. PNW-RP-525.

(USFS, 2000c). United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 2000. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-42-vol. 1. “Wildland Fire in Ecosystems: Effects of Fire on Fauna.” Ogden, UT: 83 pp.

Literature Cited 109 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

(USFS, 1999a). United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1999. Revised Land and Resource Management Plan, Kisatchie National Forest. Pineville, LA.

(USFS, 1999b). United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1999. Final Environmental Impact Statement, Revised Land and Resource Management Plan, Kisatchie National Forest. Pineville, LA.

(USFS, 1989a). United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1989. Final Environmental impact Statement, Vegetation Management in the Coastal Plain/Piedmont. Vol. I & II. Management Bulletin R-8-MB-23. USDA Forest Service Southern Region. Atlanta, Georgia.

(USFS, 1989b). United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1989. A Guide for Prescribed Fire in Southern Forests. Technical Publication R8-TP-11. USDA Forest Service Southern Region, Atlanta, Georgia.

(USFS, 1979). United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1979. General Technical Report WO-7. Effects of Fire on Soil. National Fire Effects Workshop. Denver, Colorado.

(USFWS, 2012). United States Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, 2012. Fuels Treatments Reduce Wildfire Suppression Cost. Available online at: http://www.fws.gov/southeastfire/documents/FMIR_Fuels_Treatments_Reduce_Wildfire_Report .pdf

(USFWS, 2003). United States Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, 2003. Recovery Plan for the Red-cockaded Woodpecker (Picoides borealis): Second Revision. Atlanta, GA. 296 pp.

(USGCRP, 2014), U.S. Global Change Research Program. 2014. Climate Change Impacts in the United States: The Third National Climate Assessment. Accessed online October 2014 at: http://www.globalchange.gov/browse/reports/climate-change-impacts-united-states-third- national-climate-assessment-0

(Wagner and Hightower, 2005). Wagner, D. and D. Hightower. 2005. Wildlife Management Indicator Species Population and Habitat Trends, Kisatchie National Forest. Pineville, Louisiana. 265 pp.

(Weakley, 2008). Weakley, A.S. 2008. Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, Georgia, Northern Florida, and Surrounding Areas. University of North Carolina Herbarium, North Carolina Botanical Garden, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

(Wiedinmyer and Hurteau, 2010). Wiedinmyer, C. and M.D. Hurteau. 2010. Prescribed Fire as a Means of Reducing Forest Carbon Emissions in the Western United States. Environ. Sci. Technol., 44 (6), pp 1926–1932. Available online at: http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es902455e?journalCode=esthag

Literature Cited 110 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

CHAPTER 6: ACRONYMS AND GLOSSARY 6.1 ACRONYMS ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation AQCR Air Quality Control Regions APE Area of Potential Effect ASQ Allowable Sale Quantity BE Biological Evaluation CC Condition Class CCF 100 Cubic Feet CEQ Council of Environmental Quality CFR Code of Federal Regulations CH4 Methane CO Carbon Monoxide CO2 Carbon Dioxide DFC Desired Future Conditions EA Environmental Assessment EPA Environmental Protection Agency FEIS Final Environmental Impact Statement FRCC Fire Regime Condition Class FY Fiscal Year GIS Geographic Information System HWD Hardwood Mast IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change KNF Kisatchie National Forest LDEQ Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality LDOA Louisiana Division of Archaeology LLP Longleaf Pine LTA Landtype Association LVSM Louisiana Voluntary Smoke Management MA Management Area MBF Million Board Feet MHL Mixed Hardwood/Loblolly Pine MIS Management Indicator Species NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NFMAS National Fire Management Analysis System NFS National Forest System NNIP Non-Native Invasive Plants N2O Nitrous Oxide NOx Nitrogen Oxides NRHP National Register of Historic Places NVUM National Visitor Use Monitoring O3 Ozone OHV Off-Highway Vehicle

Acronyms and Glossary 111 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

ORV Off-Road Vehicle PA Programmatic Agreement Pb Lead PETS Proposed, Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive PM Particulate Matter RAPZ Riparian Area Protection Zone RCW Red-Cockaded Woodpecker RFSS Regional Forester Sensitive Species ROD Record of Decision ROS Recreation Opportunity Spectrum RV Recreational Vehicle SHPO State Historic Preservation Office SHPZ Streamside Habitat Protection Zone SIO Scenic Integrity Objective SMA Sub-Management Area SO2 Sulfur Dioxide SOH Shortleaf Pine, Oaks and Hickories TESC Threatened, Endangered, Special Concern THPO Tribal Historic Preservation Officer TSP Total Suspended Particulates USC United States Code USFS United States Forest Service

6.2 GLOSSARY Affected Environment: The components of the physical, biological, and social environment that will be affected by a proposed action or alternative.

