Environmental Assessment

FOREST HEALTH INITIATIVE PROJECT

December, 2017

Project Number: 47969 Mark Twain National Forest Ranger Districts: Willow Springs, Salem, Potosi, Eleven Point, Poplar Bluff Missouri Counties: Douglas, Howell, Dent, Iron, Washington, Reynolds, Shannon, Oregon, Carter, Ripley, Butler, and Wayne Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status,

family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident.

Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and

TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination

Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of

the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410; (2) fax: (202) 690-7442; or (3) email: [email protected] .

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer and lender.

Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Table of Contents

CHAPTER 1 – PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION ...... 1 Introduction ...... 1 Forest Health Initiative Project Location ...... 1 Background and Project Area Setting ...... 3 Forest-wide Direction and Goals ...... 6 Forest Health Initiative Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action ...... 8 Forest Health Initiative Proposed Action ...... 10 Decision Framework ...... 15 Public Involvement ...... 16 Issues ...... 17 Relationship of the Forest Health Initiative project to other documents ...... 18 CHAPTER 2 – ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED ...... 21 Introduction ...... 21 Formulation of Alternatives ...... 21 Alternatives to be Evaluated in Detail ...... 21 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study ...... 24 Comparison of Key Issues and Treatments by Alternative ...... 24 Mitigation Measures Common to All Action Alternatives...... 25 CHAPTER 3 – AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ...... 28 Background ...... 29 Physical Environment ...... 33 Soils ...... 33 Hydrology Resource ...... 45 Transportation ...... 61 Biological Environment ...... 69 Vegetation and Forest Health ...... 69 Wildlife Resources ...... 82 Social and Economic Environments ...... 114 Recreation ...... 114 Historic Properties ...... 121 Economics ...... 127 Visuals ...... 132 Environmental Justice ...... 145 CHAPTER 4 – PROJECT COORDINATION...... 151 APPENDICES ...... 153 Appendix A: References ...... A-1 Appendix B: Glossary and Acronyms ...... B-1 Appendix C: Compartment/Stand Treatment Activity Table ...... C-1 Appendix D: Standards and Guidelines, Mitigation Measures and Best Management Practices . D-1 Appendix E: Oak Decline Phones ...... E-1 Appendix F: Forest Health Initiative Project Maps ...... F-1

Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

(Page intentionally left blank)

Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

CHAPTER 1 – PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION Introduction

The Forest Service prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other relevant federal and state laws and regulations. This Environmental Assessment will disclose the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts that would result from the proposed action and alternatives. It also provides the supporting information for a determination to prepare either an Environmental Impact Statement or a Finding of No Significant Impact.

Preliminary investigation via aerial detection flights and analysis of recent weather patterns indicate that areas of the Mark Twain National Forest (MTNF) subjected to drought events are experiencing various stages of oak decline and mortality.

This proposal is based on the need to harvest the declining red oak group (red oak, black oak, scarlet oak) and white oak in specific areas before they die. Some oak sprouting occurs by cutting trees before they die, which will help retain oak in those stands. Since dead oak stumps do not stump sprout, in areas with mortality, the dead oaks may be replaced by brushy fields consisting of mixed species (including suppressed trees from the understory). The composition of the remaining species would depend on numerous variables. However, this could result in a shortage of the red oak group and white oak in the future. It is a goal of the Forest Health Initiative (FHI) project to regenerate and retain oak and other more long-lived species in areas having oak decline, particularly white oak and shortleaf pine.

In some declining red oak group locations, we need to increase species diversity and begin to change the species composition of the remaining dominant trees to a mix of white oaks, shortleaf pine and red oaks. Such a composition better reflects the adapted natural diversity of the forest and woodlands in the Analysis Area, which has been dramatically changed over the last century due to human use and occupation. The change will help make forest vegetation more resilient to natural disturbances (such as insect outbreaks and extended drought), and result in a healthier future forest that can better withstand the types of stresses acting on today's forests. In these locations, planting shortleaf pine may be implemented.

Forest Health Initiative Project Location

The FHI project is situated solely on Federal lands throughout southern Missouri on several MTNF Ranger Districts, including; Salem, Potosi, Willow Springs, Eleven Point and Poplar Bluff and in the Missouri Counties of: Dent, Reynolds, Iron, Washington, Howell, Douglas, Shannon, Oregon, Carter, Ripley, Butler, and Wayne. See the Vicinity Map on the following page and project treatment maps in Appendix B.

The analysis area totals approximately 943,982 acres of which 566,071 acres are National Forest System (NFS) lands and of this, approximately 45,885 acres are proposed for treatment. Also within this analysis area boundary are 377,910 acres of private lands. Private lands are mentioned in this project because the environmental effects of activities on private ownerships are used in our cumulative effects analysis. This project does not direct private landowners, within the project area, any different way of managing their lands than how they currently manage them.

Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need for Action Page 1 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

(INSERT Vicinity Map here)

Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need for Action Page 2 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

The legal description for the FHI project area is: Salem/Potosi Ranger Districts: T33N, R3W; T33N, R2W; T34N, R2W; T32N, R3W; Willow Springs Ranger District: T27N, R10W; T26N, R10W; T26N, R11W; T25N, R11W; Eleven Point Ranger District: T23N, Ranges 2W, 1W, 1E, 2E; T24N, Ranges 3W, 2W, 1W, 1E, 2E; T25N, Ranges 5W, 4W, 3W, 2W, 1W, 1E; T26N, Ranges 5W, 4W, 3W, 1W; T27N, Ranges 4W, 3W; Poplar Bluff Ranger District: T25N, Ranges 6E; 7E; T26N, Ranges 7E, 6E, 4E; T27N, Ranges 3E, 4E, 6E; T28N, Ranges 4E and 5E; Fifth Principal Meridian.

Background and Project Area Setting

The FHI project presents an opportunity to conduct vegetative management activities in high risk oak stands on NFS lands across Southern Missouri. Field reconnaissance began in 2014 to identify potential stands, specifically those that were close to existing System Roads in areas with high mortality that were outside the national forest’s normal program of entry. The forest was concerned that without entry, many areas would experience substantially increased mortality before normal program of entry could occur, result in undesirable vegetative composition and structure, and represent missed economic opportunities across the project area.

Collaborative efforts Collaboration with communities and the public is important to the Mark Twain National Forest. In addition to interacting with the general public, the Forest Service is collaborating with area organizations and agencies to establish priorities, cooperate on activities, and increase public awareness and participation about site-specific projects.

Two initial open and transparent meetings were conducted on the evenings of September 1, 2015 at the Potosi Ranger District Office (13 attendees), and September 15, 2015 at the Eleven Point Ranger District Office (7 attendees). Each of these public meetings had optional field tours planned for the following morning as well. The purpose of these public meetings was to reach out to potential collaborators, share information on the proposed purpose and need, invite participants to be involved in future collaborative events, share the proposed timeline and have discussions on the intended considerations for project development. Sixteen participants expressed an interest in further collaborative events. On the evening of March 2, 2017, a final collaborative meeting for the project was held. Six participants engaged with the Forest Supervisor and Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) members on the progress of the project.

Healthy Forest Restoration Act/2014 Farm Bill Every five years, Congress passes legislation that sets national agriculture, nutrition, conservation, and forestry policy. On February 7, 2014, President Barak Obama signed into law the Agricultural Act of 2014 (commonly called the "Farm Bill"). Among the provisions that pertain to the Forest Service, Section 8204 of the 2014 Farm Bill amends Title VI of the 2003 Healthy Forest Restoration Act (HFRA; 16 U.S.C. 6591) by adding section 602 (Designation of Treatment Areas) and section 603 (Administrative Review) to address qualifying insect and disease infestations on National Forest System lands.

On April 7, 2014, Missouri Governor Jay Nixon sent a letter to Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack requesting the designation of 123 sixth-level hydrologic units within Missouri’s Mark Twain National Forest as a landscape scale insect and disease treatment area, pursuant to Section

Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need for Action Page 3 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

8204 of the Farm Bill. As stated in his letter “the Mark Twain National Forest in Missouri has 123 sixth-level hydrologic units (sub watersheds) that are qualified for designation under the statue. Based on the 2012 National Insect and Disease Risk Map, 25% or more of the forested area in each of these sub watersheds is in hazardous condition or has significant mapped damage. Therefore, these units are "at risk" of experiencing substantially increased tree mortality over the next 15 years due to insects or disease infestation.”

On May 20, 2014, Department of Agriculture Secretary Vilsack announced the designation of approximately 45.6 million acres of National Forest System lands across 94 national forests in 35 states to address insect and disease threats that weaken forests and increase the risk of forest fire.

On May 20, 2014, Chief of the Forest Service Thomas Tidwell notified Governor Nixon that the area that was requested to be designated under Section 602 met one or more of the criteria required in Section 602. The FHI Project may be carried out in accordance with Title VI, section 602 (d). This HFRA section provides for expedited NEPA reviews, pre-decisional objection review, and guidance on judicial review. Such designation does not change or exempt the Forest Service from complying with any other existing law, regulation and policy such as the National Environmental Policy Act, Endangered Species Act, Clean Water Act, National Historic Preservation Act, agency Roadless Rules, and any other applicable law, regulation, and/or policy that affects the designated area.

The original boundary was based on remote sensing and data from 2013-2014. Additional high risk stands (9,312 acres) were found outside the original HFRA designated boundary in early 2015 and field verified. Some stands were visited during our collaborative field tour meetings in September. Originally, these additional stands did not qualify under Section 602 designation because their watersheds were not within the original 123 watershed designation on the MTNF.

In October 2015, the MTNF put in a request to have 12 additional watersheds added to the original designation. These additional watersheds contain the additional 9,312 acres of high risk stands. In March 2016, these additional acres of high risk stands were approved under the Farm Bill for Oak decline by the Washington Office.

The 2014 Farm Bill allows for an expedited analysis process and streamlined objection process. However, a managerial decision was made prior to scoping to not use this expedited analysis process and instead continue to move forward under a traditional NEPA process while the additional watershed designation process was reviewed.

How the Mark Twain National Forest is moving forward to improve Forest Health The MTNF has identified an all-inclusive proposal of 45,885 acres of “at risk” stands (of which 37,163 acres fall within the original HFRA designation and 9,312 acres fall outside the designation). The 27 project treatment maps (Appendix B) show the proposed treatment area in 52 watersheds across Southern Missouri. Planning of this project is in addition to the Forests’ existing program of work. We are proposing this project to accelerate our entry schedule on out-year planning project areas in the effort to harvest high-risk oak before it dies.

Without this entry, many of these areas would have ecological and economic losses and we would not be reducing the risk or extent of, or increasing the resilience to, insect and disease infestations in

Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need for Action Page 4 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

these areas. Many of the areas with no activity within the project boundary have been covered under recent NEPA project areas or are moving forward on current 2015-16 program of work.

Forest Land and Resource Management Plan The MTNF 2005 Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan) guides all natural resource management activities on the MTNF to meet the objectives of federal law, regulations, and policy. The Forest Plan provides an integrated, interdisciplinary, programmatic framework for environmentally sound management based on the best available scientific information. It establishes: forest-wide multiple-use goals and implementing objectives, forest-wide management requirements (known as Forestwide Standards and Guidelines), Management Area direction, including area-specific standards and guidelines, desired conditions and management practices. A management area is a portion of a landscape with similar management objectives and a common management prescription. A copy of the Forest Plan can be found via the internet on the MTNF Website at: http://www.fs.usda.gov/goto/mtnf/plan. All activities in this project must comply with the Forest Plan.

The Mark Twain lies within the Ozark Highlands, a region long distinguished for its extraordinary geological, hydrological and ecological diversity. Signature features include crystal-clear springs, over 6,000 caves, rocky barren glades, an inclusion of ancient Pre-Cambrian volcanic mountains known as the St. Francis and nationally recognized wild and scenic rivers are within the Ozarks. The Ozarks have been continuously available for plant and animal life since the late Paleozoic period, constituting perhaps the oldest continuously exposed landmass in North America (Yatskievych 1999).

In the Ozarks, eastern oak hardwood and southern pine woodlands converge with the drier western tallgrass prairie, creating a distinctive array of forests and open grassy woodlands, savannas and glades. This rich mixture of unique, diverse and ecologically complex natural communities provides a high level of habitat diversity. The high level of habitat diversity, influx of biota from divergent regions through thousands of years of climatic events, effects of past glaciation to the north, and extreme antiquity of the landscape have combined to support relict populations and allow for development of at least 160 endemic species.

The Ozark Highlands are deeply dissected by clear-flowing, mostly spring-fed, streams and rivers. The MTNF occurs in five of the seven major river basins in the Missouri portion of the Ozark Highlands. Eleven primary streams and rivers course through these basins, portions of which occur within boundaries of the Mark Twain. As a result of the region’s karst topography, the Ozarks are home to some of the world’s largest collection of first magnitude springs (with over 65 million gallons of water flow daily).

Forest Health Initiative Ecological Classification Classification hierarchies provide structure for analysis of the parts of and synthesis of ecosystems as a whole. It answers the question “How do we organize natural resources or biodiversity in a way we can compare and understand?” A hierarchical classification structure helps characterize ecosystems, and identify patterns and processes at different ecological scales. The Hierarchical Framework of Ecological Units being used by the MTNF incorporates (in part) the national framework (Cleland et al. 1997), Missouri’s ecological sections and subsections (Nigh and Schroeder 2002) and terrestrial natural communities (Nelson 2005).

Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need for Action Page 5 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

“The highest levels of the Classification system – domain, division, and province – are levels of great generalization useful for national planning and assessment. … The intermediate levels of the classification system are the section and subsection. … Criteria used to establish sections are geomorphology (land form, relative relief, lithology, structure, and geomorphic process), potential vegetation, and major soil groups. Sections are subdivided into subsections. … In general, the same criteria that are used to establish sections are used to establish subsections, although at a finer resolution. The lower levels of the hierarchical classification system consist of the landtype association (LTA) and ecological landtype (ELT). These levels are appropriate for local planning and assessments such as watersheds, counties, ranger districts, conservation areas, and even site and landownership tract planning.” (pages 2-3, Atlas of Missouri Ecoregions (Nigh and Schroeder, 2002)).

The entire FHI project area lies within the Ozark Highlands Section. The Ozark Highlands Section is divided into sixteen subsections with only six of these found in the FHI project area. These include: • OZ4 White River Hills Subsection • OZ5 Central Plateau Subsection • OZ8 Meramec River Hills Subsection • OZ9 Current River Hills Subsection • OZ10 St. Francois Knobs and Basins Subsection • OZ14 Black River Ozark Border Subsection. Forest-wide Direction and Goals

This landscape scale project is being considered under the Forest Plan. It guides all natural resource management activities on the MTNF to meet the objectives of federal law, regulations, and policy. The Forest Plan provides an integrated, interdisciplinary, programmatic framework for environmentally sound management based on the best available scientific information. It establishes: forest-wide multiple-use goals and implementing objectives, forest-wide management requirements, management area direction and management practices, and desired conditions.

Forestwide Goals and Objectives This project is designed to meet the Forestwide Goals and Objectives as stated in Chapter 1 of the Forest Plan. The activities in this project will contribute to the social and economic well-being of the local communities by providing a variety of uses, values, and products that are within the capabilities of the land. Specifically, the project proposal is responding to Goal 2.4 “Respond to disturbance events (storms, wildfires, disease, or insect attacks, etc.) in a timely manner. Salvage damaged forest resources when compatible with management prescriptions.”

Forestwide Standards and Guidelines Forestwide Standards and Guidelines (S & G’s), as stated in Chapter 2 of the Forest Plan, are required design elements for all projects. Some projects may require mitigation measures, which are additional steps to lessen the effects of an activity that go beyond the mandatory compliance of the Forestwide S & G’s. The S & G’s were developed to include protective measures that are inclusive of most conditions or circumstances that are encountered at the project level. These S & G’s are automatically incorporated into our project-level planning, design, and implementation.

Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need for Action Page 6 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Management Prescriptions Management Prescriptions (MP) provide administrative direction for project-level planning on distinct geographic units including the desired condition for the area. The FHI project area falls within five MPs. • MP 1.1 (Forest Plan Chapter 3, pages 3-3 to 3-5). • MP 2.1 (Forest Plan Chapter 3, pages 3-11 to 3-12). • MP 6.1 (Forest Plan Chapter 3, pages 3-33 to 3-36). • MP 6.2 (Forest Plan Chapter 3, pages 3-37 to 3-39). • MP 8.1 (Forest Plan Chapter 3, pages 3-49 to 3-64).

MP 1.1 - Natural Community Restoration, Roaded Natural ROS This prescription emphasizes restoration of natural communities while providing a roaded natural recreation experience. MP 1.1 consists of distinctive ecological areas, each differing with respect to flora, fauna, natural communities, watersheds, and landform. The desired condition will vary based on the characteristics of respective natural community types as described for each management area. Specific Goals and Desired Conditions for MP 1.1 can be found on page 3-3 and in Appendix A of the Forest Plan. Several MP 1.1 areas lie within the project boundary. They include: • Current River Watershed (Salem Ranger District) • Eleven Point Breaks (Doniphan/Eleven Point Ranger District) • Bald Hill Glades/Woodland (Doniphan/Eleven Point Ranger District) • Current River Pinery (Doniphan/Eleven Point Ranger District) • North Fork River (Willow Springs Ranger District)

MP 2.1 – General Forest, Roaded Natural ROS This prescription emphasizes multiple use resource objectives while allowing for the enhancement of natural communities, improvement of forest health conditions, and roaded natural recreation experiences. Multiple use resource objectives provide a wide variety of goods, uses, and services including wood products, forage, other products, visual quality, developed and dispersed recreation opportunities, and habitat for a variety of terrestrial and aquatic wildlife, fish, and other biota. Specific Goals and Desired Conditions for MP 2.1 can be found on page 3-11 of the Forest Plan.

MP 6.1 – Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized ROS This prescription features management of natural vegetative communities under limited investments to provide non-motorized semi-primitive dispersed recreation. Specific Goals and Desired Conditions for MP 6.1 can be found on page 3-33 of the Forest Plan.

MP 6.2 – Semi-Primitive Motorized ROS This prescription features the management of natural vegetative communities under limited investments to enhance the semi-primitive motorized dispersed recreation experience. Specific Goals and Desired Conditions for MP 6.2 can be found on page 3-37 of the Forest Plan.

MP 8.1 – Designated “Special Areas” Other than Wilderness

This prescription describes a variety of designated “special areas” other than Wilderness. They exist for the protection of unusual environmental, recreational, cultural, or historic resources, and

Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need for Action Page 7 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

for scientific or educational studies. Specific Goals and Desired Conditions for MP 8.1 can be found on page 3-49 of the Forest Plan. Standards and Guidelines specific to the Lower Current River Special Area can be found on page 3-60 of the Forest Plan.

Forest Health Initiative Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action

The main objective of this project is to examine opportunities to minimize adverse impacts from insects and disease while protecting other forest resources within the constraints of the Forest Plan. The purpose for proposing management in this project is to achieve the following objectives: • Reduce the risk or extent of, or increase the resilience to, insect or disease infestations in designated areas.

• Treat areas of high risk by focusing on the removal of dead and dying white, black, red and scarlet oaks.

• Provide for safety of forest users, adjacent landowners, and other values at risk by reducing hazards from falling debris.

• Recover valuable timber products through harvest.

• Move the Analysis Area toward each Management Prescriptions Desired Condition identified in the Forest Plan.

• Utilize the existing Transportation system and/or provide a safe and efficient Transportation system that meets the implementation requirements of the FHI project area.

When determining how to achieve these objectives, we also considered several other factors.

Treat areas of heavy tree mortality, insect and disease infestation, and oak decline. As insect and disease infestations become epidemic, infestations spill over into otherwise healthy host trees, putting additional stress on the forest. We need to remove available brood trees to reduce future insect outbreaks.

Adjacent Landowner concerns pertaining to land lines (fence) and project activity access. As with many projects on the MTNF, accurate established landline boundaries and access to project activities on National Forest System lands will be of concern to many.

Federally listed and proposed species that may have suitable habitat and may occur in the project area. In project development and refinement, known occupied sites of federally listed and proposed species and sensitive habitats were identified and avoided.

Reduce standing dead or dying trees along utility rights-of way A number of utility companies have rights of ways across lands managed by the Forest Service. They provide electric and telephone service to both local and non-local users, as authorized under Special Use Permit administration. It is important to assist these companies in providing

Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need for Action Page 8 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

services to customers, due to needs for electricity for life-support systems, to industry, and communication for emergency and medical professions.

Provide firewood removal areas after treatments are completed. Many local residents have wood heat as the primary or only source of heat for their homes. They look to the National Forest or dependable supplies of firewood.

Reduce the amount of slash or other vegetation in order to minimize damage from wildland fire. The public, Forest Service employees, and other agency representatives are concerned about damage and cost to suppress wildland fires due to an increase in dead or dying trees, and increase in heavy fuels that may contribute to more intense wildland fires. Wildland fires that are difficult to control have more potential to cause damage to private property and forest resources. Standing trees can produce a hazard of throwing fire and sparks across control lines. If weakened by fire trees can fall across roads.