Agriculture: Agriculture involves the use of water for crop spraying, irrigation, livestock watering, poultry operations and other farm purposes not related to human consumption.

Backing Fires: A fire spreading, or ignited to spread, into (against) the wind, in the absence of wind, or downslope.

Conservation Species: A species that is considered rare within the State of Louisiana although it is commonly found in other states.

Cumulative Effects Analysis: An analysis of the effects on the environment resulting from the incremental impacts of a proposed action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions- regardless of what agency (federal or non-federal), or person undertakes such other action.

Degree of Support: The level at which water quality supports the designated uses of a water body specified in the Louisiana Water Quality Standards. The degree of support is divided into three levels: fully supporting uses, partially supporting uses, and not supporting uses.

Acronyms and Glossary 112 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Designated Stream Crossing: Area designated by Forest Service officials where vehicles are allowed to cross a stream.

Designated Water Use: A use of the waters of the state as established by the Louisiana Water Quality Standards. These uses include, but are not limited to, recreation, propagation of fish and other aquatic life and wildlife, including oysters, public water supply, agricultural activities and outstanding natural resource waters.

Desired Future Conditions: A portrayal of the land or resource conditions that are expected to result if goals and objectives are fully achieved.

Dissolved Oxygen: The amount of oxygen dissolved in water, commonly expressed as a concentration in terms of milligrams per liter, mg/l.

Dormant Season: That period of time when plants are not photosynthesizing and transpiring and adding growth tissue. In Louisiana, this is generally mid-September to mid-March.

Duff: The lower portion of the organic layer covering the soil, consisting of decomposed litter.

Ecosystem: A community of organisms and its physical setting. An ecosystem, whether a fallen log or an entire watershed, includes resident organisms, nonliving components such as soil nutrients, input such as rainfall and output such as organisms that disperse to other ecosystems.

Endangered Species: Any species which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range, other than members of the class Insecta that have been determined by the Secretary to constitute a pest and whose protection under the provision of the Act (Endangered Species Act of 1973) would present an overwhelming and overriding risk to man. Endangered species must be designated in the Federal Register by the appropriated Secretary.

Forest Plan: Land and Resource Management Plan for the Kisatchie National Forest, Louisiana, 1999. The guiding document for the management of National Forest Lands in Louisiana.

Fragmentation: Breaking up of contiguous areas into progressively smaller patches of increasing degrees of isolation.

Growing Season: That period of time when plants are photosynthesizing, transpiring, and adding growth tissue. In Louisiana, this is generally mid-March to mid-September.

Habitat: The total environment conditions on a unit of land including food, cover, and water within the home range.

Habitat Type: The collective land area which one association occupies, or will come to occupy, as succession advances.

Acronyms and Glossary 113 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Intermittent Stream: A stream that flows seasonally (10 to 90 percent of the time) in response to a fluctuating water table, with a scoured channel that is at least three feet wide.

Landscape: An area composed of interacting ecosystems that are repeated because of geology, land form, soils, climate, biota, and human influences throughout the area. Landscapes are generally of a size, shape and pattern which are determined by interacting ecosystems.

Landtype Association: An ecological unit ranging in size from about 25,000 acres to as much as 500,000 acres. An LTA is fairly uniform in land-surface form, sub-surface geology, soil patterns, and historical vegetation.

Litter: The upper portion of the organic layer covering the soil, consisting of unaltered dead remains of plants and animals whose original form is still visible.

Management Indicator Species: A species selected because its population changes indicate effects of management activities on the plant and animal community in general. A species whose condition can be used to assess the impacts of management actions on a particular area.

Management Type: A forest vegetation type that has been selected as the species that will best achieve desired future conditions and meet the goals and objectives of the Forest Plan.

Midstory: A canopy layer of smaller trees that occur under an overstory of larger trees. Midstory trees are usually of a different species than the large trees and can grow in almost total shade. The midstory under a pine canopy usually consists of hardwood trees.

Mineral Soil: A soil consisting predominately of and having its properties determined predominately by mineral matter.

Mixing Height: The height at which smoke is carried away by transport wind.

Monitoring: To watch, observe, or check, especially for a specific purpose, such as to keep track of, regulate, or control.

Percent Slope: A measure of change in surface value over distance expressed in percent.

Perennial Streams: A stream flows year-round (more than 90 percent of the time) with a scoured channel that is always below the water table.

Plastic Soils: A soil that can be readily molded or deformed without rupture; pliable; putty-like.