Old Growth Several factors are considered when evaluating stands for old growth designation. They include condition of stand, existing old-growth characteristics, a potential to develop old growth characteristics, location of the stand, and location of sensitive areas that could be better protected with this designation adjacent. In this analysis, special attention will be paid to areas of mortality and the loss of old growth characteristics to previously designated old growth stands. Stands previously designated as old growth would not be harvested in this project.

Reduce the spread of non-native and invasive plants (NNIP) The proposed vegetative treatments have the potential to spread existing infestations of NNIP in the analysis area. The Integrated Non-Native Invasive Plant Control Project (Record of Decision dated 02/14/2012) would continue to be implemented and includes managing existing and future NNIP infestations through an integrated approach using a combination of chemical, manual, mechanical, and biological control methods.

Discovery of Cultural Resources during Project Implementation Although the cultural resources surveys completed for this project are designed to locate all archaeological sites and site components that might be eligible for the National Register, such sites and site components may go undetected for a variety of reasons. Pursuant to the provisions found in 36 CFR 800.13 and as per MTNF policy, should any previously unrecorded cultural resources be discovered during project implementation, activities that may be affecting that resource will be halted immediately; the resource will be evaluated by a professional archaeologist and consultation will be initiated with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), consulting Tribal Historic Preservation Offices (THPOs), and with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, if required, to determine if the site meets the definition of an historic property as per 36 CFR 800.16(l)(1), and if so, to determine appropriate actions for protecting the resource and for mitigating any adverse effects on the resource. Project activities will not be resumed until the resource is adequately protected and until agreed-upon mitigation measures are implemented with SHPO approval.

Promote healthy forest ecosystems where productivity and sustainability of multiple resources and ecological values are resilient to disturbance.

Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need for Action Page 9 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

We need to increase species diversity and begin to change the species composition of the remaining dominant trees to a mix of white oaks, shortleaf pine and red oaks. Such a composition better reflects the adapted natural diversity of the forest and woodlands in the Analysis Area, which has been dramatically changed over the last century due to human use and occupation. The change will help make forest vegetation more resilient to natural disturbances (such as insect outbreaks and extended drought), and result in a healthier future forest that can better withstand the types of stresses acting on today's forests.

In order to move the analysis area towards the desired condition for MP’s 1.1, 2.1, 6.1, 6.2, and 8.1, the following specific management needs were identified for the FHI project: Need 1: Restore, enhance, and maintain the structure, composition, and function of distinctive terrestrial and aquatic natural communities. (MP 1.1) Need 2: Improve forest health and enhance natural communities by encouraging a variety of desirable natural species at a desirable stocking rate. (MP 2.1) Need 3: Manage natural vegetative communities and their successional stages under limited investment. (MP 6.1 & 6.2) Need 4: Provide and protect a wide diversity of habitats to meet the needs of plants, fish, and wildlife species including federally listed and proposed species. Need 5: Provide a variety of uses, products, and values by managing in support of desired ecological conditions. (MP 1.1) Need 6: Protect and appropriately manage areas of special scientific, biological, historical, ecological, geological, scenic, recreational, and educational significance. (MP 8.1) Need 7: Provide a safe and efficient transportation system that meets the implementation needs of the FHI project area.

There may be additional Associated and Connected actions or follow-up treatments which would be required to implement the above Needs. (i.e. Site Preparation, Tree planting)

Forest Health Initiative Proposed Action

In an effort to limit the potential adverse effects of insect infestation on forest health, the Forest Service has proposed a range of management activities on approximately 45,885 acres of National Forest land distributed over a 951,445 acre area located on the Salem, Potosi, Willow Springs, Eleven Point and Poplar Bluff Ranger Districts of the MTNF. Implementation would occur within the next five to ten years. Management activities would include commercial timber harvests and reforestation treatments.

Management of forest resources is provided in the Forest Plan approved in 2005. The principal objective in harvesting timber is to promote growth and resilience, or regenerate a stand to maintain it in a healthy vigorous condition to meet a number of resource management objectives. These include enhancing forest health and species diversity, restoring historic natural vegetation and community type, visual management, wildlife habitat, timber quality, and integrated pest management. Specific harvest methods are defined in Appendix D of the Forest Plan. The detailed management actions listed in this document (see Table C-1: Compartment/Stand Treatment Activity

Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need for Action Page 10 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

listing in Appendix C) are given with approximate measures. The following actions are proposed in the project area:

Hardwood Regeneration Harvest (FACTS Code 4117, 4121, 4131, 4132, 4143, 4145) Even-aged methods regenerate and maintain a stand with a single age class. A mix of regeneration methods (506 stands, approximately 9,040 acres) are proposed under this action. The decision on which regeneration harvest method to use is based on desired condition, management objectives, stand conditions, and the silvical characteristics of the species present or desired. In stands with a pine component, selected pines may be removed.

• Clearcut with Reserves - 156 stands, (approx. 2,773 acres). A Clearcut with Reserves removes essentially all trees in the stand except for reserve trees, producing an exposed microclimate for the development of a new age class in one entry. Regeneration can be from coppice (stump sprouting), natural seeding, planted seedlings, or advance reproduction. Varying numbers of reserve trees are not harvested to attain goals other than regeneration. Future stand-tending measures within the next 10-20 years may include planting, and timber stand improvement measures, such as site preparation and release. Forestwide S & G’s require a minimum of 7 to 10 percent of all even-aged harvest units (including clearcuts) be retained as reserve trees. • Shelterwood Preparatory Cut – 21 stands, (approx. 374 acres). Shelterwood with reserves is the cutting of most trees, leaving those needed to produce sufficient shade to produce a new age class in a moderated microenvironment. The sequence of shelterwood cutting can include three types: a preparatory cut, and establishment cut, and a removal cut. This treatment is a preparatory cut to enhance conditions for seed production. Some of the shelterwood trees or other reserve trees are retained after regeneration has become established to attain goals other than regeneration. • Shelterwood Establishment Cut – 152 stands, (approx. 2,825 acres). Shelterwood with reserves involves reducing the number of trees in a stand to retain 20-30 ft2, leaving those trees needed to produce sufficient shade and a new age class in a moderated microenvironment. The sequence of shelterwood cutting can include three types: a preparatory cut, and establishment cut, and a removal cut. This shelterwood establishment cut would focus on preparing mature, even-aged stands for the establishment of new pine and oak-hickory seedlings and stimulating the growth of existing seedlings by increasing light to the forest floor. This would be accomplished through the removal of low quality or declining black and scarlet oak, low quality other species, and midstory trees, and by exposing some soil during harvest operations. A site preparation for natural regeneration would take place by chainsaw felling midstory, noncommercial stems after harvest. Some of the shelterwood trees or other reserve trees are retained after regeneration has become established to attain goals other than regeneration. • Seed tree Seed Cut - 163 stands, (approx. 2,791 acres). This treatment is the harvest of all trees except for a small number of widely dispersed trees retained for seed production, and to produce a new age class in a fully exposed microenvironment. Some of the seed trees or other reserve trees are retained after regeneration has become established, sometimes indefinitely, to attain goals (e.g., wildlife habitat) other than regeneration. In a seed tree with reserves all of the overstory trees would be removed except for large pine seed trees and other species left to maintain at least 10-15 ft2 basal area. This treatment would be followed with site preparation. A site preparation for

Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need for Action Page 11 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

natural regeneration would take place by chainsaw felling midstory, noncommercial stems after harvest. • Overstory Removal Cut – Three stands, (approx. 69 acres). An overstory removal treatment is used on sites where there is acceptable regeneration resulting from a preceding seed tree cut, shelterwood cut, oak decline, or wildfire. The removal of some or all of the remaining overstory trees that would inhibit the new stand’s proper growth and development would be carried out. Reserve trees should be longer-lived pine or white oak, where available, to meet wildlife needs for mast and cover. The residual overstory would consist mostly of trees with a life expectancy of 20 years or greater and would average below 30% stocking, thus allowing the regenerating stand to fully utilize the site’s resources. • Shelterwood Removal Cut – 11 stands, (approx. 208 acres). Shelterwood with reserves is the cutting of most trees, leaving those needed to produce sufficient shade to produce a new age class in a moderated microenvironment. The sequence of shelterwood cutting can include three types: a preparatory cut, and establishment cut, and a removal cut. This removal cut treatment would remove some or all of the remaining overstory trees that would inhibit the new stand’s proper growth and development. Any reserve trees should be longer-lived pine or white oak, where available, to meet wildlife needs for mast and cover. The residual overstory would consist mostly of trees with a life expectancy of 20 years or greater. Some of the shelterwood trees or other reserve trees are retained after regeneration has become established to attain goals other than regeneration.

Hardwood Salvage Harvest (FACTS Code 4231) Forest health would be improved in 1,035 stands on 21,693 acres through the salvage of merchantable dead and dying black, scarlet, northern red oaks (Red oak group) and white oak. The poor health condition of these stands is a result of oak decline and advanced age. Removal of dead, dying, or damaged trees provides an opportunity to enhance the conditions of terrestrial natural communities, improve current forest health conditions, provide timber and wood products to the local economy, and address hazardous fuel conditions. The proposed action captures mortality that will otherwise be lost due to senescence. In stands with a pine component, selected pines may be removed.

• Salvage Cut – 1,035 stands, (approx. 21,693 acres). Forest Health would be improved mostly through the salvage of merchantable dead and dying black, scarlet, and northern red oaks (Red oak group). Salvage harvests remove trees that are dying, damaged, or recently destroyed by injurious agents other than competition. Much of the mortality in these stands is associated with oak decline as a result of extended drought conditions and insect and disease infestations. For those stands in MP 1.1, these treated areas also represent regeneration opening opportunities in open and closed woodland natural communities, as well as opportunities to manipulate vegetation species composition that closer resembles the natural community type. This treatment may be followed with site preparation. A site preparation for natural regeneration would take place by chainsaw felling midstory, noncommercial stems after harvest for most stands. This treatment would contribute increased development of shrub, grass, and/or forb habitat.

Hardwood Intermediate Harvest (FACTS Code 4232, 4152, 4220, 4221)

Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need for Action Page 12 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

A mix of Intermediate Harvest methods in 726 stands, (approximately 15,152 acres) are proposed under this action. Uneven-aged methods are also proposed with this action. Uneven aged harvest method maintains a multi-aged structure by removing some trees in all size classes either singly or in small groups. The decision on which intermediate harvest method to use is based on species composition, desired condition, management objectives, stand conditions, and the silvical characteristics of the species present or desired. In stands with a pine component, selected pines may be removed.

• Group Selection Cut – 141 stands, (approx. 2,808 acres). Uneven-aged treatments are designed to move the stand in a direction of having three or more 20-year age classes developed within the stand. With an uneven-aged system, a portion of each stand must be harvested on a routine cutting cycle such as 15 to 20 years. Our residual stands would consist mostly of trees with a remaining life expectancy of 20 years or greater. White oak would become more prevalent because of its longer life expectancy; white oaks tolerate more shade than red oaks, so would also accumulate in relatively greater numbers in the younger age classes. This treatment would create conditions to favor development of a new age class of shade intolerant tree species including oaks, hickories and shortleaf pine and reduce the trend of conversion to shade tolerant species using a combination of individual tree selection and group selection as necessary. Favoring longer lived species such as white oak would allow these stands to begin transitioning into the desired condition of the 1.1 Management Prescription. Site preparation for natural regeneration treatment may take place in these stands by chainsaw felling suppressed, noncommercial or damaged stems following harvest for most stands. Trees to be felled will be within the openings created by the harvest to ensure a good representation of the seedling/sapling size class within the stand. • Commercial Thin – 181 stands, (approx. 3,318 acres). Commercial thinning is an intermediate harvest treatment that reduces the basal area of a stand by harvesting and removing trees by means of a commercial timber sale. Thinning would focus primarily on the oaks species. Treatment would occur in predominantly immature, smaller diameter pine and pine-oak stands that have basal areas greater than 130. This treatment would improve growth and wind firmness of residual trees, and improve canopy openness. • Restoration Thin – 286 stands, (approx. 6,398 acres). Poorer quality, declining or excess black and scarlet oak would be the primary focus of removal. More vigorous, dominant and co-dominant pine and oak-hickory would be favored for retention to enhance the natural community. Increased light reaching the forest floor would stimulate the growth of existing oak and pine seedlings and herbaceous cover. • Sanitation Cut – 118 stands, (approx. 2,628 acres). Sanitation cuts harvest trees that are of poor quality, at risk of dying during the next 5-10 years, and to reduce stocking in overly-dense stands to enhance residual tree survival, health and growth. This treatment also allows for faster growth of the best trees to avoid stagnation, insect and disease problems and promotes larger diameter trees in a shorter time frame. Opening up the stand would maintain and encourage a forage component (desirable in MP 1.1) in the stand by allowing more light to reach the ground. Leaving the best-formed, healthiest and youngest trees in the dominant size class in the stand for future growth would be the practice in these stands. Removing the high risk and poor quality trees would be the objective.

Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need for Action Page 13 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

To implement the proposed action there are Forest Service System roads, non-system roads, and temporary roads that would need to be utilized.

System roads and Non-system roads Roads under Forest Service jurisdiction are categorized by either: 1) National Forest System road (System road), or 2) National Forest non-system road (non-system road). The project area contains 228 National Forest System Roads that would be used for access to project activities, with a combined length of 395 miles. These System roads are needed for long-term motorized access and to manage forest resources. System roads are marked at the beginning of the road with brown Carsonite posts showing the road’s number (marked with FR (Forest Road) and then the road number, i.e. FR 2275) and length. There are also approximately 194 miles of non- system roads in the FHI project area. Non-system roads are not managed as part of the Forest Transportation System, and are not open to motorized vehicles. Non-system roads under special use permit would not be decommissioned. The implementation of the actions below would improve watershed health by reducing sedimentation and are planned for System Roads in the FHI project:

• System Road Maintenance Approximately 163 miles of System roads would require road maintenance to facilitate timber harvesting. System road maintenance activities are preventive measures used to stabilize the road, protect road investments, and minimize disturbance to surrounding resources. Activities associated with System road maintenance and improvement may include surface blading, replacement of driving surface material, mowing and limbing of roadside vegetation, cleaning and restoring drainage features, and replacing signs.

• System Road Reconstruction Approximately 85 miles of System roads would require reconstruction to facilitate timber harvesting. The conditions of these roads have deteriorated over time and currently do not meet Forest Service engineering standards. Reconstruction to Forest Service engineering standards (Forest Service Handbook 7700) would result in a long- term reduction in road-related erosion and sediment. System road reconstruction consists of clearing vegetation from the roadway, installing drainage features, and adding aggregate to harden the road-driving surface of the road. In some cases, realignment of the road may be necessary.

Temporary roads Approximately 63.7 miles of temporary roads would need to be constructed to provide temporary road access to timber stands that complements the permanent road system for effective resource management. These are a combination existing temporary roads and temporary roads that do not currently exist that would need to be newly constructed. Temporary roads would be closed or decommissioned after they are no longer needed for management activities. Road decommissioning may involve one or more of the following treatments: blocking access with earthen berms, rock berms, boulders, or slash piles; restoration of natural drainage features by removing culverts and re-contouring the area; scarification to remove the roadbed; re-vegetation by seeding, planting, or fertilizing; and signing to discourage motorized use of the road.

Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need for Action Page 14 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

All actions are compliant with the Forest Plan, and each has incorporated S & G’s in their design.

Connected and Associated Actions (Follow-up treatments) • Natural Regeneration (Site Preparation/Understory Control) - After the harvest removes the targeted commercial sized trees in each of the treatments above, follow-up site preparation consisting of cutting species such as dogwood, red maple, sassafras, suppressed oaks, or other poorly formed or severely damaged woody species could occur. This follow- up treatment would promote the development of desired oak-hickory and shortleaf pine tree seedlings that more closely reflect the natural community type and will help make the future stand more resilient. These small (generally understory) trees are usually 5-30 feet tall and have little to no commercial timber value. This cutting would increase the light levels to the ground, reduce competition and shading and prolongs the ground forage (grasses, forbs) benefits. Trees specially designated for retention on the site would not be cut. Even aged site prep could occur on 1241 stands (24,194 acres). Uneven aged site prep could occur on 534 stands (11,071 acres). Understory control could occur on 226 stands (4,992 acres).

• Tree planting – Full planting of shortleaf pine (10 x 10 spacing) is prescribed on 468 stands (9,773 acres) and would also be considered (Supplemental 20 x 20 spacing) on selected salvage or even-age harvest sites following post-harvest stocking surveys that indicate a lack of regeneration of acceptable species in the desired numbers. Planting shortleaf pine would initiate reestablishment of the historical natural community type. Within 3-5 years, all regenerated areas would be fully stocked with pine and oak-hickory saplings.

• Pre-commercial thinning (PCT) – 10 stands (approx. 89 acres) – A follow-up post-sale treatment to further influence the composition of regeneration in the stem exclusion stages of stand development is planned in the project area. Also, a silvicultural standard, a crown release of individual “crop trees” is usually completed in stands 15-25 years of age, and is typically carried out on a 20x20 spacing for crop tree selection. Prioritizing individuals that are already expressing dominance and superior form over less desirable species and poorly formed trees significantly influences the composition of the future dominant overstory. Favoring white oak, well-formed black oak, pine, as well as scarlet oak, walnut, or sugar maple over black gum, red maple, post oak, and in some cases hickory ensures a higher diversity for the future stand, again increasing the resiliency, diversity, and growth potential of the stand. Any additional stands with a regeneration harvest may be evaluated and treated in the timeframe discussed above.

Decision Framework

The Forest Supervisor of the MTNF is the responsible official for selecting an alternative for the FHI project area. Given the purpose and need, the responsible official reviews the proposed action, other alternatives, and the environmental consequences in order to make the following decisions:

• Whether the proposed activities and alternatives are responsive to the issues, accomplish Forest Plan direction, and meet the purpose and need as defined for the FHI project, • Which actions or alternative to approve and implement, • Whether the information in this analysis is sufficient to make an informed decision, • Whether a Non-significant Forest Plan Amendment is needed, and

Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need for Action Page 15 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

• If the activities can be implemented in a timely manner.

The decision is not one of land allocation, nor is the analysis intended to look at every possible combination of activities. The scope of the decision will be confined to a reasonable range of alternatives that will meet the projects purpose and need.

Public Involvement

The FHI project was initiated with two collaborative meetings and field visit in September, 2015 and then the mailing to 1,279 addresses (either hard copy or e-mail) of a scoping letter to each District mailing list, Tribal Governments, and Adjacent Neighbors on November 9, 2015. This project was also posted on the Forest-wide Schedule of Proposed Actions (SOPA) on November 11, 2015 and the information has been accessible through the MTNF website since then.

Comments received during and after the scoping period were accepted and evaluated in the development of issues and alternatives to the proposed action. Several days prior (12-09-15) to the requested deadline for receiving comments (12-14-15) and after receiving multiple requests for an extension to the scoping deadline, Forest Supervisor Bill Nightingale extended the deadline for receiving comments during the scoping phase of the project to January 19, 2016. This notification was placed on the MTNF Website and several interested parties who requested an extension, were notified. On January 19, 2016 the planned closing of the scoping period, the Forest Service public facing NEPA Projects Page was not working properly and would not load. This made it difficult for the public to view and respond to the project. A decision was made to accept scoping comments thru the close of business (4:30 p.m. local time) January 25, 2016. This notification was also placed on the MTNF Website. As of the close of business January 25, 2016 (requested deadline for receiving comments), 91 comment letters were received from individuals and organizations. There were also seven comments/requests received after January 25, 2016. All comment letters received were reviewed and evaluated by members of the IDT and the deciding official on April 26, 2016.

The largest request during scoping was for project information or requests to be kept informed. Visual quality after completion of harvest activities either along scenic roads or along property lines ranked high in many public comments. General project concerns and specific timber harvest effects also ranked high in the comments received. Opposition to clearcut harvesting or opposition to the project in its entirety was also identified in comments made. Other partial listing of concerns include: Support for the project, Heritage resource protection, Old growth designation, Scoping period extension and General information sharing.

On March 2, 2017, a final collaborative meeting for the project was held. Six of the past collaborative partners participated with the Forest Supervisor and Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) members discussing the project proposal, changes resulting from public involvement and upcoming plans for the project.

On March 20, 2017, Forest Supervisor Sherri Schwenke mailed a letter and e-mail to notify interested parties and neighbors of the projects 30 day comment period. The document Proposed Action and Preliminary Alternatives for 30-day Comment Period along with supporting documents and maps was posted on the Mark Twain National Forest website and was available for review as of March 22, 2017. The Rolla Daily News newspaper, Rolla, Missouri (newspaper of record) published a legal notice on March 23, 2017 to begin the official 30 day comment period and a

Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need for Action Page 16 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

digital image of the notice was published on the website that same day. After the 30 day comment period the ID Team and the Forest Supervisor reviewed the comments received both internally and externally to see if any new key issues or alternatives were identified. None were identified or formed. The Mark Twain National Forest received 19 responses as a result of the 30-day comment period. Eighteen comment letters were received by the close of the comment period which ended on April 24, 2017 and those commenters have standing to file an objection. One comment letter was received after the close of the comment period and was reviewed by the ID Team as well. A summary and response to comments can be found in the FHI project file.