Prescribed Burn: A fire ignited under known conditions of fuel, weather, and topography to achieve specified objectives.

Primary Contact Recreation: Any recreational activity which involves or requires prolonged body contact with the water, such as swimming, water skiing, tubing, snorkeling, and skin- diving.

Acronyms and Glossary 114 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Riparian Areas: Geographically delineated areas with distinctive resource value and characteristics that are comprised of the aquatic and riparian ecosystem.

Rutting: A track worn by a wheel or habitual passage.

Secondary Contact Recreation: Any recreational activity which may involve incidental or accidental body contact with the water and during which the probability of ingesting appreciable quantities of water is minimal, such as fishing, wading and recreational boating.

Sensitive Species: Those plant or animal species that are susceptible or vulnerable to activity, impacts, or habitat alterations, including species proposed for classification as endangered or threatened by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service with the propose rule-making already published in the Federal Register and species identified by the Regional Forester as needing special management emphasis on the Southern National Forest.

Site Preparation: A general term for removing unwanted vegetation, slash, and even roots and stones form a site before reforestation.

Slash: The residue, e.g. tops and branches, left on the ground after logging, or accumulating as a result of storm, fire, girdling, de-limbing.

Threatened Species: Any species that is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all, or a significant portion of its range, and that has been designated in the Federal Register by the Secretary of the Interior as a threatened species.

Species: A population or series of populations of organisms that is capable of interbreeding freely with each other but not with members of other species.

Understory: A structural layer of a forest consisting of trees, shrubs, and herbs that are growing far beneath the canopy. Some tree species will never reach the tree canopy. They are the understory species. Others will eventually reach the canopy.

Scenic Integrity Objective (SIO): Refers to the degree of acceptable alteration of the characteristics of the landscape.

Waterbar: A shallow channel or raised barrier of soil or other material laid diagonally across the surface of a road or skid trail to lead the water off the road and prevent soil erosion.

Watershed: A land area that collects and discharges excess surface or ground water through a single outlet

Water-Source Seeps: Water escaping through or emerging from the ground along a line of surface, or from a spring where the water emerges from a localized spot.

Acronyms and Glossary 115 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Wetland: Those areas that are inundated by surface or ground water often enough to support pants and other aquatic life that requires saturated or seasonally saturated soils for growth and reproduction. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas such as sloughs, potholes, wet meadows, river overflows, mud flats, and natural ponds.

Wetline: A line of water, or water and chemical retardant, sprayed along the ground, serving as a temporary control line from which to ignite or stop a low-intensity fire.

Wildfire: A fire that is naturally caused or caused by humans that does not meet land management objectives.

Acronyms and Glossary 116 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

APPENDIX A: FLORA BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT

Appendices A-1 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Appendices A-2 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

APPENDIX B: FAUNA BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT

Appendices B-1 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

Appendices B-2 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

APPENDIX C: HERITAGE RESOURCES LIMITED REVIEW CHECKLIST

Appendices C-1 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

HERITAGE RESOURCES

EXEMPT UNDERTAKING CHECKLIST Kisatchie National Forest

Compartment Ranger District:

In accordance with stipulation V: J.8 of the Programmatic Agreement among the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Kisatchie National Forest, The Louisiana State Historic Preservation Office, The ACHP and Federally Recognized Tribes Concerning the Management of Historic Properties on the National Forest Lands in Louisiana, I have determined that the following project(s) can be excluded from full review procedures under section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Project location maps are attached.

Stand / Acres 1. Research Activities with no ground disturbance

2. Permits, ROW and leases with no ground disturbance

3. Easement acquisitions (involving no historic properties)

4. Land acquisitions (involving no historic properties)

5. Routine road maintenance

6. Maintenance or alteration of existing facilities less than 50 year old

7. Transfer of use authorization

8. Pesticide/Herbicide spray

9. Withdrawal revocations

10. Installation of signs, gate posts and monuments

11. Routine trail maintenance

12. Broadcast seeding (no ground disturbance)

13. Placement of geophysical seismic monitoring equipment

14. Chainsaw/herbicide site preparation

15. Routine Recreation site maintenance

16. Road Closures

Appendices C-2 Kisatchie National Forest FY 2016-2025 Prescribed Burn Program Winn District Environmental Assessment

17. Prescribed Burn Previous Burned areas

18. Special Use Permits in existing ROW

19. Reconstructing log roads

20. Hand Planting pine seedlings

21. SPB/salvage of 1 acre or less

22. RCW midstory removal with no heavy equipment

23. Precommercial Thinning

24. First Thinning

______District Archeologist / Date

______District Ranger / Date Forest Heritage Program Manager / Date

Appendices C-3