From the beginning of the project, a wide range of views surfaced about the project. Responses ranged from support of the project, to general concerns over silvicultural prescriptions adjacent to private property, to total opposition of the project. Visual concerns along a Scenic byway on the Willow Springs Ranger District received the most concerns.

Issues

In accordance with laws and regulations, factors such as vegetation, wildlife, threatened and endangered species, water and air quality and cultural resources will be addressed in the analysis. The IDT separated the issues into two groups: key issues and non-key issues. Key issues were defined as those that directly or indirectly generate a point of disagreement, debate or dispute over the proposed action based on environmental effects. Non-key issues were identified as those: 1) outside the scope of the proposed action; 2) already decided by law, regulation, Forest Plan, or other higher level decision; 3) irrelevant to the decision to be made; or 4) conjectural and not supported by scientific or factual evidence. The responsible official reviewed and concurred with the key and non-key issues. The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) NEPA regulations explain this delineation in Sec. 1501.7, “…identify and eliminate from detailed study the issues which are not significant or which have been covered by prior environmental review (Sec. 1506.3)…”

A: Key Issues Considered

The purpose of soliciting comments is to determine where there are any unresolved issues that affect a resource, the proposed action or another alternative. Many issues and concerns originating from public comments and internal agency concerns, are identified for analysis. Using the comments from the public, county officials, other agencies, and organizations, the interdisciplinary team determined that no “key issues” were identified from public comments.

B: Non-key Issues Considered but already decided by law, regulation, Forest Plan, or other higher level decision

Non-key Issue: Discovery of Cultural Resources during Project Implementation: Although the cultural resources surveys completed for this project are designed to locate all archaeological sites and site components that might be eligible for the National Register, such sites and site components may go undetected for a variety of reasons. Pursuant to the provisions found in 36 CFR 800.13 and as per MTNF policy, should any previously unrecorded cultural resources be discovered during project implementation, activities that may be affecting that resource will be halted immediately; the resource will be evaluated by a professional archaeologist and consultation will be initiated with the State Historic Preservation Office, consulting Tribal Historic Preservation Offices, and with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, if required, to determine if the site

Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need for Action Page 17 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

meets the definition of an historic property as per 36 CFR 800.16(l)(1), and if so, to determine appropriate actions for protecting the resource and for mitigating any adverse effects on the resource. Project activities will not be resumed until the resource is adequately protected and until agreed-upon mitigation measures are implemented with SHPO approval.

Non-key Issue: Visuals along scenic roadways: Treating areas of heavy standing dead and dying trees, insect and disease infestation, and oak decline along designated National Forest Scenic Byways (i.e. State Highway 181 on Willow Springs Ranger District - Blue Buck Knob) was a concern from the start of the project. Development and implementation of Visual Mitigation Measure VR1 should minimize the visual impact of harvest activities and vehicle-forest debris collisions.

Visual Mitigation Measure VR1: Where possible and feasible in stands with an assigned Visual Quality Objective (VQO) of Retention, remove only standing hazard trees, trees with signs of oak decline, and damaged trees in the near foreground (0-300 feet) along the following: 1. Travelways State Highways 19, 32, 181-National scenic byway State Routes DD, C, AP, AA Forest Roads 2245, 3145, 3190, 3152, 3002, 3155 County Road 156, 127 U.S. Highway 67 2. The Ozark Trail.

Table 3-29 page 138 (Maximum residue treatment heights) found later in the Visual Resource section of this document should also minimize the visual quality impact of harvest activities.

Non-key issue: Project implementation/timeline consideration: It had been requested that an alternative be developed that implements the proposal over a timespan greater than 5 years (as originally stated in the Scoping report). Timing of implementation and effects of implementing the activities on all resources has been considered in the EA (including cumulative effects of activities from other landowners). As stated in this EA on page 76, “It is optimistic to foresee completing the proposed activities of harvest and site preparation within the next decade, given normally flat annual budgets and limited manpower. However, it is conceivable that the majority of work should be able to be accomplished before the inevitable decline that is expected progresses to the point that a commercial treatment is no longer viable.” With this being disclosed, no need for alternative development with this concern.

Relationship of the Forest Health Initiative project to other documents

Previous environmental analyses have been written with many activities similar to those proposed in the FHI project, even similar in geographical area as in this project. The analysis done for these other documents did not reveal any significant effects from their proposed activities (i.e. timber harvesting, prescribed burning, old growth designation, and grazing). Post activity monitoring on the MTNF Ranger Districts have verified that the analyses were compliant with the NEPA documents and the effects were as displayed.

Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need for Action Page 18 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

In the past 14 years, site-specific projects were conducted whose decisions affected the FHI project area. The following environmental analyses and resulting vegetation management activities were implemented within or in the close proximity to the FHI project area boundary (Forest Service decision type and signature dates shown in parentheses):

• 2016 – East Fork Huzzah Analysis Area - #43455 (DN, 04/20/2016) • 2016 – Paty Hollow and Big Barren Tornado Salvage Project - #48177 (Decision Memo (DM), 1/21/2016) • 2016 – MO National Guard New Road Construction - # 48624 (DM, 3-14,2016) • 2016 – Crane Lake Trail Re-route - # 47882 (DM, 9/1/2016) • 2016 – Floyd Natural Community restoration project - #44288 (DN, 11/16/2016) • 2015 – Fremont - Pineknot East Restoration Project - #39955 (DN, 7/31/15) • 2013 – Indian Creek Project - #41174 (DN, 9/5/13) • 2013 – Cattail Creek Salvage Project - #36739 (DM, 8/8/13) • 2013 – Hickory Creek Salvage Project - #36740 (1/25/2013) • 2013 – Northeast Lake –# 29409 (DN, 3/6/2013) • 2013 – Bunker Area Derecho Fuels - #40067 (DN, 12/17/2013) • 2012 – Integrated Non-Native Invasive Plant Control Project - #30341 (ROD, 02/14/2012) • 2012 – Pineknot Community Prescribed Burn Project (DM, 2/24/2012) • 2011– Van Buren Project - #33359 (DN, 9/07/11) • 2011 – Wolf Mountain Natural Community Restoration Prescribed Burn Project #31473 (DM, 9/28/2011) • 2009 – Cane Ridge West - #19793 (DN, 9/25/09) • 2009 – Handy Natural Community Restoration - #22820 (DN, 10/21/09) • 2009 – Shirley Project - #25612 (DN, 6/3/2009) • 2007 – Shoal Creek - #18216 (DN, 6/27/2007) • 2007 – Westside Project - #15830 (DN, 4/11/07) • 2007 – Camp 8 Natural Community Restoration - #19473 (DN, 10/24/07) • 2006 – Compton - #5787 (DN, 8/28/06) • 2005 – Possum Trot Vegetation Management Projects 20506 - #2594 (DN, 8/12/2005) • 2004 – Crooked Creek Project 70202 - #417 (DN, 11/1/2004) • 2003 – Carman Springs Wildlife Habitat Enhancement Project 10204 - #333 (DN, 11/25/2003)

Programmatic documents

Mark Twain National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan Final Environment Impact Statement and Record of Decision (Mark Twain National Forest 9/2005).

The Forest Plan is a programmatic document, which is required by the rules implementing the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974 (RPA), as amended by the National Forest Management Act of 1976 (NFMA), the 1969 NEPA, and other laws and associated regulations.

The Forest Plan provides guidance for all resource management activities on the MTNF. It establishes: Forest-wide multiple-use goals and implementing objectives; Forest-wide management requirements (known as Forest-wide Standards and Guidelines); Management Area direction,

Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need for Action Page 19 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

including area-specific standards and guidelines, desired conditions, and management practices; identification of lands suited/not suited for timber management; monitoring and evaluation requirements; and recommendations to Congress for additional Wilderness.

The planning process and analysis procedures used to develop the Forest Plan are described in Appendix B of the MTNF – FEIS. The Forest Plan sets management direction for the MTNF through the establishment of short-term (first decade, 10 years) and long-range goals and objectives through the year 2055 (See MTNF – FEIS, Chapter 3, and Appendix B).

Mark Twain National Forest Programmatic Biological Assessment – Forest Plan Revision (Mark Twain National Forest, June 2005) and Programmatic Biological Opinion for the Mark Twain National Forest – 2005 Forest Plan (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, September 2005)

Federal agencies are required to comply with provisions of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended. This includes a requirement to consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on projects which may affect species federally listed as Threatened or Endangered (TE).

This analysis is tiered to the following programmatic documents:

• The Mark Twain National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision (9/05). • Mark Twain National Forest Programmatic Biological Assessment (Mark Twain National Forest September 2005). • Programmatic Biological Opinion for the Mark Twain National Forest – 2005 Forest Plan (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, September 2005).

The following analyses are incorporated by reference: • The Mark Twain National Forest Monitoring and Evaluation Reports from 1987 through present. • Other Documents: Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment (December 1999) National Fire Plan (January 2001)

Other resources used to prepare this document: • Aerial photo interpretation. • Mark Twain National Forest FSVEG Spatial data. • Missouri Department of Conservation – Heritage database. • NRCS data. • References listed in Appendix A. • Personal observations.

Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need for Action Page 20 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

CHAPTER 2 – ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Introduction

This chapter describes and compares alternatives to the proposed action considered in the FHI project analysis. Information in this chapter will provide the decision maker with a range of alternatives to consider for the FHI project. Some of the information used to compare the alternatives is based upon the design of the alternative (i.e., use of commercial harvest vs. non- commercial harvest) and some of the information is based upon the environmental, social and economic effects of implementing each alternative (i.e., the amount of habitat available to threatened or endangered species). The process used to develop alternatives, the description of alternatives to be analyzed in further detail, a comparison of those alternatives and the reasoning for eliminating other alternatives that were considered from further analysis will be explored in this chapter of the analysis.

Formulation of Alternatives

The Responsible Official and IDT analyzed both internal and external comments received during the scoping period and official 30-day comment period. Alternatives are developed to respond to the unresolved issues as they related to the purpose and need for this project, laws, regulations, and policies that govern land use on the National Forest System lands.

As stated in the previous chapter, the MTNF received 91 responses from individuals and organizations to the activities identified in the FHI scoping document and 19 responses were received during the official 30-day comment period. A summary and response to comments can be found in the FHI project file. As mentioned earlier, responses ranged from support of the project to opposition of harvest proposed actions.

If the project is implemented as it stands, actual amounts of activities on the ground (measured in acres, miles, and numbers) may vary due to environmental, social and financial conditions. Advances in mapping technology and data management may account for some differences between planned activity amounts and those amounts actually implemented. All changes would be evaluated to ensure that any effects are within the environmental parameters of the effects analyzed in this document and would be documented in the FHI area project record.

Alternatives to be Evaluated in Detail

The Forest Service through IDT input along with input and review of the Deciding Official and analysis of the issues, considered two alternatives in the Elder Piney project. The two alternatives developed in detail include the No Action Alternative and Proposed Action Alternative. For a compartment/stand treatment activity listing for these alternatives, see Table D-1 in Appendix D.

From the public comments received and internal concerns, no additional issues could be identified to generate additional action alternatives. Thus, there are only two alternatives identified to be considered in detail. The first is the No Action alternative which covers no commercial logging, and no change in the non-system roads and routes and the second is a modified proposed action

Chapter 2 Alternatives Considered Page 21 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

identified during the scoping phase of project development. Below is a detailed description of these two alternatives.

Alternative 1: (No Action) This alternative is the No Action Alternative required by CEQ and provides a baseline or reference point against which to describe environmental effects of the action alternatives. This is a viable alternative and responds to the concerns of those who want no vegetation management activities (no logging) or no change in the transportation system. The option for future management in this area would not be foreclosed.

If Alternative 1 is selected, current and on-going management activities would continue, but no new federal management activities would be initiated (e.g. no commercial logging). No Forest Plan amendment would be required for selection of this alternative. Changes, such as road maintenance, might occur through current management direction, natural processes, or other management decisions in the future.

Under this alternative, the following activities would continue to occur in the FHI project area as part of the Forest Service’s responsibility to protect National Forest resources and public safety:

1) Resource protection a) Suppress wildfires as they occur. b) Remove hazard trees along roads as they occur. c) Periodically maintain System roads as safe public travel ways. The maintenance standard for this alternative is simply to keep roadways safe to travel.

2) Ongoing Management a) Although this alternative has no vegetative management, fuels treatment, or wildlife habitat improvement activities proposed, projects such as: Indian Creek (Decision Notice (DN) 9/5/13), Shirley (DN, 6/3/09), Freemont-Pineknot East Restoration project (DN, 7/31/15) as well as numerous other projects approved under previous decisions would continue to occur. b) Although the FHI project has no non-native invasive plant control proposed, the Integrated Non-native Invasive Control Project would continue to be implemented as approved (Record of Decision (ROD), dated 2/14/2012).

The decision to implement Alternative 1 would have no effect on the continuation of these activities.

Alternative 2: (Proposed Action) This alternative is the proposed action based on the purpose and need outlined earlier in this document. This represents the IDT’s proposal to move the existing resource condition toward the desired condition as specified in the Forest Plan.

Table 2-1 displays a summary of the FHI Need Statements (identified earlier on page 10) that would allow the forest to move towards the various desired conditions in the project area.

Chapter 2 Alternatives Considered Page 22 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Table 2-1: FHI Need Statement Need Statement FHI Need Statement Number Restore, enhance, and maintain the structure, composition, and function of Need 1 distinctive terrestrial and aquatic natural communities. (MP 1.1) Improve forest health and enhance natural communities by encouraging a variety Need 2 of desirable natural species at a desirable stocking rate. (MP 2.1) Manage natural vegetative communities and their successional stages under Need 3 limited investment. (MP 6.1 & 6.2) Provide and protect a wide diversity of habitats to meet the needs of plants, fish, Need 4 and wildlife species including federally listed and proposed species. Provide a variety of uses, products, and values by managing in support of desired Need 5 ecological conditions. (MP 1.1) Protect and appropriately manage areas of special scientific, biological, historical, Need 6 ecological, geological, scenic, recreational, and educational significance. (MP 8.1) Provide a safe and efficient Transportation system that meets the implementation Need 7 needs of the FHI project area.

Table 2-2 shows a summary of the FHI project Proposed Actions identified earlier on pages 12-17 (providing the number of stands and acres treated).

Table 2-2: FHI Proposed Action Stand and Acre Summary Treatment Type FACTS Code Number of Stands Acres Treated Clearcut with Reserves 4117 156 2,773 Shelterwood Preparatory Cut 4121 21 374 Shelterwood Establishment Cut 4131 152 2,825 Seed tree Seed Cut 4132 163 2,791 Overstory Removal Cut 4143 3 69 Shelterwood Removal Cut 4145 11 208 Group Selection (Uneven-aged) Cut 4152 141 2,808 Commercial Thin 4220 181 3,318 Restoration Thin 4221 286 6,398 Salvage Cut 4231 1035 21,693 Sanitation Cut 4232 118 2,628 Commercial Harvest Totals 2,267 45,885 Plant trees 4431 468 9,773 Even age Site Prep 4493 1241 24,194 UEA Site Prep 4495 534 11,071 Pre-commercial thin 4521 10 89 Control Understory 4540 226 4,992

Chapter 2 Alternatives Considered Page 23 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study

Federal agencies are required by NEPA to rigorously explore and objectively evaluate all reasonable alternatives and to briefly discuss the reasons for eliminating any alternatives that were not developed in detail (40 CFR 1502.14). In general, external comments (public) and internal concerns received in response to the Proposed Action would provide suggestions for alternative methods for achieving the purpose and need, as discussed above.

No additional alternatives were identified or eliminated from further study through the continued development of the FHI project (other than what was displayed in the section above).

Comparison of Key Issues and Treatments by Alternative

As stated in Chapter one of this document, using the comments received from the public, other agencies, and organizations, the interdisciplinary team determined that no “key issues” were identified to assist in the development of additional alternatives to be evaluated in detail.

Table 2-3 shows a comparison of acres treated by alternative for the FHI project.

Table 2-3: FHI Alternative Summary Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Treatment Type Measures Measures (Estimated) (Estimated) Clearcut with Reserves 0 acres (ac.) 2,773 ac. Shelterwood Preparatory Cut 0 ac. 374 ac. Shelterwood Establishment Cut 0 ac. 2,825 ac. Seed tree Seed Cut 0 ac. 2,791 ac. Overstory Removal Cut 0 ac. 69 ac. Shelterwood Removal Cut 0 ac. 208 ac. Group Selection (Uneven-aged) Cut 0 ac. 2,808 ac. Commercial Thin 0 ac. 3,318 ac. Restoration Thin 0 ac. 6,398 ac. Salvage Cut 0 ac. 21,693 ac. Sanitation Cut 0 ac. 2,628 ac. Commercial Harvest Totals 0 ac. 45,885 ac. Plant trees 0 ac. 9,773 ac. Even age Site Prep 0 ac. 24,194 ac. UEA Site Prep 0 ac. 11,071 ac. Pre-commercial thin 0 ac. 89 ac.

Chapter 2 Alternatives Considered Page 24 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Treatment Type Measures Measures (Estimated) (Estimated) Control Understory 0 ac. 4,992 ac. Numbers in this table are approximate values.

Mitigation Measures Common to All Action Alternatives Soils

SR1: Whenever possible, an effort should be made to minimize the land area affected and utilize already disturbed areas or old log landings.

Heritage Resources

CR1: Site Avoidance/Protection during Project Implementation

Avoidance of historic properties [(36 CFR 800.16(l)(1)] will be understood to require the retention of such properties in place and their protection from effects resulting from the undertaking. Effects will be avoided by implementing the following specific actions in the FHI project area:

a) Establishing clearly defined operating conditions, site boundaries, and buffer zones around those sites in areas where commercial timber harvest and/or tree-felling/removal activities will take place that might result in an adverse effect to a historic property. Operating conditions and/or buffer zones will be sufficient to ensure that the integrity of the characteristics and values which contribute to, or may potentially contribute to, the properties' significance under 36 CFR 60.4 will not be adversely affected

b) Routing temporary roads and placing log landings and skid trails away from historic properties where possible; where rerouting is not possible and such roads exist, use of previously established woods roads for hauling timber across cultural resource sites will be permitted only within designated acceptable operating conditions, as defined by Missouri Department of Conservation (2010:20) “Best Management Practices” (e.g., when such roads are dry or frozen and where hauling is unlikely to lead to excessive road rutting and/or erosion)

Where road re-alignment is proposed, routing reconstructed roads away from archaeological sites whenever possible.

CR2: Other Mitigation Measures

If it is not feasible, or necessarily desirable to completely avoid previously undisturbed portions of a historic property that may be harmed by a project activity (CR1), then the following steps will be taken: (1) In consultation with the Missouri State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), the threatened portion(s) of the site(s) will be evaluated against National Register of Historic Places significance criteria (36 CFR 60.4) to determine if that portion of the site contributes to the site’s significance. This evaluation may require subsurface site testing. (2) In consultation with the

Chapter 2 Alternatives Considered Page 25 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Missouri SHPO, and with the Advisory Council if required, mitigation measures will be developed which will lessen, or minimize, the adverse effects on the site, so that a finding of No Adverse Effect results. (3) The agreed-upon mitigation measures will be implemented prior to initiation of project activities that have the potential to affect the historic property.

CR3: Discovery of Unevaluated Cultural Resources during Project Implementation

The cultural resources surveys completed for this project were designed to identify historic properties within the area of potential effects, as defined in 36 C.F.R. 800.16(l)(1). However, some sites and site components may have been, or go, undetected for a variety of reasons and as such are considered to be unevaluated for National Register eligibility. Should any previously unrecorded site(s) be discovered during project implementation, activities that may be affect the resource will be halted immediately. The resource would be evaluated by an archaeologist, and consultation would be initiated with the Missouri State Historic Preservation Officer, consulting Federally- recognized Native American Tribes, and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, if required. If evaluation determines that the site is not eligible for inclusion in the NRHP, no further management action will be taken. If determined to meet the criteria for consideration as an historic property, the evaluation and consultation would determine appropriate actions for protecting the resource and for mitigating any adverse effects on the resource.

Project activities at that location would not be resumed until the historic property is adequately protected and mitigation measures were implemented as approved by the Missouri State Historic Preservation Officer, and in consultation with affiliated Federally-recognized Tribes.

Visual Resources

VR1: Where possible and feasible in stands with an assigned VQO of Retention, remove only standing hazard trees, trees with signs of oak decline, and damaged trees in the near foreground (0- 300 feet) along the following

1. Travelways State Highways 19, 32, 181-National scenic byway State Routes DD, C, AP, AA Forest Roads 2245, 3145, 3190, 3152, 3002, 3155 County Road 156, 127 U.S. Highway 67 2. The Ozark Trail.

Table 2-4: Stands in near foreground of Sensitivity Level 1 Travelways

Travelway District Compartment/Stand State Highway 32 Potosi 176/75, 175/92, 175/127, 175/126, 175/120, 175/118, 175/115, 175/113, 175/106,173/32, 173/26, 173/27 Forest Road 2245 Potosi 176/33, 176/27, 176/28, 176/29, 176/30, 176/31, 177/26, 177/27, 177/31, 177/34, 177/35, 177/52 State Route DD Potosi 172/54, 172/24, 172/25, 172/26, 172/38

Chapter 2 Alternatives Considered Page 26 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Travelway District Compartment/Stand State Highway 181 – Blue Willow 117/83, 117/122, Buck Knob Scenic Byway Springs Forest Road 3145 Doniphan 60/01, 60/02, 60/03, 60/04, 57/110 County Road 156 Doniphan 236/27, 236/08 State Highway 19 Doniphan 242/15, 242/16, 232/31, 232/32, 218/20, 218/21, 218/22, 216/13, 216/37, 216/39, 216/60, 217/01, 217/02, 217/03, 217/34, 217/38, 217/44, 217/47, 217/55, 215/05, 215/19, 215/21, 215/39, 215/38, 215/40, 215/42 County Road 127 Doniphan 209/43, 209/30 Forest Road 3152 Doniphan 216/63, 214/04, 214/10, 215/13, 215/12, 215/31, 214/32, 214/31, 214/26 Forest Road 3190 Doniphan 237/37, 237/67, 237/81, 237/83, 237/90, 237/80, 237/82 State Route C Doniphan 35/ 154, 35/155, 35/158, 35/159, 35/163, 35/164, 35/165, 35/174, 46/14, 46/07, 46/13, 46/06, 46/103, 46/115, 46/116, 46/117, 46/118, 46/122, 46/133, 33/31, 19/48, 19/46, 19/43, 19/31, 19/30, 5/56, 5/57, 5/50, 5/52, 5/48, 5/46 5/49, 5/47, 5/121, 5/85, 5/20, 5/81, 5/82, 5/84, 5/72, 119/2, 119/06, 119/07, 119/08 Ozark Trail/Trace Creek, Potosi 175/113, 175/115, 175/118, 174/98, 174/26, Ozark Trail/Middle Fork 174/99, 174/23, 173/25, 173/32, 173/33, 173/09, 173/23, 173/26, 172/29, 172/30, 172/31, 172/32, 172/47, 172/58 Ozark Trail/11-Pt. River Doniphan 214/53, 214/42, 214/41, 224/97, 224/99, 237/24, Ozark Trail/Between the 215/80 Rivers Ozark Trail/Wappapello Poplar Bluff 67/07, 67/09, 70/84, 70/100, 70/50, 54/28, 54/55, Section 169/07, 117/46

VR2: Where possible and feasible in regeneration stands adjacent to private property, remove only standing hazard trees, trees with signs of oak decline, and damaged trees in the near foreground (0- 300 feet).

Chapter 2 Alternatives Considered Page 27 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

CHAPTER 3 – AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

This Chapter summarizes the existing condition of the physical (page 30), biological (page 69), social, and economic (page 114) environments of the FHI project area It also displays the effects of implementing each alternative on that environment and presents the scientific and analytical basis for the comparison of alternatives presented in the previous section. Resource specialists considered direct, indirect, and cumulative effects to evaluate both short-term uses and long-term productivity.

The Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) that accompanied the programmatic Forest Plan disclosed the effects, including cumulative effects, of management practices in a forest-wide context. This analysis of the FHI project discloses the effects of implementing the proposed action and its alternatives, and is tiered to the FEIS.

The FHI project is situated solely on Federal lands throughout southern Missouri on several MTNF Ranger Districts including; Salem, Potosi, Willow Springs, Eleven Point and Poplar Bluff and in the Missouri Counties of: Dent, Reynolds, Iron, Washington, Howell, Douglas, Shannon, Oregon, Carter, Ripley, Butler, and Wayne. The FHI project as identified in the current Forest Plan, consists of MP 1.1 (Natural Community Restoration, Roaded Natural Recreational Opportunity Spectrum (ROS)), MP 2.1 (General Forest – Roaded Natural ROS), MP 6.1 (Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized ROS), and MP 6.2 (Semi-Primitive Motorized ROS). The direct and indirect effects would include those identified in the project area and the existing conditions within the MA’s boundary and Landtype Associations.

The cumulative effects include “…the impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person undertakes such other actions.” (40 CFR section 1508.7). This includes determining the geographic (spatial) and time (temporal) cumulative effects analysis area boundaries. This is to ensure that the cumulative effects are measurable and meaningful and that the decision makers would be completely informed about the consequences of their actions (CEQ 1997 – Considering Cumulative Effects under NEPA). The cumulative effects need to be evaluated separately for each resource as the scope of evaluation for each resource is different. Therefore the cumulative effects may vary between resources, including the spatial and temporal boundaries.

The CEQ memorandum “Guidance on the Consideration of Past Actions in Cumulative Effects Analysis” dated June 24, 2005, was used in the preparation of this analysis document and is included in the FHI project file. In determining what information is necessary for a cumulative effects analysis, agencies should use scoping to focus on the extent to which information is "relevant to reasonably foreseeable significant adverse impacts," is "essential to a reasoned choice among alternatives and the overall costs of obtaining it are not exorbitant." (40 CFR 1502.22). Agencies are not required to list or analyze the effects of individual past actions unless such information is necessary to describe the cumulative effect of all past actions combined. The analysis of cumulative effects begins with consideration of the direct and indirect effects on the environment that are expected or likely to result from the alternative proposals for agency action. Agencies then look for present effects of past actions that are, in the judgment of the agency,

Chapter 3- Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 28 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

relevant and useful because they have a significant cause and effect relationship with the direct and indirect effects of the proposal for agency action and its alternatives. CEQ regulations do not require the consideration of the individual effects of all past actions to determine the present effects of past actions. The scope of the cumulative impact analysis is related to the magnitude of the environmental impacts of the proposed action. Proposed actions of limited scope typically do not require as comprehensive an assessment of cumulative impacts as proposed actions that have significant environmental impacts over a large area. Proposed actions that are typically finalized with a finding of no significant impact usually involve only a limited cumulative impact assessment to confirm that the effects of the proposed action do not reach a point of significant environmental impacts.

Information regarding past Forest Service activities in and adjacent to the FHI project area can be found on page 19 of Chapter 1 of this document.

The activities identified in Alternative 2 (Chapter 1 and 2) are the same or similar to previous activities implemented on the Mark Twain National Forest on the respective Ranger Districts. In the foreseeable future, project activities on National Forest ownership nearest to this project include: Blackwell Ridge, and Cane Ridge Small Tree Project which may include commercial timber harvest, fuels management, and non-native and invasive weed eradication. These activities may or may not be inside the cumulative effects spatial and temporal boundaries for the various resources in the FHI project. Therefore, any effects would be the same or very similar to ones which have already been observed.

Background

Ecological Classification

The purposes of The National Environmental Policy Act are to encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between humans and their environment; to promote efforts that would prevent or eliminate damage to the environment, to stimulate the health and welfare of humans, to enrich the understanding of the ecological systems and natural resources important to the United States of America. Missouri’s rich array of native plant and animal species requires the maintenance and enhancement of the native ecosystems they depend on. Understanding ecological systems, their patterns on the landscape, and natural processes is fundamental toward understanding challenges in managing healthy natural resources.

The Forest Plan uses an Ecological Classification System (ECS) framework to identify, describe, and map units of land with similar physical and biological characteristics at scales suitable for natural resource planning and management. This ECS framework serves as a basis for an inventory of the number, size, location, and status of native ecosystems. An ECS allows planners and managers to assess the capability of land to produce resources and respond to management. At the higher, most generalized levels of this national framework, continental climate, broad patterns of soils, and natural vegetation are most important in determining domains, divisions, and provinces. Table 3-1 shows the Hierarchical Ecological Classification for the FHI project area. At intermediate levels, lithology, topography, geomorphology, regional soils, and regional potential vegetation are the most important in delineating sections and subsections. At the lower levels, the most important factors are local variations in topography, parent materials, soil types, and vegetation communities, which define landscapes and site-specific levels. The numerical code used

Chapter 3- Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 29 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

in this system uses letters for sections (OZ), numbers for subsections (OZ1), and small letters for LTA’s (OZ1a) for easier communication and map labeling of the units that are relevant to the state of Missouri. The Atlas of Missouri Ecoregions (Nigh and Schroeder, 2002) was used in the preparation of this analysis document and gives detail to the Ecological Classification system.

Table 3-1: Hierarchical Ecological Classification

Ecological General Planning Forest Health Initiative project Unit Size/Range Level Domain Subcontinental National Humid Temperate Domain 1,000,000 sq. mi. Division Multiple state National Hot Continental Division 100,000 sq. mi. Province Multiple-state National Eastern Broadleaf (Continental) Province 10,000 sq. mi. Section Regions National Ozark Highlands Section 1,000 sq. mi. Subsection Subregions Forest White River Hills(OZ4), Central Plateau(OZ5), 10-100 sq. mi. Meramec River Hills(OZ8), Current River Hills(OZ9), St. Francois Knobs and Basins(OZ10), Black River Ozark Border(OZ14) Landtype Landscape Forest North Fork River Oak-Pine Woodland/Forest Association 1 to 10’s of Hills(OZ4o), North Fork Pine-Oak Woodland (LTA) square miles Dissected Plain(OZ4p), Howell-Oregon Counties Oak Woodland Dissected Plain(OZ5p), Ripley County Oak Woodland Dissected Plain(OZ5r), Upper Meramec Oak Woodland Dissected Plain (OZ5x), Huzzah-Courtois Oak Woodland Dissected Plain(OZ8c), Clear Creek Pine-Oak Woodland Dissected Plain(OZ8j), Current River Pine-Oak Woodland Dissected Plain(OZ9a), Current River Oak-Pine Woodland/Forest Hills(OZ9b), Eleven Point River Oak-Pine Woodland/Forest Hills(OZ9c), Black River Oak- Pine Woodland/Forest Hills(OZ9d), Eleven Point Oak-Pine Forest Breaks(OZ9g), St. Francois Igneous Glade/Oak Forest Knobs(OZ10a), St. Francois Dolomite Glade/Oak Woodland Basins(OZ10b), St. Francois Oak-Pine Woodland/Forest Hills(OZ10d), Grandin Pine-Oak Woodland Dissected Plain(OZ14a), Southeastern Oak Savanna/Woodland Plain(OZ14b), Wappappello Oak-Pine Woodland/Forest Hills(OZ14c) * Atlas of Missouri Ecoregions (Nigh and Schroeder, 2002)

Chapter 3- Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 30 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Section and Subsections in the FHI project The entire FHI project area lies within the Ozark Highlands Section as seen in Table 4 above. “The Ozark Highlands is a distinctive biogeographic region that includes most of southern Missouri and much of northern Arkansas and small parts of Illinois, Oklahoma, and Kansas. Geologically, the Ozark Highlands is a low structural dome of essentially horizontally bedded strata that has been undergoing erosion and weathering for a quarter billion years into a thoroughly dissected plateau. The exceptional length of geologic erosion, one of the longest in the United States, coupled with a central geographic location in North America and tremendous physiographic diversity, has created a region of unique ecosystems.” (Atlas of Missouri Ecoregions, 2002). The Ozark Highland is further subdivided into 16 subsections of which six subsections are present in the FHI project.

Land Type Associations in the FHI project LTA’s are based on variations within each subsection in local landform, relief, geologic parent materials, soils, and potential natural vegetation. These are fairly uniform areas of land approximately 5,000 to 100,000 acres in size that seem to harbor similar assemblages of natural vegetation, and possess similar topography and geology. The six subsections found in the project are also subdivided into 75 distinct LTA’s of which portions of 18 LTA’s are found in the project area. Detailed locations, boundaries and descriptions can be found in the Atlas of Missouri Ecoregions.

The OZ4 White River Hills Subsection (Willow Springs Unit) is subdivided into seventeen LTA’s. They range from high, gently rolling oak savanna/woodland dissected plains, through rugged dolomite knobs and river breaks, to more typical oak-pine woodland/forest hills. Only two of the seventeen LTA’s are found in the stands proposed for harvest in this subsection

The OZ5 Central Plateau Subsection (Doniphan Unit) is divided into thirty LTA’s. The LTA’s can be grouped into three general types: 1) Prairie/Savanna Plains are high, smooth landscapes that were formerly dominated by prairie and open-oak savanna and are mainly associated with the highest drainage divides I the upper Osage River basin. 2) Oak Savanna/Woodland Dissected Plains are high, minimally dissected areas in the eastern part of the region that had historic oak savanna and prairie openings interspersed with oak woodland. 3) Oak Woodland Dissected Plains and Hills occupy the most thoroughly dissected parts of the ecoregion, with up to 150 feet of local relief; they were formerly dominated by a nearly continuous cover of open- oak woodland. Only three of the thirty LTA’s are found in the stands proposed for harvest in this subsection.

The OZ8 Meramec River Hills Subsection (Salem, Potosi Units) is subdivided into eleven LTA’s. Oak and pine-oak woodland dissected plains give way to oak woodland/forest hills and breaks nearer the river. Only two of the eleven LTA’s are found in the stands proposed for harvest in this subsection.

The OZ9 Current River Hills Subsection (Salem, Doniphan, and Poplar Bluff Units) is subdivided into nine LTA’s. Gently rolling pine-oak woodland dissected plains on interfluve uplands give way to oak-pine hills, then rugged oak forest breaks. In addition, a cluster of Precambrian igneous knobs occurs in the center of the region. Only five of the nine LTA’s are found in the stands proposed for harvest in this subsection.

Chapter 3- Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 31 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

The OZ10 St. Francois Knobs and Basins Subsection (Potosi Unit) is subdivided into four LTA’s. The most prominent LTA’s are the ones with igneous knobs and basins. There is also an unusual elevated igneous plain and an LTA with sedimentary hills. Three of the four LTA’s are found in the stands proposed for harvest in this subsection.

The OZ14 Black River Ozark Border Subsection (Poplar Bluff Unit) is subdivided into four LTA’s. They include minimally dissected oak and pine-oak woodland dissected plains, as well as more rugged oak-pine hills. Three of the four LTA’s are found in the stands proposed for harvest in this subsection.

Chapter 3- Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 32 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Physical Environment

Soils

Prediction Models and Discussion of Soil Disturbance Understanding the impact of forest management activities on soil physical properties is important since management can significantly change site productivity by altering root growth potential, water infiltration and soil erosion, and water and nutrient availability (Page-Dumroese et al. 2006). Two types of modelling efforts were used to best analyze and understand the effects of the proposed land management activities on the soil resource, as defined below.

Soil Survey Mapping and Interpretations – The United States Department of Agriculture - Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS) and the National Cooperative Soil Survey develops, manages, and maintains a nationwide soil mapping and classification system. As a part of this program, NRCS has developed several dozen soil interpretations rating the suitability of various land management activities or potentials based on soil properties. In total, there are 164 soil map units located in the FHI analysis area. Each of these map units has been evaluated according to six different forestland management interpretations. These interpretations are given different ratings which will be referred to in later sections, and are listed below:

Hydric soils – The National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils defines a hydric soil as: “a soil that formed under conditions of saturation, flooding, or ponding long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part” (USDA NRCS 2010). These anaerobic conditions typically result in unique soil properties which have been identified and documented by NRCS during the soil survey process. Soils are one of the components used in delineation of jurisdictional wetlands. In addition to hydric soils, wetland hydrology and wetland vegetation are each required to be considered a jurisdictional wetland. In addition to housing unique and sometimes rare ecological resources, wetlands are carbon sinks, important for nutrient cycling, flood retention, and provide recharge for ground water (Mitsch and Gosselink 2015).

Floodplain/riparian soils – Floodplain or riparian soils are developed from sediments deposited by flooding. Active floodplains are considered to have either occasional or frequent flooding. Occasional flooding occurs infrequently under normal conditions (chance of flooding is between 5-50 percent in any year) while frequent occurs often under normal weather conditions (chance of flooding is more than 50 percent in any year). Flooding frequency is estimated by soil scientists; based on evidence in the soil profile, local information, and the relation of the soils on the landscape to historic floods. These “riparian” soils are those soil mapping units likely to experience flooding and possible sedimentation usually due to their position on the landscape. In the Ozark Highlands, floodplains are more likely to contain wetlands. Disturbance in floodplains can cause decline in riparian habitat, disrupt flooding retention, serve as sources for downstream pollution, and cause other watershed-related resource issues. Like wetlands, riparian areas are sources of concentrated biodiversity (Naiman et al. 2005).

Soil compaction potential – Compaction is one of the leading causes of soil degradation resulting from timber harvest operations (Brais 2001). It commonly reduces growth of young trees that regenerate on a site following conventional harvest (Greacen and Sands 1980),

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 33 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

promotes runoff and erosion, and reduces water infiltration which affects groundwater recharge. Severely compacted forest soils could remain compacted for decades (Froehlich et al. 1985). Soils containing high amounts of clay, are low in rock fragments, and have a high water table are more susceptible to compaction (USDA NRCS 2016). The immediate (i.e., direct) effects of compaction on soil properties includes: 1) increased soil resistance to penetration; 2) reduced conductivity of soil to water and gas flow through a reduction in the size, continuity, and total volume of pores, especially large pores; and 3) reduced number, size, and/or strength of structural aggregates. The distribution of these effects within the soil profile is a function of ground pressure and total load (i.e., ground pressure X contact area of the tire or track), soil characteristics (e.g., texture and structure), and moisture conditions at the time of operation.

Soil rutting, compaction, puddling are similar often occur simultaneously. To model the potential for compaction, the NRCS Soil Rutting Hazard interpretation was used (USDA NRCS 2016). This interpretation separates soil map units into three separate categories: slight, moderate, and severe. A rating of slight indicates the soil is subject to little or no rutting. Little or no restriction on the type of equipment that can be used. A rating of moderate indicates that rutting is likely under certain wetness conditions. The use of equipment is seasonally limited, or that modified equipment are needed, such as rubber-tired skidders rather than crawler-type tractors. A rating of severe indicates that compaction is likely and ruts form readily. Special equipment is needed or that use of such equipment is severely restricted by unfavorable soil characteristics.

Erosion and sedimentation – Soil erosion or displacement refers to the relocation or removal of surface soil particles and/or organic soil layers sufficient to reduce long-term productivity as well as diversity of soil-dependent flora and fauna. This is especially important because most of the soil nutrients are held in the surface horizons (Brady and Weil 2002). Because soil is eroded off the surface horizon, erosion results in a loss of nutrients for forest productivity (Fisher and Binkley 2000). It also results in a loss of biodiversity of thousands of species of soil organisms which are lost from the site where the erosion takes place (Pierzynski et al. 2000). In addition, erosion results in a loss of carbon which was sequestered in the surface horizon (Boyle 2002).

Potential erosion hazard is based on slope and soil texture, and to a lesser extent, organic matter and structure. Erosion is positively related to slope percent and as discussed above, degree of soil compaction (due to the inability of water to infiltrate the soil). Soils on steep slopes are more susceptible to erosion, especially on droughty, south-facing aspects. In the Ozark Highlands, soil materials high in silts are the most erodible, typical of surface horizons found throughout the FHI project area. The potential for erosion is also related what is covering the soil. A lack of adequate effective ground cover usually results in accelerated surface erosion. Organic matter or “duff” primarily composed of leaf litter serves as a shield that protects the mineral soil surface from erosion. Understory and overstory vegetation also protects soils but intercepting the impact of raindrops which would dislodge soil particles.

Erosion potential was rated according to risk of erosion on forestland where normal practices are used in managing and harvesting trees. To model the potential for erosion, the NRCS Erosion Hazard (Off-Road, Off-Trail) interpretation was used (USDA NRCS 2016). This interpretation separates soil map units into four separate categories: slight, moderate, severe, and very severe. A rating of slight indicates erosion is not an important concern. A rating of moderate indicates that some attention to soil loss is required. Both slight and moderate ratings

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 34 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

generally indicate that slope is less than 35 percent. A rating of severe indicates that intensive treatments or special equipment and method of operation are required to minimize erosion. This may include seeding or mulching disturbed areas, water bars, etc. Slope percent in this category is generally greater than 35 percent. A rating of very severe indicates that erosion, loss of soil productivity, off-site damage are likely, and erosion-control measures are costly and generally impractical.

Temporary road stability – Temporary roads are typically used to connect permanent system roads to log landing areas. A temporary road infers that the road base is the natural surface of a landform and little, if any non-native materials or other road construction methods are used for road improvement. Following timber sale completion, temporary roads will be closed and not available for public use. If needed, water features should be installed and bare areas re- vegetated. Prior to the development of this EA, the tentative locations of temporary road were mapped using Global Positioning System (GPS) and Geographic Information System (GIS) technologies. Knowing the location of these roads allowed the ability to analyze the suitability of the mapped soils for each road. In the Ozark Highlands, a lack of water table, low slope, and high rock content at the surface are properties that provide stable temporary road surfaces.

To model the stability of the proposed temporary road locations, the NRCS Suitability for Roads (Natural Surface) interpretation was used (USDA NRCS 2016). This interpretation separates soil map units into three separate categories: well suited, moderately suited, and poorly suited. A rating of well suited indicates all soil properties are favorable to good road stability. A rating of moderately suited indicates at least one property is not favorable for road stability, indicating some level of maintenance is needed. A rating of poorly suited indicates that many or all properties are not favorable to road stability, and would require maintenance or improvement.

Log landing suitability – The NRCS Suitability for Log Landings interpretation was used to model the degree to which the soils are appropriate for stable log landings. Ratings are based on slope, rock fragments on the surface, plasticity index, sand content, soil classification, depth to a water table, ponding, flooding, and the hazard of soil slippage (USDA NRCS 2016). This interpretation separates soil map units into three separate categories: well suited, moderately suited, and poorly suited. A rating of well suited indicates that the soil has features that are favorable for log landings and has no limitations. Good performance can be expected and little or no maintenance is needed. A rating of moderately suited indicates that the soil has features that are moderately favorable for log landings. One or more soil properties are less than desirable, and fair performance can be expected. Some maintenance is needed. A rating of poorly suited indicates that the soil has one or more properties that are unfavorable for log landings. Overcoming the unfavorable properties requires special design, extra maintenance, and costly alteration (USDA NRCS 1998).

Aquatic Cumulative Effects Model (ACE) – Soil and water resources are inherently connected and need to be considered concurrently. Manipulation of water flow, particularly on roads, is a watershed concern and poses the potential for soil erosion and sedimentation. Log landings and skid trails also serve as potential point source locations for erosion and sedimentation. Vegetation management associated with logging treatments also need to be considers, although these activities are less likely to produce runoff issues. An ACE Model (Clingenpeel 2014) was developed specifically for the Ozark Highlands of the MTNF. This model measures the direct, indirect and cumulative effects of runoff, erosion, and sedimentation related to the specific treatment activities

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 35 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

proposed in Alternatives 1 and 2 of the FHI Environmental Assessment. Some results of the ACE Model are described in detail in the Hydrology Section of this document.

• Existing condition of Soils

The entire FHI project area is located within the Ozark Highlands Section, a highly dissected plateau primarily composed of Mississippian, Ordovician, and Cambrian aged layers of sedimentary limestones, dolomites, and sandstones (Nigh and Schroeder 2002). The region is also affected by the ancient St. Francois Mountains, an area of volcanic uplift having Precambrian aged igneous rhyolite and granite parent materials. Within the Ozarks, the majority of the FHI project is within the Current River Hills (57 percent) and Central Plateau (19 percent) Subsections. The Current River Hills is the most heavily forested Subsection within the Ozark Highlands, largely due to rugged, highly dissected topography. In contrast, the Central Plateau is perhaps the least forested portion and has some of the flattest topography in the Ozarks. The Central Plateau represents the high divide between the major river hills portions of the Ozarks and includes the headwaters of many of the major river systems (i.e., the Current, Eleven Point, Meramec, White, Big Piney, Niangua, and Gasconade Rivers). Smaller portions of the project area are located in the Meramec River Hills, Black River Ozark Border, White River Hills, and St. Francois Knobs and Basins Subsections. The Meramec River Hills and Black River Ozark Border are ecologically similar to the Current River Hills. The White River Hills have unique geology and landforms related to the highly resistant Ordovician aged Jefferson City-Cotter dolomite formations and the younger Mississippian aged limestone formations, which often occur as monadnoks above the aforementioned dolomite. And as described earlier, the so-called St. Francois Knobs and Basins Subsection consists of ancient igneous uplift landforms and includes the highest elevations in the Ozarks.

Within the six ecological Subsections described above, there are portions of 18 LTA’s within the project area, most of which are separated on the basis of geology and/or local relief (Nigh and Schroeder 2002). The three major types of LTAs include: dissected plains, river hills, and river breaks. Thirty-nine percent of the project area includes eight dissected plains LTAs which have 50 to 150 feet of local relief. These LTAs are higher in the landscapes and often structurally controlled by comparatively younger geologic formations such as the Roubidoux sandstone or Jefferson City- Cotter dolomites. Fifty-five percent of the project area includes six river hills LTAs which have 150 to 250 feet of local relief. A wide range of geologic formations occur in these landscapes. Four percent of the project area includes one river breaks LTA which has greater than 250 feet of local relief. This LTA (the Eleven Point Oak-Pine Forest Breaks) also includes a range of geologic formations. The additional LTAs collectively comprise less than two percent of the project area.

The majority of soils in the project area are somewhat excessively well drained, well drained, or moderately well drained. The surface of most upland soils includes a layer of rocky and loamy hillslope sediments moved from above by gravity and water over geologic time. Beneath these mantles of hillslope sediments, soil properties closely reflect the geologic parent materials described above. Soils of these formations are often highly weathered and contain a high volume of chert. As a result, rocky (and often highly leached) soils with low to moderate site productivity cover much of the project area, particularly in steep terrain. Protected, north and east facing aspects within the river hills and breaks LTAs have the highest site productivities of the project area. Lesser sloping landforms (e.g., ridges, summits, benches, etc.) often retain a thin cap of wind-blown loamy sediments referred to as “loess”, which is a common parent material found in the Central Plateau

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 36 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Subsection. Throughout the project area, soils that have dolomite bedrock near the surface are not as leached and are high in clay that has weathered in place. Although these soils are often higher in nutrient content, bedrock, chert, and high clay content limit site productivity. Many soils have root restricting fragipans greatly affecting site productivity, located mostly on flat or gently sloping uplands. The valleys between the uplands include terrace and floodplain landforms having soils deposited by floodwaters, and in some cases by wind-blown loess (on terraces). Floodplain soils reflect variable hydrodynamics and can range from sandy and rocky to loamy or silty.

Table 3-2: Ecological Subsections and Landtype Associations within the FHI project area

Subsection Landtype Association Acres Current River Hills Black River Oak-Pine Woodland/Forest Hills 6,652

Current River Hills Eleven Point River Oak-Pine Woodland/Forest Hills 6,627

Current River Hills Current River Oak-Pine Woodland/Forest Hills 6,288

Current River Hills Current River Pine-Oak Woodland Dissected Plain 4,980

Current River Hills Eleven Point Oak-Pine Forest Breaks 1,817 Central Plateau Ripley County Oak Woodland Dissected Plain 8,114 Howell-Oregon Counties Oak Woodland Dissected Central Plateau 576 Plain Central Plateau Upper Meramec Oak Woodland Dissected Plain 135

Meramec River Hills Huzzah-Courtois Oak Woodland Dissected Plain 1,796

Meramec River Hills Clear Creek Pine-Oak Woodland Dissected Plain 1,382

Black River Ozark Border Wappappello Oak-Pine Woodland/Forest Hills 2,515

Black River Ozark Border Southeastern Oak Savanna/Woodland Plain 212

Black River Ozark Border Grandin Pine-Oak Woodland Dissected Plain 54 St. Francois Knobs and St. Francois Oak-Pine Woodland/Forest Hills 1,655 Basins St. Francois Knobs and St. Francois Igneous Glade/Oak Forest Knobs 648 Basins St. Francois Knobs and St. Francois Dolomite Glade/Oak Woodland Basins 171 Basins White River Hills North Fork River Oak-Pine Woodland/Forest Hills 1,576 White River Hills North Fork Pine-Oak Woodland Dissected Plain 737 (Nigh and Schroeder 2002).

As described previously, the NRCS and National Cooperative Soil Survey develops, manages, and maintains a nationwide soil mapping and classification system. Soil map units were delineated throughout the project area and cumulative effects analysis area. These mapping units commonly indicate a single soil series, soil texture class, and slope class. Many soil mapping units are

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 37 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

complexes including two or three soil series and texture class for each and slope class. There are 164 soil mapping units located within the FHI project area. The most common soil series are: Captina, Clarksville, Coulstone, Doniphan, Macedonia, Poynor, Rueter, and Scholten. Detailed county soil surveys for the MTNF are available online at: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/.

• Direct and indirect effects on Soils

Alternative 1: (No Action) No new management activities would take place, nor any associated activities with the proposed action. Therefore, no management related appreciable changes in productivity of the land would occur. Soils would be impacted by regular maintenance and use of roads as well as planned and ongoing natural resource management activities. Current runoff and erosion patterns would be maintained. Natural processes and functions would continue to occur as dead material decomposes. Actual soil organic matter may increase with an accompanying increase in microorganisms and fungi and carbon sequestration (Boyle 2002).

In this alternative non-system roads would remain open which could increase the amount of sediment moving off site. In this alternative, there would be no silvicultural treatments and associated temporary road construction or road reconstruction. Under this alternative maintenance of System roads would continue; therefore, implementation of the no action alternative would cause little change to soils within the project area.

Alternative 2: (Proposed Action) Alternatives were evaluated to assess whether implementation of the proposed project would result in any detrimental or beneficial effects to the soil resource. Alternatives can be compared based on the relative effects of soil disturbance.

Only four of the nearly 46,000 acres within the FHI project include mapped hydric soils. Each of these four hydric soil locations are on the fringe of stand boundaries, within the degree of mapping error typically allowable for a soil polygon mapped at 1:24,000 scale. For any wetlands that do occur within forest stand boundaries there are S & G’s that qualify as identified in the Forest Plan. No mechanical disturbances are allowed within a wetland. In addition, at least a 100 foot buffer should be established from the outside edge of the wetland. Within the buffer zones, vehicle/heavy equipment use, timber management, and construction of new roads is prohibited. Additional specifications for unique larger acreage fens are listed in the Forest Plan. A list of these soil map units is located in the project file.

There are no timber or associated activities planned within floodplain areas. However, a total of 950 acres of frequently and occasionally flooded soil map units (26 map units in total) are located within FHI stand boundaries. The majority of this acreage occurs on the boundary of forest stands within a reasonable degree of mapping error. For any floodplains clearly within the boundary of treated stands, S & G’s published in the Forest Plan are to be strictly followed. In Riparian Management Zones the following activities are prohibited: timber management, log landings, and new system roads. In addition, the following activities should be avoided whenever possible: equipment operation, temporary roads, and stream channel crossings. A list of these soil map units is located in the project file. Ultimately, no impact to either wetland or riparian ecosystems is expected.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 38 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Soil surface disturbance is one of the effects of the activities proposed. Management associated with vegetative treatments and associated activities in Alternative 2 would cause some soil disturbance. Potential exists for soil compaction, rutting, and surface erosion as a result of heavy equipment operation on sites where management activities would occur. Soil surface disturbance is detrimental because it has an impact on soil quality and productivity. This disturbance would be expected to occur on or adjacent to skid trails, temporary roads, and log landings both during and after the activities take place. Implementation of S & G’s would limit this disturbance within the matrix of treatment units. Those treatments listed as “heavy” in Table 6 will receive more intensive use and are more likely to have soil disturbance within stand boundaries. In addition, more complete removal of vegetation in these treatments would result in less soil cover, potentially increasing the amount of erosion. The S & G’s of the Forest Plan are designed to minimize the amount of disturbance from management activities. Assessment of proposed activities on specific sites would determine if the degree and extent of soil disturbance would cause appreciable change in soil properties to be considered detrimental to the long-term productivity of the land. Determination of effects is based on available research, the completed soil surveys for the MTNF, and professional judgment. Adherence to Forestwide S & G’s and site-specific mitigation measures (located in Appendix C) could be expected to result in no appreciable changes in the inherent long- term productivity of the land.

Table 3-3: Compaction potential for off-trail forestry activities

Acres with Acres with Acres with Intensity Treatment Type Slight Hazard Moderate Hazard Severe Hazard Rating Rating Rating Heavy Clearcut 1,868 169 735 Heavy Salvage 14,369 1,666 5,652 Heavy Seed tree 1,816 235 735 Intermediate Shelterwood 132 14 63 Removal Intermediate Shelterwood 1,858 252 715 Establishment Intermediate Shelterwood Prep 216 11 147 Intermediate Group Selection 1,548 217 1,043 Intermediate Restoration Thin 3,734 660 1,985 Light Sanitation 1,740 219 669 Light Overstory 36 3 29 Removal Light Commercial 1,989 289 1,039 Thin Total 29,306 3,735 12,812 USDA NRCS 2016

Compaction and rutting destroys the structure of the soil and reduces the size of soil pores, which reduces the rate water can infiltrate into the ground, potentially causing ponding and/or runoff of water. Based on analysis for Alternative 2, the potential for soil compaction is the most concerning area for potential resource damage. Using the soil rutting hazard interpretation, it was found that 64 percent of the project area is rated as moderate, 28 percent as severe, and eight percent as slight

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 39 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

(Table3-3). Soils rated as severe are essentially evenly distributed throughout the project area, particularly in areas with loess (i.e., wind-blown) surfaces, clayey subsoils, and high water tables. Important soil compaction S & G’s identified in the Forest Plan include: the use of pre-designated skid trails, one pass over non-skid trail areas, avoidance of wet soil conditions, and piling slash ahead of ground-based equipment prior to covering the area. Each of these measures can minimize compaction over the treatment areas. Of utmost concern for these areas would be timing the use of heavy machinery. Areas with severe rutting potential are likely to require more drying/drainage time following high volume rain events. Timber sale administrators may consider implementing additional restrictions, such as no logging or related activities during wet periods.

Temporary roads and log landings are the most concerning management activities likely to cause damage to soils and associated resources. These high traffic areas compact soils and have the potential to produce runoff and erosion when proper mitigations aren’t in place. A total of 64 miles of temporary roads are planned as a part of this project. A concerted effort was made to place the location of these roads on areas with rocky surfaces and stable landforms with little slope. Of the 64 miles of temporary roads planned, over 96 percent of those miles are in locations having soils and topography that are moderately suited for roads utilizing the natural surface of the landform as the road base. Still, very little of the total temporary road mileage are on locations having soils and topography well suited this type of activity. The lack of well suited locations in the Ozarks is due to nearly ubiquitous sloping topography, limited sand content, and at times high clay content. Using this interpretation, areas listed as moderately suited are usually the best suited locations available on typical Ozark landscapes. It is important to note that this soil interpretation broadly considers the range of soils found across North America, and is not local to the Ozark Highlands. Finally, it was found that three percent of the temporary road mileage is located in areas having poorly suited soils and topography. Slopes being mapped as greater than 15 percent is the overwhelming reason for this rating. Only in one instance was it found that a temporary road was mapped on a hydric soil. Upon further review, only 100 feet of the road in question crosses through the edge of a hydric soil polygon, well within the range of error acceptable for soil survey polygons. In addition, this location was not mapped as a wetland by the National Wetlands Inventory (USFWS 2016). A separate shapefile was created for roads located on poorly suited sites and copied to the project file.

Soils with poorly suited log landing rating are scattered across the project area, particularly in floodplains or on steep slopes. Similar to the temporary road analysis, soils in the Ozarks are unlikely to qualify as well suited. As such, only one percent of the project area includes well suited sites for log landings. Fifty-two percent of the area was identified as moderately suited, while 47 percent of the area was listed as poorly suited. Specific locations of log landings are not identified until timber sales are established. Every effort should be made to minimize the land area affected and utilize already disturbed areas or old log landings (see Soil Mitigation measure SR1). Basic Forestwide S & G’s should be implemented when establishing log landings, as identified in the Forest Plan. Following completion of timber sales, landing areas should be vegetated or covered with slash to minimize the potential for erosion and runoff. A shapefile identifying poorly suited log landing locations was added to the project file.

Soil displacement through erosion is an important consideration. Using the erosion hazard interpretation, very severe ratings are rare across all districts (Table 3-4). Severe ratings are also rare in most cases with the exception of the Doniphan-Eleven Point Ranger District, where severe ratings are more common. The majority of these stands having severe rating for erosion hazard occur in deeply dissected river hills and breaks LTAs associated with the Current and Eleven Point

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 40 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

River valleys. These areas have some of the highest local relief in the Ozarks (Nigh and Schroeder 2002). However, it is important to note that regardless of the rating given to individual stands or soil map units, Forestwide S & G’s will be in place and as such, no logging activities will take place on areas having sustained slopes greater than 35 percent.

Table 3-4: Erosion potential for off-trail forestry activities

Acres with Acres with Acres with Acres with Treatment Slight Moderate Severe Very Severe Intensity Type Hazard Hazard Hazard Hazard Rating Rating Rating Rating Heavy Clearcut 1,483 1,094 191 4 Heavy Salvage 11,812 9,001 867 7 Heavy Seed tree 1,458 1,131 192 5 Intermediate Shelterwood 130 78 1 0 Removal Intermediate Shelterwood 1,526 1,130 159 0 Establishment Intermediate Shelterwood 230 144 0 0 Prep Intermediate Group 1,342 1,430 37 0 Selection Intermediate Restoration 3,939 2,173 263 4 Thin Light Sanitation 1,385 1,204 38 0 Light Overstory 46 5 0 0 Removal Light Commercial 1,772 1,542 2 0 Thin Total 25,123 18,932 1,750 20 USDA NRCS 2016

Soil erosion would generally be greatest during the first year after harvest and revert back to pre- harvest levels three to four years after harvest and associated activities (Clingenpeel 2014). Practices such as spreading slash over exposed areas and avoiding areas of steep slopes during layout would serve to minimize erosion levels. In addition to erosion potential, which is based on erodibility and slope of soil map units, canopy and ground cover following treatment will also help determine soil erosion levels. Canopy and ground cover following logging activities would be variable across the 11 different treatment types. Table 7 categorizes each treatment into three categories based on the level of management intensity required for the treatment.

Due to the extreme nature of oak decline occurring, over half of the project area is slated to receive heavy intensity treatments for Alternative 2. Considerable attention should be paid to these forest stands in effective use of Forestwide S & G’s and other best management practices identified by timber sale administration staff. Treatments listed as light would not be expected to leave bare ground open to erosion and runoff. Biomass felled and left on the ground would further reduce whatever minimal erosion may occur during heavy precipitation periods.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 41 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Additional detail regarding soil erosion, sedimentation, and associated watershed effects can be found in the Hydrology Section.

• Cumulative effects on Soils Cumulative soil effects are the estimated additive changes in soil disturbance and forest productivity that might occur from the existing conditions, implementing the proposed project, current activities within the analysis area, plus any foreseeable actions. Components of cumulative effects:

Spatial boundary: A one mile corridor around the FHI project treatment areas for each district was selected as the soils resource cumulative effects boundary. This area was used because it will adequately address any effects related to soil resources. Additional effects for erosion and watershed issues can be found in the Hydrology section.

Temporal boundary: The temporal boundary was set to analyze 10 years prior to this decision, plus 10 years following this decision. The boundary was selected because 10 years is the normal management cycle and this is the extent the effects are measurable and meaningful. Increases in soil erosion from project and associated activities usually return to pre-project levels within three to five years. Soil compaction and the effects of compaction on vegetation are less well known. Some information from the southeast U.S. indicates 10 years is the average time for restoration of compacted areas through natural processes (Miller et al. 2004).

Past and present actions that may have an effect on the Soil resource: On Federal and private lands activities includes: wildfire suppression, prescribed fire, fireline construction, timber harvest, timber stand improvement, road maintenance, fish and wildlife habitat improvements, opening maintenance, pond maintenance, pond construction, illegal dump removal, power-line installation, utilities installation, herbicide use, insect and disease occurrences (such as the oak borer), the influences from highways and numerous county roads. The past activities of timber harvesting and wildlife openings on National Forest system lands have not had apparent long-term negative impact on the soil productivity with the mitigation measures applied.

National Forest land actions include: Past projects within the soils cumulative effects boundary include the following (Decision type, date):

Integrated Non-native Invasive Plant Control Project (ROD, 2/14/2012) This was a Decision that was Forest-wide with the main focus to treat non-native invasive plant infestations on the MTNF using an integrated combination of manual, mechanical, cultural, chemical, prescribed fire and biological control treatment methods.

Indian Creek Project EA (DN, 9/05/13): This Willow Springs Ranger District is utilizing a combination of commercial harvest (Salvage/Sanitation, Seed Tree and Shelterwood harvest), non- commercial timber, wildlife, and prescribed fire treatments, and other activities designed to enhance natural communities and improve forest health conditions while providing opportunities for wildlife habitat improvement, dispersed recreational uses, and harvest of timber products. This project lies

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 42 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

on the northern boundary of the soils cumulative effects boundary of the Willow Springs District activities.

East Fork Huzzah EA (DN, 4/20/2016): This Salem Ranger District project has a small portion within the FHI soils cumulative effects area. Activities include Shelterwood harvest, Thinning, Crop tree release and Trash dump clean-up. Additional activities are used to improve forest health by treating oak decline, enhancing ecosystems, improving wildlife habitat, and managing the transportation system. This project lies on the northeastern boundary of the soils cumulative effects boundary of the Salem Ranger District activities.

Cattail Creek Salvage (DM, 8/8/2013): This Poplar Bluff Ranger District project is approximately 4.0 miles northeast of Poplar Bluff, Missouri, near the rural community of Rombauer. The purpose of the projects was to conduct salvage harvest and resource management activities in 13 stands totaling an estimated 250 acres to meet objectives in the MTNF Forest Plan. Activities inside the cumulative effects boundary include multiple Salvage harvest cuts.

Cane Ridge West (DN, 9/25/2009): This Poplar Bluff Ranger District project is located west of U.S. Highway 67, north of U.S. Highway 60, and south of the Black River. The purpose of this project was to move the project area toward the Forest-wide goals and objectives, and the prescription for the 1.1 MP found in the Forest Plan. Activities inside the soils cumulative effects area include Restoration Thinning (Open and Closed Woodlands), Crop tree release and Trash dump clean-up.

Van Buren (DN, 9-07-2011): This Doniphan/Eleven Point Ranger District project generally lies west and southwest of Van Buren, Missouri. The purpose for this project was to move existing conditions in the project area which are not in compliance with the Forest Plan toward Forest-wide goals and objectives, and the prescription for MP 2.1 found in the Forest Plan. Activities inside the soils cumulative effects area include Shelterwood Preparation cut, Pre-commercial thinning, and Group Selection harvest.

Fremont-Pineknot (DN, 7/31/2015): This Doniphan/Eleven Point Ranger District project is located near the community of Fremont, Missouri. The purpose of this project was to restore and enhance fire-adapted pine and pine-oak bluestem woodlands to their full range of historic vegetation composition and structural conditions that occurred under natural disturbance regimes (e.g. fire and drought). Activities inside the soils cumulative effects area include Restoration thinning, Pre- commercial thinning, and commercial thinning.

Other projects that justify the rationale for a 10 year cumulative effects temporal boundary include: Westside (4-11-2007), Camp 8 Natural Community Restoration (10-24-2007), and Compton (8-28-2006).

State of Missouri and Other Federal land activities include: Peck Ranch, Rocky Creek, and University Forest Conservation areas: These are just a few of the State managed Conservation Areas with Wildlife, Forest and Woodland resource management. Missouri Department of Conservation (MDC) protects and manages Missouri's fish, forest, and wildlife resources. These three Conservation areas comprise over 60,000 acres of lands adjacent to or within the FHI soils cumulative effects spatial boundary. Management activities in Missouri

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 43 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Conservation areas are similar to those of the MTNF. Additional conservation areas considered in this cumulative effects analysis can be found in the FHI project file.

Private land activities include: The following activities do not occur on Forest Service lands; however they do occur on privately owned lands. The activities include: land clearing for farms and/or home sites, beef farm operations, hobby farms, horse and goat grazing and the construction of new homes. During the conversion process to pastures there was an increase in the sedimentation of streams and creeks and their tributaries.

Reasonably foreseeable actions that may have an effect on Soils:

Future actions on National Forest lands may include: Cane Ridge Small Tree Project (Ongoing): This Poplar Bluff Ranger District project is located west of U.S. Highway 67, and north of U.S. Highway 60. The nearest rural community is Williamsville, Missouri. The project is needed to restore natural communities. The purpose of the Cane Ridge Small Tree project is to move habitat conditions toward their historic natural community types, structure, and composition. Activities inside the FHI cumulative effects area include Pre-commercial Thinning, and mid-story control of understory.

Blackwell Ridge (Ongoing): This Poplar Bluff Ranger District project is located west of U.S. Highway 67, and north of the Black River. The purpose of the project is to improve forest health, develop sustainable forest conditions, and provide wildlife habitat diversity by harvesting declining trees. Activities inside the FHI cumulative effects area include Seed tree with reserves, Salvage harvest, Group Selection harvest and understory control.

Future actions on State of Missouri and other Federal lands may include: State of Missouri Conservation areas: At this time there are no known projects or activities proposed in the future on MDC lands that would affect the soils resource. Activities similar to that of the MTNF are expected, such as prescribed fire, forest thinning, and logging.

Future actions on Private lands may include: Reasonable foreseeable actions based on past trends in the area include some timber harvest and some prescribed burning occurring on the surrounding private ownerships. Other activities on private land include some pasture conversion and housing development on a percentage of the lands being harvested. The lands most suitable for pasture are already in pasture; new housing developments have a close correlation to good access.

Cumulative effects discussion:

Alternative 1: (No Action) Salvage and other forest health operations would not take place under this alternative. Dead and down trees would increase fuel levels leading to increased wildfire danger. In the absence of wildfire, dead and down trees would decompose over time leading to increased macro and micro- organism populations carrying out the decomposition process. As decomposition proceeds, dead and down material would eventually be incorporated into the organic horizon and surface horizons leading to increased soil nutrient capital.

Alternative 2:

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 44 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Adherence to the Forestwide S & G’s, mitigation measures, and strict contract administration would be critical in minimizing detrimental impacts to soil and watershed resources. Harvesting, site prep and timber stand improvement, and transportation system management projects can negatively affect soil productivity and soil quality. The overriding intention of this project Alternative is to remove dead and dying declining oak species from easy to access locations with limited resource damage vulnerability. Through this analysis it was found that there is no impact expected to hydric soil wetlands or riparian areas. Mitigations associated with the forest plan limit the potential for excessive erosion. Sediment increase is expected to be highest during harvest activities and eventually would be reduced as the temporary roads become stable and vegetated. This may take up to one full growing season, but can be shorter if the re-vegetation and growing season are compatible. Closing and obliteration of the temporary roads is critical in bringing the erosion rate down to pre-harvest and pre-activity levels. Temporary roads utilizing existing non-system legacy road networks limit the need for new road construction. The most important soils-related concern is the amount of acreage having soils susceptible to compaction. In addition to the S & G’s listed in the Forest Plan, it will be of utmost importance to adhere to strict timber sale administration and ensure heavy equipment is not being used during times of high compaction potential.

Irreversible or irretrievable commitment on resources Alternative 1 or Alternative 2 would not have an irreversible or irretrievable commitment on the soil resource in the proposed FHI project area.

Soil resource summary: There would be no significant cumulative effects on the soil resource because of the limited nature and extent of the cumulative effects discussed above. This conclusion was reached after analyzing all of the above information regarding the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future activities on all ownerships within the specified spatial and temporal boundaries.

Hydrology Resource

The MTNF utilizes the ACE model and watershed condition classifications to analyze, track, and inventory hydrology resources on national forest lands. Refer to the Soil Resources section of this environmental analysis for an explanation of the ACE model. Watershed condition is defined as the state of physical and biological characteristics and process within a watershed that affect soil and hydrological functions supporting aquatic ecosystems (USDA Forest Service 2011). A watershed is considered to be functioning properly if the physical attributes are appropriate to maintain biological integrity. As part of the Watershed Condition Framework (WCF), the Watershed Condition Classification (WCC) is used nationwide to determine watershed condition. WCC defines classes that reflect the level of watershed health or integrity in the context of WCF. There are three classes to describe watershed condition:

• Class 1 (Functioning Properly): watersheds exhibit high geomorphic, hydrological, and biotic integrity relative to their natural potential condition. A properly functioning watershed has minimal undesirable human impact on natural, physical, or biological processes and is resilient and able to recover if disturbed by large natural disturbances or land management activities.

• Class 2 (Functioning at Risk): watersheds exhibit moderate geomorphic, hydrological, and biotic integrity relative to their natural potential condition.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 45 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

• Class 3 (Impaired Function): watersheds exhibit low geomorphic, hydrological, and biotic integrity relative to their natural potential condition. An impaired function watershed occurs because a threshold has been exceeded. Substantial changes to the factors that caused the degraded state are needed to set them on a trend of improving conditions that sustain physical, hydrological, and biological integrity. In addition, there are 12 indicators used to assess watershed condition, which are split into four categories to measure overall Watershed Condition Classes (i.e., classes 1, 2, and 3), as follows: aquatic physical, aquatic biological, terrestrial physical, and terrestrial biological (USDA Forest Service 2011). The indicators and their attributes represent ecological functions and processes that affect soil and hydrological function, and include: • Water Quality Condition • Water Quantity Condition • Aquatic Habitat Condition • Aquatic Biological Conditions • Riparian/Wetland Vegetation • Road and Trail • Soil • Fire Regime Condition • Forest Cover • Rangeland Vegetation • Terrestrial Invasive Species • Forest Health

• Existing condition of Hydrology Resource

The hydrology analysis area is located in the Salem and Springfield Plateaus of the Ozark Highlands, a landscape characterized as karst topography. Karst landscapes are defined by the presence of caves, springs, sinkholes and losing streams, which are created as groundwater dissolves soluble, carbonate bedrock, such as limestone and dolomite. Within Missouri’s karst topography, groundwater recharge is considered to be discrete recharge (localized, concentrated movement of water from land surface into subsurface). Discrete recharge occurs where the dissolution of limestone and dolomite bedrock has occurred (MODNR 1997). In karst terrain there is a strong interaction between surface water and ground water, as is evidenced by the presence of both gaining and losing streams. Gaining streams maintain flow essentially year-around and have flows that are well-sustained or increase in a downstream direction (MODNR 1997). The gaining streams on the MTNF are the reason for perennial stream flow. Perennial streams flow all year long and do not go completely dry during low flow conditions. The water table along gaining streams is generally at or above stream level and groundwater generally moves toward the stream. In comparison, losing streams lose a significant part of their flow to the groundwater, and are considered discrete recharge features that allow surface flow to rapidly enter the subsurface (MODNR 1997). The water table along losing streams is below stream elevation. Losing streams do not always direct all of the water into the subsurface. A stream in the Ozarks can have sections that are both gaining and losing. Also, losing streams can become gaining for a short duration after a precipitation event that causes the groundwater table to rise to stream level. Most losing streams will carry some flow after a heavy prolonged precipitation event, but some may be dry year-round (MODNR 1997). Missouri Code of State Regulations defines a losing stream as a stream which

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 46 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

distributes 30 percent or more of its flow through natural processes, such as through permeable geologic materials into a bedrock aquifer within two miles flow distance downstream of an existing or proposed discharge (Carnahan, 2012). Not all ephemeral channels at the beginning of a stream network in karst topography are considered a losing stream. There are ephemeral channels that flow only in response to runoff from a storm event and are not losing water to the subsurface.

The total miles of streams (including known gaining and losing streams) and acres of lakes by watershed within the project area are included in Tables 12 to 16 of the Hydrology, Karst, and Cave Specialist Report. The majority of watersheds within the project area include intermittent streams. Intermittent streams flow the majority of the year, but typically go dry during the late summer/early fall months or other times of the year having low precipitation, often combined with times of high evapotranspiration. The Clean Water Act requires the identification of water bodies that do not meet, or are not expected to meet water quality standards or are considered impaired. These are known as the “impaired waters” and are identified on the 303(d) list. The most current version available at the time of this report was written is 2014. The 2016 list is currently being reviewed for approval by the Environmental Protection Agency (MODNR 2016). Within the watershed condition analysis area there are 17 HUC-6 watersheds with a stream on the 303(d) list (Table 11 of the Hydrology, Karst, and Cave Specialist Report). Streams on the 303(d) list include the Eleven Point River, Current River, and Black River for atmospheric deposition of mercury in fish tissue, and the West Fork Black River and Big River for heavy metals associated with lead mining.

Land use and land use history is an important consideration in understanding watershed condition. Native Americans occupied Missouri 12,500 years ago and altered the landscape with the use of fire, localized agriculture in fertile valleys or along rivers, hunting of game, and village sites. European settlement led to substantial changes in the landscape. By the mid 1800’s, broad-scale logging operations, commercial farming, livestock overgrazing, and fire suppression had started, leading to a landscape far different than it was a century earlier. As a result, much of Missouri’s native vegetation remains in an altered condition, ultimately affecting overall watershed condition (Nelson 2010). From the early 1800’s to approximately 1880, the first major land cover change that effected stream morphology was the replacement of bottomland forest with cultivated fields and pastures, causing a direct disturbance to stream channels. During the same time period, wildfire suppression in the uplands caused an increase in forest vegetation, causing decreased runoff and sediment yield from uplands. After 1880, the so-called “timber boom” started, where commercial timber companies began large operations to harvest mature shortleaf pine, followed by other species. The post timber boom period from 1920 to 1960 began a phase of frequent burning in the uplands, extensive cutover hillsides, increased grazing, and increased cultivation. The net hydrological effects of this complex of land use changes are difficult to determine and separate from natural variability. Regardless, there is no doubt these activities have affected Ozark stream channels (USGS 1997). The effect being characterized by accelerated movement of gravel (especially in former deep pools), accelerated channel migration, and expansion of gravel point bars.

Landscape changes in fire regimes vegetation removal have also altered upland terrestrial ecosystems, which has in part resulted in changes to overland flow, infiltration rates, evapotranspiration, groundwater recharge rates, and the quantity and quality of surface water. These alterations have also increased runoff and simultaneous erosion of the land surface into rivers and streams. This has provided long-lasting effects on stream morphology and associated aquatic habitat, which still affect the landscape today. In areas of vegetation removal associated with post-

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 47 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

settlement land development, increased overland flow has resulted in less precipitation filtering into the water table to supply aquifers and springs. This may have resulted in some springs going dry (Nelson 2010). In undeveloped areas, a denser second growth flush of woody vegetation now covers the once open Ozark woodland, and a mat of accumulated leaf litter has replaced the cover of deep-rooted forbs and grasses. This has caused on alteration of the soil-water relations.

Today, the majority of the watershed analysis area includes a forested landscape. However, land development for housing or towns, pasture, and other agricultural activities occur within the analysis area as well. There are a few watersheds having a greater proportion of agricultural (pasture) lands versus forestland. Most of the valley bottoms in the watershed analysis area are in private land ownership, and have been cleared and converted to other uses. Private land use outside Forest Service properties have a major impact to hydrological dynamics and cause more sediment to reach the stream channel network than any other land management activity in these watersheds. In total, private land use in the watershed analysis area is contributing anywhere from 50 to 85 percent of the total tons per year of sediment to the stream network (Table 44 in the Hydrology, Karst, and Cave Specialist Report).

Roads are perhaps the most impactful contributor to degraded watershed conditions. Roads modify drainage networks and accelerate erosion processes, resulting in the alteration of physical processes in streams. These changes can be dramatic, long-lasting, and can degrade water quality and aquatic habitat (Hagans et al. 1986). Water quality and aquatic habitat can be affected by altering flow, sediment loading, sediment transport and deposition, channel morphology, channel stability, substrate composition, stream temperatures, and riparian conditions (USDA Forest Service 2001). Other common hydrological problems originating from roads include: rutting and road surface erosion, poorly placed or inadequate stream crossings, failed surface drains, diversion of drainage from its natural course, blocking passage for fish and other aquatic organisms, and over-steepened cut-and-fill slopes prone to erosion and mass wasting. Studies have indicated that as road and stream crossing densities increase, so do negative effects on aquatic habitat and fish populations (USDA Forest Service 2001).

In 2011, the MTNF completed a watershed condition assessment for all sixth level (HUC-6) watersheds having greater than five percent Forest Service ownership. The assessment included a road and trail condition indicator to address changes to the hydrologic and sediment regimes related to the density, location, distribution, and maintenance of the road/trail network. Calculations included open road density and proximity to water on Forest Service lands. Road density was calculated by the miles of open road and trail divided by the square miles of Forest Service lands. Road proximity to water was defined by the percent of road and trail miles within in 300 feet of a stream. These numbers were used to determine a condition rating of “good”, “fair”, or “poor”. The results of the scoring are included in Tables 22-27 in the Hydrology, Karst, and Cave Specialist Report. The results of this assessment showed that 50 percent of the watersheds had a condition rating of good and are properly functioning, 47 percent had a condition rating of fair and are functioning at risk, and 3 percent of the watersheds had a condition rating of poor and are considered impaired.

In addition to the condition assessment, the ACE model can be used to individually look at effects from sediment erosion caused by roads under the existing condition. The results of this analysis showed that roads in the analysis area for this project are contributing anywhere from 15 to 50 percent of the total tons per year of sediment to the stream network (Table 28 in the Hydrology,

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 48 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Karst, and Cave Specialist Report). The combination of the risk rating scores and the tons of sediment per year calculations show that roads significantly impact the stream network and associated aquatic habitat in the analysis area. Evidence of these impacts can be especially observed at road stream crossings or roads located next to the stream corridor within a floodplain.

Mining has also impacted watershed conditions for portions of the analysis area for this project. Within the MTNF proclamation boundary, mineral production includes lead, zinc, copper, iron, barite, stone, sand, and gravel mining (Missouri Department of Natural Resources 2001). Lead mining exploration in Missouri began in about 1700 with French explorations along the Meramec River and the rugged St. Francois Mountains of southeastern Missouri (USGS 1998b). Since 1720, lead has played an important role in the growth and development of Missouri. As a result, lead mining stemmed the settlement and development of Missouri’s woodlands and forests, generated commerce and industry, and created an economic base for the state (Missouri Department of Natural Resources 2002). Mining continues to occur on MTNF Lands. The “Lead Belt” in Missouri is the leading producer of lead in the United States and produces about 70 percent of the countries lead supply as well as large amounts of the nation's zinc. About 84 percent of the lead is used for lead-acid batteries, and a secondary smelter in Boss, Missouri recycles lead-acid batteries. As a result of past and present mining and smelter operations there are areas of heavy metal- contaminated soil within those watersheds. Historically, transport vehicles did not cover the mining ore, resulting in windblown ore being deposited along haul routes from the mines to the smelters. As a result, the Environmental Protection Agency has found that areas along haul routes have heavy metal soil contamination. Now, trucks cover the ore to prevent additional soil contamination. In addition to historical windblown ore contamination, historically roads in these areas were once built with mine waste which also contributed to local soil contamination. Although this practice is no longer used, soil contamination remains in some areas, impacting hydrology resources.

Extremes in climatic conditions are becoming more common in this region, and reflect another disruption of the hydrology and response of Ozark rivers and streams. Current trends show the Central Hardwood Region (including USDA Forest Service ownership in Missouri, Illinois, and Indiana) is receiving 12 to 17 percent more precipitation, particularly in spring and fall. For example, in the Lower Current River over the last ten years precipitation events have increased along with an increase of daily rainfall events that individually exceed three inches (Missouri State University 2016). During the 50 years between 1955 and 2005 there were a total of six of these storm events occurring over a 24-hour period. In comparison, during the 10 years from 2005 to 2015 there were a total of 10 storm events of this magnitude. In addition, analysis of the 60-year rainfall record in 5-year intervals show that larger rainfall events are occurring more frequently and have higher magnitude over the last 10 years (Missouri State University 2016). Not surprisingly, the increase in these precipitation events are causing a simultaneous increase in flood events. As episodic rainfall events have become more rapid, irregular rises in stream volumes have resulted, with corresponding rapid lowering of water levels caused by the landscape’s decreased ability to “sponge” water (Nelson 2010). Overall, in the Ozark Highlands two-year flood interval discharge has increased 30 percent over the past 30 years (Foreman 2014). There has also been extreme drought (i.e., 2012), and although much shorter term, rivaled conditions occurring during the dust bowl in the 1930’s. There have also been short periods of drought in between high precipitation events within the same calendar year. In addition, since the 1970’s there has been a decrease in snow cover which has led to an increase in soil frost, both of which are expected to continue to increase (USDA Forest Service 2014). Over the next century, various models have been used to predict how the climate may change. Current predictions indicate that precipitation will increase in

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 49 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

winter and spring between two and five inches for those seasons combined, and in summer an increase up to three to eight inches, depending on the model used. As a result, hydrological model projections indicate that soil moisture, runoff, and stream flow will increase along with precipitation. During extreme wet periods the increase in floods will affect streams, while drought will affect the groundwater recharge rates that are needed replenish surface water sources downstream. All of this affects the hydrologic cycle and ultimately, water quantity.

Ultimately, although past and present land management activities continue to affect watershed condition, the climate record shows flood frequency is increasing over the last ten years. Stream response to flooding is a result of the connection to its floodplain and morphology of the stream channel. Morphology of stream channels includes width, depth, bed load content, streambanks, riffle-pool sequence, meander length, and location. A stable stream channel should include vegetated banks, correct riffle-pool sequences, and meander bends. A functioning stream connected to its floodplain allows the water to spread across the landscape, slowing water velocity allowing the deposition of sediment. In contrast, impaired streams not connected their floodplains have unstable streambanks, flood waters cause increased erosion, channel down cutting, and increased sediment movement to lower parts of the watershed.

• Direct and indirect effects on the Hydrology Resource

The analysis area for direct and indirect effects is the location of proposed activities described for each action alternative. Each activity has a management area boundary for silvicultural treatments and road maintenance and reconstruction.

Effects to beneficial uses are considered in this analysis. Direct and indirect effects are analyzed together because they are difficult to distinguish between during an analysis. Detrimental direct and indirect effects on beneficial uses occur when MTNF land management activities result in deposition of sediment or pollutant into a waterway that is at a greater quantity than natural conditions to the point of altering a beneficial use. When this occurs, it is considered nonpoint source pollution. Nonpoint source pollution is defined as water pollution that comes from many different sources in a watershed. Additional information about beneficial uses as defined under Missouri law is included in the Laws and Policy section of the Hydrology, Karst, and Cave Specialist Report located in the project file.

Direct and indirect effects can occur on beneficial uses when soil on hillslopes erode at a rate greater than natural condition and the sediment reaches the waterway. This causes a decrease in water quality, aquatic habitat, and associated beneficial uses. Nonpoint source pollution from soil erosion is most likely to occur when ground disturbing activities cause the removal of soil cover during management treatments. This includes alteration of upland natural vegetation types if effective soil cover is removed and/or the hydrologic function is altered due to soil compaction and decreased soil infiltration. Effective ground cover includes vegetative litter and duff, fine and large woody debris, rock cover greater than 0.75 inches thick, and live vegetation. Vegetative soil cover serves several purposes in the mitigation of accelerated soil erosion by dissipating the energy of falling raindrops through interception. Without effective ground cover, an intense storm can generate large quantities of sediment from hillslopes. Ground cover absorbs water, increases storage capacity, and slows the velocity of overland flow (Poff 1996). Based on observations during monitoring trips, at least some soil cover (live vegetation, leaf litter, etc.) typically returns within one year or less, and erosional processes return to normal function quickly. However, it is

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 50 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

important to note that the response of landscapes to these disturbances are influenced by climate, topography, geology, and ecology (USDA 2005b). As a result direct and indirect effects vary across the landscape and occur naturally in areas that are steep. Increased runoff from direct and indirect effects to stream channels may result in: • increased peak channel flows during flood events • alteration of annual flow distribution • changes in stream channel morphology (pool-riffle sequence, streambank stability, and meanders), and channel bed composition (including gravel, cobbles, boulders, and fine sediment) • alterations to stream channels also negatively affect associated aquatic habitat

Direct and indirect effects are determined by using available monitoring data, scientific research, and results from each proposed activity using the ACE model. Forestwide S & G’s reduce the potential for adverse effects. If effects were determined to be adverse, additional project design mitigation measures (also known as BMPs) were developed to reduce effects. These additional mitigations are included in Appendix A of the Hydrology, Karst, and Cave Specialist Report. The goal is to keep direct and indirect effects short-term, so erosion of sediment remains within the natural variability of the stream network. This would infer that the stream channel is resilient to the amount of sediment being deposited without changing stream morphology, causing the bedload material and movement to be altered.

The timeframe for direct and indirect effects analysis is one year. The removal of effective ground cover typically recovers during the growing season or in the fall. Within one year or less, erosional processes in the treated stands return to normal function. This is based on observation during project monitoring.

Alternative 1: (No Action) No ground disturbing activities would occur; therefore the risk of project-induced adverse effects would not occur. However, the current trend of oak mortality would occur causing a decline of oak species in general. Over time oak mortality would contribute to fuel loading both on the ground and in the form of standing and/or fallen snags. Although this would provide additional soil cover, it could result in more intense fires and safety hazards for public visitors. Refer to the Vegetation Section for more information. Under this alternative, three watershed condition indicators would be altered overtime: fire regime condition, forest cover, and forest health. Under the no action alternative these indicators would continue to move towards a condition class of impaired function, resulting in a decrease in watershed condition.

Alternative 2: (Proposed Action) Under the proposed action there is potential for direct and indirect effects to beneficial uses from vegetation treatments and all road activities.

Roads Roads and motorized trails affect watershed condition because more sediment is contributed to streams through these activities than any other land management activity occurring on National Forest System lands (USDA Forest Service 2010). Road construction and road use are the primary

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 51 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

sources of nonpoint source pollution on forested lands. Roads and trails for motorized use modify drainage networks and accelerate erosion processes, resulting in the alteration of physical and biological processes in streams by directly affecting water quality and aquatic habitat. Roads and motorized trails directly alter natural sediment and hydrological regimes by changing streamflow patterns and amounts, sediment loading, transport and deposition, channel morphology and stability, water quality, stream temperatures, and riparian conditions within a watershed (USDA Forest Service 2001 and 2010). These changes can be dramatic and long lasting and can degrade water quality and aquatic habitat (Hagans et al. 1986). Common hydrologic problems originating from roads and motorized trails include: rutting and road surface erosion, poorly placed or inadequate stream crossings, failed surface drains, diversion of drainage from its natural course, or blocking of passage for fish and other aquatic organisms, and over-steepening cut-and-fill slopes prone to erosion and mass wasting. Ultimately, studies have indicated that as road and stream crossing densities increase, so do negative effects on aquatic habitat parameters and fish populations (USDA Forest Service 2001). Road construction and maintenance activities on Forest Service system roads are planned to reduce the effects of increased sediment to water quality and beneficial uses. Activities include improvement of road drainage by adding BMP’s. These activities include re-shaping of slope, smoothing surface to remove ruts and rills, improving ditches, adding cross drains such as rolling dips or culverts, and adding rock to outlet of culverts to prevent/reduce gullying of the soil. Implementation of these practices can cause a temporary increase in erosion and sediment to the stream systems, but overall will reduce the amount of sediment from the system road network. As long as the road prism exists, there still will be an effect, but the activities proposed under Alternative 2 are not expected to degrade beneficial uses. See Appendix A in the Hydrology, Karst, and Cave Specialist Report for a complete list of applicable BMP’s. The ACE model can be used to individually look at the direct and indirect effects by watershed from proposed road work, including temporary roads (Table 3-5). In all watersheds analyzed the proposed additional road work adds up to one percent or less of the total tons of sediment per year reaching the stream network. This additional contribution of sediment is minor and will be mitigated with the use of BMP’s.

Table 3-5: Tons/Year of Sediment Roads Contribute to Streams in Each Watershed within the Analysis Area under Alternative 2

Percent Alt Total Road Additional 2 Road Sediment - Sediment - Effects Ranger Work Watershed Entire Existing From District Contributes Watershed Condition Roads Alt 2 to Total (tons/yr.) (tons/yr.) (tons/yr.) tons/yr. Eleven Lower Spring Creek 4,057 1,852 24 < 1 Point Briar Creek-Current Eleven 11,890 2,474 2 < 1 River Point Eleven Middle Hurricane Creek 4,535 1,499 15 < 1 Point

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 52 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Percent Alt Total Road Additional 2 Road Sediment - Sediment - Effects Ranger Work Watershed Entire Existing From District Contributes Watershed Condition Roads Alt 2 to Total (tons/yr.) (tons/yr.) (tons/yr.) tons/yr. Whites Creek-Eleven Eleven 5,682 1,269 35 < 1 Point River Point South Fork Buffalo Eleven 2,924 1,079 44 1 Creek Point Wells Creek-Current Eleven 2,771 1,203 5 < 1 River Point Eleven Fourche Creek 8,145 1,184 15 < 1 Point Little Hurricane Creek- Eleven 6,397 1,574 7 < 1 Eleven Point River Point Eleven Big Barren Creek 3,771 1,354 7 < 1 Point Eleven Lower Hurricane Creek 3,481 1,159 27 1 Point Popular Otter Creek 3,151 1,479 8 < 1 Bluff Indian Creek – Black Popular 19,177 2,748 11 < 1 River Bluff Headwaters Cedar Potosi 4,733 711 2 < 1 Creek Headwaters Big River Potosi 4,618 1,363 5 < 1 Upper West Fork Black Salem 5,972 1,714 31 < 1 River Headwaters Huzzah Salem 6,635 1,808 17 < 1 Creek Willow Noblett Creek 22,485 869 14 < 1 Springs Zachs Branch – North Willow 7,075 1,310 7 < 1 Fork River Springs Aquatic Cumulative Effects model

Mechanical Vegetation Treatments Mechanical vegetation treatment activities include creation and use of skid trails, landings, and temporary roads with ground-based equipment. These land management treatments have potential to increase erosion and sediment entering streams because of the removal of effective soil ground cover (leaf litter, vegetation, woody debris, etc.). Direct effects and indirect effects are reduced with the application of stream course protection corridors as defined in the Forest Plan. These protections include the application of riparian management zones, watercourse protection zones, and protections for special karst and wetland features such as fens, springs, and caves. With the use of BMP’s, increases in erosion rates resulting from direct and indirect effects are expected to be

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 53 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

short term and within natural variability of the system. Typically, sediment is reduced as native grasses and forbs grow or recover on the forest floor. See Appendix A in the Hydrology, Karst, and Cave Specialist Report for a complete list of applicable BMP’s. Best Management Practice Evaluations of commercial timber harvest units occurred on the MTNF between 2014 and 2016. Assessment areas included skid trails, temporary roads, landings, stream courses, and the interior or matrix of harvest units. All commercial timber harvesting units surveyed had a total score of “excellent” and all BMP’s were effective at preventing soil erosion from reaching the stream network from temporary roads, skid trails, and landings. (National Core BMP monitoring) The ACE model can be used to individually analyze direct and indirect effects of soil erosion from mechanical vegetation treatments that would occur in each watershed as a result of the proposed action. In the watershed analysis area, mechanical vegetation treatments would contribute less than one to as much as nine percent of the total tons per year of sediment reaching the stream network across all watersheds (Table 3-6).

Table 3-6: Project induced direct and indirect effects from mechanical vegetation treatments Percent Alt Total Sediment 2 Vegetation Reaching Vegetation Treatments Watershed and Ranger District Streams-Entire Treatments Contributes Watershed (tons/yr.) to Total (tons/yr.) tons/yr. Lower Spring Creek – Eleven Point RD 4,057 146 4 Briar Creek-Current River – Eleven Point 11,890 67 1 RD Middle Hurricane Creek – Eleven Point 4,535 72 2 RD Whites Creek-Eleven Point River – Eleven 5,682 140 2 Point RD South Fork Buffalo Creek – Eleven Point 2,924 252 9 RD Wells Creek-Current River – Eleven Point 2,771 78 3 RD Fourche Creek – Eleven Point RD 8,145 198 2 Little Hurricane Creek-Eleven Point River 6,397 41 1 – Eleven Point RD Big Barren Creek – Eleven Point RD 3,771 82 2 Lower Hurricane Creek – Eleven Point RD 3,481 166 5 Otter Creek – Popular Bluff RD 3,151 28 1 Indian Creek – Black River – Popular 19,177 63 < 1 Bluff RD Headwaters Cedar Creek – Potosi RD 4,732 71 1 Headwaters Big River – Potosi RD 4,618 129 3 Upper West Fork Black River – Salem RD 5,972 287 5 Headwaters Huzzah Creek – Salem RD 6,635 71 1

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 54 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Percent Alt Total Sediment 2 Vegetation Reaching Vegetation Treatments Watershed and Ranger District Streams-Entire Treatments Contributes Watershed (tons/yr.) to Total (tons/yr.) tons/yr. Noblett Creek – Willow Springs RD 2,485 71 3 Zachs Branch – North Fork River – 7,075 47 1 Willow Springs RD Aquatic Cumulative Effects model

• Cumulative effects on the Hydrology Resource

Components of cumulative effects:

The ACE Model was used to estimate the cumulative risk to water quality and associated beneficial uses from the proposed silvicultural and associated activities. Sediment is used as measure for effects determinations on land management activities (Clingenpeel 2014). Vegetation management treatments (including prescribed burning) and road construction, maintenance, and decommissioning have potential to generate increased erosion of sediment reaching the stream network or other waterways. Sediment increases can adversely impact water quality and associated aquatic habitat (Clingenpeel 2014). This model estimates the current condition and the effects of various management alternatives that could generate erosion, and compares to risk levels (or thresholds). Results are defined by: low risk level, moderate risk level, and high risk level. A low risk level only requires that the project implementation include Forestwide S & G’s and BMP’s as defined in Appendix A of the Hydrology, Karst, and Cave Specialist report. A moderate risk level suggests that streams be monitored to determine the health of the aquatic biota. A high risk level suggests that the project should consider reducing proposed activities or proposing additional improvement projects such as road and trail obliterations or closures.

Spreadsheets used to run the ACE model can be found in the FHI Project file and are included in the Hydrology, Karst, and Cave Specialist report.

Spatial boundary: There are 52 HUC-6 (or 12 digit code) watersheds with proposed activities within this project. Only 18 of the watersheds (35 percent) were selected for further analysis using the ACE model (Tables 6-10 in the Hydrology, Karst, and Cave Specialist Report). These watersheds were selected because proposed vegetation treatments exceeded 1,000 acres. The selected watersheds contain a mix of private land majority as well as public land majority. All other watersheds have considerably less proposed treatment acres, in most cases less than one percent of the total watershed area. Effects in these watersheds would be considered less than the 18 that were completely analyzed.

Of the 18 watersheds analyzed with the ACE model, 10 are located on the Eleven Point Ranger District, two on the Poplar Bluff Ranger District, two on the Potosi Ranger District, two on the Salem Ranger District, and two on the Willow Springs Unit of the Ava-Cassville-Willow Springs Ranger District.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 55 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Maps and tables of the cumulative effects boundary are included in Hydrology, Karst, and Cave Specialist Report on file in the project record.

Temporal boundary: Local research has shown the effects of increased sediment as a result of timber harvests are identifiable for up to three years (Clingenpeel 2014). Following this guidance, a timeframe of three years from the time of planned sales was used for the ACE model (Clingenpeel 2014). For purposes of this report it was assumed the sales would start in 2017 and that the past, present, and future activities outside of the proposed project that would occur are analyzed for the years of 2015, 2016, and 2017. In the 18 watersheds analyzed, currently no additional activities are planned in 2017.

Proposed actions were constrained to a single year to model the worst case scenario, so future planned projects beyond 2017 were not considered in this analysis. Project implementation on the MTNF does not occur this way. Typically, projects are implemented over a 10-year time period. On average, 15 percent of the proposed silvicultural treatments occur on an annual basis throughout the project area while prescribed fire treatments occur on a 3 to 5 year interval. By modeling the worst case scenario it does not limit the timber sale process. Detailed information of all model inputs and results are on file in the project record. Spreadsheets used to run the ACE model are on file in the project record.

An indefinite time frame for road reconstruction and maintenance was be used, since roads have a longer term impact on the landscape.

Past and present activities and Reasonable Foreseeable Future Activities that may have an effect on the Hydrology Resource: List of projects during the three year time frame include: • Eleven Point Ranger District Watersheds o Big Barren Creek . Prescribed Burns: 1) Turkey Knob, Freemont-Pineknot East Restoration project (2016); 2) Bear Pen Smith, Handy Natural Community Restoration project (2015); 3) Pineknot Cooperative Prescribed Burn project (2015 and 2016) . Vegetation Treatments: Handy Natural Community Restoration Project Treatments in both 2015 and 2016 . Invasive Treatments: 1) Two times in Handy Natural Community Restoration (2016); 2) Van Buren (2016); 3) Integrated Non-Native Invasive Plant Control project (2016) o Briar Creek . Invasive Treatments: Integrated Non-Native Invasive Plant Control project (2016) o Fourche Creek . Prescribed Burns: 1) Wolf Mountain - Units 1, 2, 5, 6, and 7, Wolf Mountain Natural Community Restoration Prescribed Burn project (2015);

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 56 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

2) Planned for 2017 Wolf Mountain Project . Invasive Treatments: Integrated Non-Native Invasive Plant Control project (2016) o Lower Spring Creek . Vegetation Treatments and Road Projects: 1) Westside Project (2015 and 2016); 2) Paty Hollow Project (2015 and 2016); 3) Big Barren Tornado Salvage Project (2016) o South Fork Buffalo Creek . Invasive Treatments: 1) Integrated Non-Native Invasive Plant Control project (2016); 2) Handy Project (2016) o Wells Creek Current River . Invasive Treatments: 1) Integrated Non-Native Invasive Plant Control project (2016); 2) Handy Project (2016) o Whites Creek – Eleven Point River . Prescribed Burns: 1) Cedar Bluff 1, Cedar Bluff 1 Smith, Handy Natural Community Restoration Project (2015); 2) Hodo 1, Handy Natural Community Restoration (2016) . Invasive Treatments: Handy Natural Community Restoration Project (2016) • Poplar Bluff Ranger District Watersheds o Indian Creek – Black River . Vegetation Treatments: Hickory Creek Salvage Project (2015) . Invasive Treatments: Integrated Non-Native Invasive Plant Control project 2016 • Potosi Ranger District Watersheds o Headwaters Big River . Vegetation Treatments: 1) Shirley Project (2015 and 2016) 2) Shoal Creek Project (2015 and 2016) • Salem Ranger District Watersheds o Headwater’s Huzzah Creek . Prescribed Burn: Crooked Creek Project (2015) . Vegetation Treatments: Crooked Creek Project (2015) • Willow Spring’s Unit Watersheds o Noblett Creek . Prescribed Burn: Carman Springs Wildlife Habitat Enhancement Project (2015)

Private Lands and State of Missouri and Other Federal lands:

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 57 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

All potential activities that could generate sediment on other lands throughout the watershed were included in the model. The assumption is that all forest lands outside of Forest Service administration are available to timber harvest. The total forest acreage in the watershed outside of Forest Service ownership is divided by an 88-year rotation age to determine the average amount harvested in any one year. In addition, an assumed mileage of temporary road (necessary for harvest) is calculated at a length of six miles per 1,000 acres harvested. In addition to timber harvest, land use is included in the calculation. The information is derived from a land use grid and assigned a coefficient.

Cumulative effects discussion: Table 3-7 includes a summary from the ACE model showing all actions causing sediment to reach the streams in each watershed analyzed within the analysis area. Land use describes the various activities in a watershed that generate sediment, including pasture, farmland, timber harvest on private land, and urbanization. The sum of Alternative 2 includes all activities in the watershed from the proposed action. Activities include mechanical vegetation treatments, prescribed burning, fire line construction, road reconstruction, road maintenance, and road decommissioning. In all watersheds, the majority of sediment reaching the stream network is due to land use activities outside of the proposed work on MTNF lands.

Most watersheds have an increase of 11% or less compared to existing condition. Only one watershed has a greater than 11% increase, (South Fork Buffalo Creek on the Eleven Point Ranger District) with a total increase of 21% compared to the existing condition.

Table 3-7: Summary of all actions causing sediment to reach streams for each watershed under Alternative 2 for the Eleven Point Ranger District

existing

Watershed and Ranger District

Condition

Existing Year) (Tons/ Roads Percent from Roads Existing Condition Land Use (Tons/ Year) Percent from Land Use Future Private Land Forest Service and (Tons/Year) Percent from Future Land Management Alt 2 (Tons/ Year) Percent in Increase compared to condition Lower Spring Creek – Eleven 1,852 45 1,822 45 26 1 357 9 Point RD Briar Creek-Current River – 2,474 21 9,162 77 166 1 89 1 Eleven Point RD Middle Hurricane Creek – Eleven 1,499 33 2,790 62 27 < 1 220 5 Point RD Whites Creek-Eleven Point River 1,269 22 3,890 68 27 1% 497 9 – Eleven Point RD South Fork Buffalo Creek – 1,079 37 1,208 41 24 1 612 21 Eleven Point RD Wells Creek-Current River – 1,203 43 1,418 51 33 1 117 4 Eleven Point RD Fourche Creek – Eleven Point 1,184 14 6,541 80 102 1 345 4 RD Little Hurricane Creek-Eleven 1,574 24 4,676 73 41 1 106 2 Point River – Eleven Point RD

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 58 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

existing

Watershed and Ranger District

Condition

Existing Year) (Tons/ Roads Percent from Roads Existing Condition Land Use (Tons/ Year) Percent from Land Use Future Private Land Forest Service and (Tons/Year) Percent from Future Land Management Alt 2 (Tons/ Year) Percent in Increase compared to condition Big Barren Creek – Eleven Point 1,354 36 2,225 59 42 1 150 11 RD Lower Hurricane Creek – Eleven 1,159 33 1,918 55 12 < 1 392 11 Point RD Otter Creek – Popular Bluff RD 1,479 47 1,507 48 63 2 102 3 Indian Creek – Black River – 2,748 14 16,126 84 122 1 182 1 Popular Bluff RD Headwaters Cedar Creek – Potosi 711 15 3,877 82 54 1 91 2 RD Headwaters Big River – Potosi 1,368 30 3,109 67 59 1 177 4 RD Upper West Fork Black River – 1,745 29 3,558 60 83 1 615 10 Salem RD Headwaters Huzzah Creek – 1,809 27 4,511 68 74 1 243 4 Salem RD Noblett Creek – Willow Springs 869 35 1,397 56 35 2 184 7 RD Zachs Branch – North Fork River 1,310 19 5,555 79 94 1 115 2 – Willow Springs RD Aquatic Cumulative Effects model

The final results of the model outputs are included in Table 3-8, identified by either: low risk level, moderate risk level, or high risk level, as follows • Low Risk is an increase of 0 to 2,567 tons of sediment per acre • Moderate Risk is an increase of 2,567 to 5,635 tons of sediment per acre • High Risk is an increase greater than 5,636 tons of sediment per acre

All watersheds had a low risk rating under the proposed action alternative. This means that the implementation of the Forestwide S & G’s and BMP’s would protect watershed condition and beneficial uses with the implementation of the proposed action.

Table 3-8: Results of the Aquatic Cumulative Effects Model for Alternative 2 Percent Increase Proposed B from Existing Tons/Year Watershed Name Ranger Condition of all Risk Rating Including District Land Future Management Projects Activities Lower Spring Creek Eleven Point 9 Low 383 Briar Creek-Current River Eleven Point 2 Low 254 Middle Hurricane Creek Eleven Point 5 Low 247 Whites Creek-Eleven Point Eleven Point 9 Low 523 River

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 59 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Percent Increase Proposed B from Existing Tons/Year Watershed Name Ranger Condition of all Risk Rating Including District Land Future Management Projects Activities South Fork Buffalo Creek Eleven Point 22 Low 636 Wells Creek-Current River Eleven Point 5 Low 150 Fourche Creek Eleven Point 5 Low 447 Little Hurricane Creek- Eleven Point 2 Low 147 Eleven Point River Big Barren Creek Eleven Point 5 Low 192 Lower Hurricane Creek Eleven Point 26 Low 1,073 Otter Creek Popular Bluff 5 Low 165 Indian Creek – Black River Popular Bluff 2 Low 304 Headwaters Cedar Creek Potosi 3 Low 237 Headwaters Big River Potosi 5 Low 144 Upper West Fork Black 698 Salem 12 Low River Headwaters Huzzah Creek Salem 10 Low 317 Willow 219 Noblett Creek 9 Low Springs Zachs Branch – North Fork Willow 209 3 Low River Springs Aquatic Cumulative Effects model

Alternative 2 proposes treatments to reduce the impacts from oak decline. Improvements to vegetation in this project also would beneficially improve watershed condition. As mentioned under Alternative 1, watershed condition is defined to be the state of physical and biological characteristics and process within a watershed that affect soil and hydrological functions supporting aquatic ecosystems (USDA Forest Service 2011). A watershed is considered to be functioning properly if the physical attributes are appropriate to maintain biological integrity.

Three indicators would improve overtime: fire regime condition, forest cover, and forest health. Under the no action alternative these indicators would help move towards a condition class of properly functioning, resulting in an improvement in watershed condition.

Hydrology Resource summary: All watersheds have a low risk rating under the proposed action alternative. This means that the implementation of the Forestwide S & G’s and BMP’s listed in Appendix A of the Hydrology, Karst, and Cave Specialist Report would protect watershed condition and beneficial uses with the implementation of the proposed action.

As mentioned under the existing condition there are streams on the 303(d) list from contamination related to lead mining activities and atmospheric deposition of mercury. Since all watersheds were rated as low and the implementation of the Forestwide S & G’s and BMP’s would protect watershed condition, there would be no additional effects from this project to the 300(d) listed streams in the analysis area.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 60 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Transportation

• Existing condition of Transportation

The FHI project area is situated solely on Federal lands throughout southern Missouri on several MTNF Ranger Districts including Salem, Potosi, Willow Springs, Eleven Point, and Poplar Bluff. Lands are within Dent, Reynolds, Iron, Washington, Howell, Douglas, Shannon, Oregon, Carter, Ripley, Butler and Wayne Counties. Approximately 45,885 acres of “at risk” stands have been identified for harvest and reforestation treatment in this project. Stands are accessed by a combination of State, County, and Forest Service roads.

Anyone traveling to or within the project area is likely to drive upon a combination of state, county, and Forest Service roads. State roads are primarily paved. County and MTNF system roads provide primary & localized access within the project area. County roads have an aggregate surface (with a small amount of paved surface), whereas Forest Service roads have an aggregate or native surface. County and Forest Service roads are used by passenger and high clearance vehicles, and carry considerably less traffic than state highways. These are the roads that would be used to transport equipment to the project sites and timber products from the project sites to processing locations.

The project area contains 228 National Forest System roads that would be used for access to project activities, with a combined length of 395 miles. These roads vary in length from 0.1 to over 5 miles. Most of these roads are single lane and dead-end within the National Forest. National Forest System roads are marked with brown, vertical posts showing the road’s number and length.

The MTNF has published Motor Vehicle Use Maps (MVUM). These maps identify those Forest Service system roads designated for public motorized vehicle use. Motorized use is limited to those vehicles and operators that comply with all federal, state, and local traffic laws and regulations. The maps also show which designated roads have seasonal restrictions. Public motorized access is prohibited on any Forest Service road not shown on the MVUM. The black and white map is free to the public and will be updated annually. All-Terrain Vehicle (ATV) operators with a valid County ATV permit may use those county roads and any Forest Service system roads shown on the MVUM within these counties. Mixed-use of the roads by licensed trucks and cars and permitted ATVs is a common occurrence.

National Forest system roads are developed and maintained for long-term access and as such provide primary access into the project area for recreation, administration, and commodity production. National Forest system roads within the project area are generally located on ridge tops, have been constructed to Forest Service engineering standards, are maintained and signed in accordance with their objective maintenance level, and are considered adequate for use under normal operating conditions. Any management activity, which increases use or considerably alters normal road conditions or traffic patterns, may be mitigated with appropriate warning and precautionary signing. Additional road maintenance may be required to safely accommodate heavier volumes of traffic. Roads may also require reconstruction in order to allow commercial vehicle access for resource management activities.

In addition to system roads, there are approximately 193.5 miles of non-system roads on National Forest land in the project area. Non-system roads are roads on Forest Service managed land that are

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 61 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

not needed for long-term access. Many have been in place since the early 1900's when the area was first harvested for timber. The condition of these roads is usually fair to poor because little or no improvements or maintenance work has ever been done. Those located on ridge tops are relatively stable, except for areas that become soft when wet. Those located on side slopes or riparian areas are less stable and may become entrenched, rutted, or washed out. These roads have continued to be used for recreational activities, timber harvesting, and other resource management activities. Some of the non-system roads have been decommissioned or have become inaccessible due to natural vegetation growth, but many have remained open because of continued recreational vehicle use. Public motorized use on non-system roads is prohibited, unless written authorization is granted.

All roads that are open, including both system and non-system, receive some degree of vehicular traffic. Use occurs primarily on weekends for recreational driving, hunting, firewood gathering, and other recreational pursuits. Evidence of hunter camps can be seen along several of the roads. Some non-system roads within the project area are used by unauthorized high clearance vehicles and ATVs. As stated previously, the MVUM prohibits motorized vehicles on non-system roads, without written authorization. However, non-motorized travel, such as hiking, biking, or horseback riding is allowed.

All System Roads are assigned a maintenance level (ML) that provides the maintenance requirements and service provided. Within this project all System Roads are either a ML 1, 2, or 3. The following lists and describes the different MLs:

ML 1: Roads are closed for at least one year to both administrative and public motorized use. Receives basic custodial care in order to minimize damage to resources. User comfort and convenience are not considered. Roads may be inaccessible and have a native surface. ML 2: Roads suitable for high clearance vehicles. User comfort and convenience given minimal consideration. Roads have aggregate or native surface. ML 3: Roads suitable for passenger cars and generally have aggregate surface. User comfort and convenience are considered. ML 4: Roads suitable for passenger cars and have either an aggregate or a paved surface that provides a moderate degree of user comfort and convenience. ML 5: Roads suitable for passenger cars and have a paved surface that provides a high degree of user comfort and convenience.

Current Forest Service annual road maintenance budgets have only been adequate for maintenance level 3 and 4 roads, and a small percentage of maintenance level 2 roads. Maintenance level 3 and 4 roads are the most heavily traveled roads on the forest. In addition to the annual road budget, road maintenance deposits collected through commercial activities (such as timber harvesting) have been used for surface blading, replacing aggregate surfacing, and roadside mowing and limbing. In some cases, commercial users of roads have performed road maintenance activities themselves, such as; surface blading, removal of roadside vegetation, or replacement of road surfacing materials, primarily on maintenance level 2 roads.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 62 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

A majority of system roads needed for resource management activities and public access is in place. The need for road maintenance, construction, reconstruction, or decommissioning activities is based on proposed management activities, management area objectives, and the need for resource protection. National Forest system roads are meant to provide safe and efficient access for both the public and/or the Forest Service.

Road maintenance is the ongoing upkeep of a road necessary to retain or restore it to its approved road management objective. Road maintenance activities are preventive measures, used to stabilize the road, protect road investments, and minimize disturbance to surrounding resources. Activities associated with road maintenance and improvement may include surface blading, replacement of driving surface material, mowing and limbing of roadside vegetation, cleaning and restoring drainage features, and replacing signs.

The intent of road construction or reconstruction is to provide long-term access into an area with the least amount of disturbance possible. Part of the “least disturbance” objective is to ensure resource damage does not occur in the future after a road has been constructed or reconstructed. Proper construction or reconstruction can minimize disturbance to the area. Road construction or reconstruction increases the degree of soil and vegetative disturbance in the short term, while providing long-term load bearing strength and stabilization of the surrounding soil and vegetation. Roads are constructed or reconstructed to provide a minimum standard of road necessary for management area objectives. Road reconstruction would reduce seasonal access restrictions due to wet weather. Road construction and reconstruction consists of clearing vegetation from the roadway, installing drainage features, and adding aggregate to harden the driving surface of the road. In some cases, realignment of the reconstructed road may be necessary.

All road miles are estimates in the following analysis and are based on current data in the MTNF’s GIS and Physical Financial Infrastructure (INFRA) database. Some adjustment of estimated miles may occur in order to protect resources, reconcile GIS and INFRA mileage differences, and provide for the application of sound engineering judgment when implementing the proposed road projects on the ground.

• Direct and indirect effects on the Transportation System

Alternative 1: (No Action) No changes would be made to the existing 395 miles of National Forest System roads within the project area. Routine maintenance of system roads would continue. These maintained roads would continue to provide access for both Forest Service management activities and public enjoyment of the area.

No reconstruction of system roads would occur. Without reconstruction, some roads would continue to deteriorate and become less safe to travel upon. Without aggregate surfacing, the roads would continue to be a source of soil erosion and sedimentation into nearby streams. Lack of surfacing material would exacerbate rutting and mud holes when vehicles are driven on saturated soils within the road. Excessive rutting and large mud holes would force drivers to maneuver around them, which could result in the vehicle leaving the roadway or even dragging or hitting the bottom of the vehicle, and thus make driving more hazardous. In addition, trees, bushes, and grasses growing along or within the road would limit sight distance, scratch the sides of vehicles that brush against them, and smack windshields.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 63 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Approximately 193.5 miles of non-system road within the project area would remain. These roads would likely continue to receive unauthorized motorized traffic, diminishing the ability of the roads to re-vegetate naturally. Many of the same effects mentioned above for not reconstructing roads would also occur on those unneeded roads that are not decommissioned.

Alternative 2: (Proposed Action) This alternative would address the purpose and need of providing a safe and efficient transportation system to access the proposed treatment areas. Routine maintenance of system roads would continue. Approximately 163 miles of system roads are proposed for maintenance in the FHI project. The effects of road maintenance would be the same as in alternative 1.

Deposits for road maintenance would be collected for about 73 miles of Forest System roads that have been constructed and are regularly maintained. These are normally maintenance level 3 or greater roads. Road maintenance on these roads would be done as needed utilizing public works contracts to maintain the roads in the same condition as they were prior to the start of the FHI project activities. The deposits may be used for maintenance during the project time period or after the project has been completed. The remaining 90 miles of system roads used in the project would be maintained by the terms of the timber sale contract.

In addition, to support project activities, approximately 85 miles of system road would be reconstructed. Reconstruction would improve the ability of the roads to handle logging equipment and vehicles, as well as improve motorized access within the project area. High-clearance and/or commercial vehicles could safely use the reconstructed roads, as the drivers would not encounter large mud holes, ruts, or tree limbs whacking their vehicles. Sight distances would also be improved. Upon completion of road reconstruction, drivers could travel much more safely and efficiently. The reconstructed roads would have less erosion and thus less sedimentation into nearby streams, due to its hardened driving surface. The area’s recreational experiences would be enhanced by improved driving conditions on the reconstructed roads.

Approximately 63.7 miles of temporary roads are needed to facilitate access to the treatment area. These new temporary roads would be rehabilitated after the timber sales.

Table 3-9 below gives a summary of Transportation activities in Alternative 2 within the FHI project area.

Table 3-9: Road Management Activities in Alternative 2 Measures Alternative 2 (Estimated) Road maintenance: The objective is to improve public safety and access to the harvest & reforestation stands. (See attached spreadsheet for road numbers & 163 miles mileage of individual roads) Designed to move toward Forest Plan Goal 2.3 Road reconstruction: The objective is to reconstruct system roads to Forest Service engineering standards and to improve public and administrative access 85 miles to the harvest & reforestation stands. (See attached spreadsheet for road numbers & mileage of individual roads) Designed to move toward Forest Plan Goal 2.3

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 64 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Measures Alternative 2 (Estimated) Temporary roads: The objective is to provide temporary road access that complements the permanent road system for effective resource management. 63.7 miles Designed to move toward Forest Plan Goal 2.3 Mileages based on GIS and INFRA data (2016)

Table 3-10 gives a summary of the Transportation system by alternative for the FHI project area.

Table 3-10: Summary of Transportation System by Alternative

Transportation System Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Total miles of System roads 395 395 Miles of System road to maintain 163 163 Miles of System road to reconstruct 0 85 Miles of System road to Non-system road 0 0 Miles of Temporary roads needed to facilitate project 0 63.7 activities (would be decommissioned when no longer needed) Mileages based on GIS and INFRA data (2016)

• Cumulative effects on the Transportation System

Components of cumulative effects:

Spatial boundary: The spatial boundary for the Transportation System is the FHI project area. It was chosen because of the narrow scope of the project’s effects on transportation access in the project area. The only changes to the transportation system due to the FHI project are those required to safely provide access to the project locations so that activities can be effectively completed.

Temporal boundary: The Transportation System cumulative effects temporal boundary is five years (past and future). This boundary was chosen because government (federal, state, and local) transportation planning is normally limited to a five-year period; and because the project activities need to occur within five years to capture the value of the timber products before the trees die. Government road-related budgets are also difficult to predict beyond five years. These boundaries were selected because this is the extent where the cumulative effects information would be measurable and meaningful and the direct and indirect effects would be relevant.

Past and present activities that may have an effect on the Transportation System: The FHI project areas were chosen because there has been no other resource management activity in them for several years, and none planned for the next several years. So the only past or present activity which has had an effect on the Transportation System of the FHI project area is general maintenance of Forest System Roads, which continues regardless of other resource project activity.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 65 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

The Forest will continue to partner with agencies addressing local, state, and regional transportation needs and provide a seamless transportation system between and amongst the various agencies (Road Analysis Report, Maintenance Level 3 and 4 Roads, 2003). The incremental effects of other federal, state, and local road actions would not change, regardless of the alternative chosen.

Reasonably foreseeable actions that may have an effect on Transportation: Potential activities in the reasonably foreseeable future include general road maintenance on roads other than those included in the FHI area, and reconstruction of roads in other adjacent or nearby future project areas. However, none of the reasonably foreseeable actions would occur within the FHI project area, and therefore do not pose any appreciable cumulative effects on motorized access to or use of the project area or its vicinity for each of the alternatives.

Future actions on National Forest System lands may include: In the future, it is reasonable to assume that a variety of assessments for vegetation management projects may be conducted in areas adjacent to or near the FHI project, including some that address forest health issues. State, County, and Forest roads may be boundaries for other project areas, and roads will be needed to access other project areas and activities. Similar vegetation management/forest health actions may include commercial timber harvest, non-commercial thinning, and hazardous fuel reduction. Other activities may include maintaining/enhancing endangered bat habitat, old growth designation, recreation site maintenance or improvement, trails maintenance, or watershed improvement.

Future actions on Private lands may include: No additional transportation system activities are anticipated on Private lands.

Cumulative effects discussion: In 2015, the MTNF completed a forest-wide Travel Analysis Process (TAP). This travel analysis included all National Forest System roads in the MTNF. The analysis period was set at five (5) years to address needs, desires, effects, and implications of forest transportation system. The TAP identified opportunities for the national forest transportation system to meet current and future management objectives, and provides information that allows integration of ecological, social, and economic concerns into future road-related decisions.

The forest-wide TAP was not a decision-making process. Instead, it provided an analytical framework from which to make recommendations that may be examined in the NEPA process that provides the basis, including formal public involvement, for making decisions. A thorough travel analysis informs subsequent NEPA decisions, allowing individual road-related projects to be more site-specific and focused, while still addressing cumulative impacts associated with the entire transportation system.

The forest-wide TAP identified which roads are “likely needed for future use” or “not likely not needed for future use”. As a result, 2191.5 miles, or 96% of NFS roads were identified as “likely needed in the future”. The other 84.5 miles, or 4% of NFS roads, were identified as “likely not needed for future use.” In addition, it was recommended that 75.3 miles of ML2 roads be reduced to ML1, saving over $21,600 annually in maintenance costs.

The Forest will continue to look for opportunities to develop an economically sustainable transportation system by leveraging funds, working with counties, reducing maintenance levels,

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 66 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

extending maintenance cycles, or even closing roads. Based on previous public reactions to the Forest’s effort to decommission and close non-system roads, a significant reduction in NFS roads would meet with enormous public opposition. The forest-wide TAP results will assist the MTNF in addressing issues related to the size of the transportation system. It will be used to inform future analyses, decisions, and specific actions.

The FHI Travel Analysis Process Report (TAP) further evaluated Maintenance Level 1and 2 System roads, as well as and non-system roads within the project area. These are the types of roads more readily impacted by project actions. The FHI TAP evaluated which roads should be maintained, reconstructed, constructed, or decommissioned. The FHI project area was selected as the appropriate analysis boundary to give the Responsible Official the site-specific context dealing with roads to determine the ultimate effects of the FHI project actions. The FHI TAP is incorporated by reference in the FHI Project Environmental Analysis.

Maintenance Level 3 and 4 roads were addressed in the January 2003 Forest-level Road Analysis Report and their management recommendations have been incorporated into a variety of project- level NEPA analysis.

The permissions or limitations currently employed and found in the Forestwide S & G’s, such as re- vegetation of disturbed soils or ground operating restrictions, ensure the integrity of the roads is maintained. Roads that were used in the past will likely be used again. Periodic road maintenance activities would provide a safe and efficient transportation system within the FHI project area. Without regular maintenance, future road reconstruction would likely be needed on system roads within 10-20 years.

According to the State Transportation Improvement Plan for 2017-2021, (http://www.modot.org/plansandprojects/construction_program/STIP2017-2021/index.htm) several state highways or routes within the analysis area are scheduled for improvements starting in 2017. These projects might result in traffic delays during work periods, but should increase safety and efficiency of travel on those sections of road that are improved. Routine maintenance of state highways is also expected to continue within the project area.

It is expected that the vast majority of road activities by counties within the project area would consist of routine maintenance, such as surface blading, culvert cleaning, aggregate or chip seal surface replacement, and removal of roadside vegetation. Also, it’s likely that additional county roads within the project area will be improved with chip seal or pavement surfacing in the future.

Access to the project area should be safer and more efficient for motorized travel where Forest Service roads have been reconstructed (as identified in alternative 2) and due to regular maintenance of state, county, and Forest Service roads.

The paved surfaces of State Highways eliminate surface erosion, but may result in winter salt and petroleum product residues moving from the road surface to adjacent forest land. Residues come from the paving material itself (asphalt) and leaks from automobiles, trucks, farm machinery and other gas-powered vehicles.

During dry periods, Forest Service and county or private aggregate-surfaced roads can become sources of dust. Frequent travel on these roads results in fine particles becoming airborne and landing on roadside vegetation, which can eventually migrate into nearby streams. At times, drivers

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 67 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

may experience reduced visibility and will need to slow down and be alert in order to spot driving hazards. The reduced visibility is temporary and short-term in nature.

National Forest system roads and county and private roads represent the same potential source of fine material via erosion that affects water resources as sediment. Aggregate roads are perpetual sources of fine materials (dust and small particles), with potential to become sediment in nearby streams. However, with routine maintenance, the amount of sediment that erodes from the roads surface would be reduced. Forest Service system roads are built and maintained to a standard that minimizes the potential for erosion and sedimentation.

An aggregate road would produce a minimum amount of sediment when the road is used infrequently during wet periods, heavy truck traffic is limited, maintenance is performed on a routine basis, and any type of off-road use that disturbs the road is prohibited.

Irreversible or irretrievable commitment on resources None of the alternatives would have an irreversible or irretrievable commitment on this resource in the proposed FHI project area.

No new System roads are being constructed. All temporary roads will be decommissioned once the sales are completed and the roads are no longer needed.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 68 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Biological Environment

Vegetation and Forest Health

Historical Perspective The types of plant communities and associations found in the Missouri Ozarks have resulted from a combination of ecological processes and human activities from both Native and European Americans. The effects of some of these processes and activities are short term, while others have created long-term changes in the vegetative cover.

The two most influential disturbances which created the landscape that we see today were probably the Native Americans use of fire, and later, European and American migration into the area exploiting the natural resources. The Native Americans would often open up the understories with fire to create hunting areas with grassy ground cover. The fire would top-kill the stem of the hardwood and pine sprouts but wouldn’t affect the root systems. Grasses and forbs grew prolifically in the new openings. After the fire, the hardwoods and pine would once again re-sprout to try and produce a stem large enough that the next fire wouldn’t kill it and thus establish itself in the over-story.

Non-human disturbances were, of course, also occurring. Historically wind, including tornados, was one of the primary natural disturbances, along with drought and ice. Naturally occurring lightning-caused fires are reported as occurring in the Ozarks with a frequency of every 2-40 years (Pell 1999). Defoliation from insects and forest diseases also undoubtedly part of the natural disturbance regime of the forest. While many forest stands were mature or over mature, the forest was composed of stands of different age and size classes due to these natural and human-caused disturbances. The variability in stand structure and composition represents the various stages of recovery from past disturbances.

European migration into the area would cause the forest and landscape to experience new manipulations which would once again shape the forest and vegetation in new ways (Nelson; 2005). Large scale logging of first the pine, and later the oak denuded most all of the Missouri Ozarks. In the 1930’s, some of these lands began to be purchased by the Forest Service for a new National Forest. Fire was reduced or eliminated from the landscape by intensive control efforts and the timber grew into what we see at the present time. Different tree species began to be more prevalent, i.e., black and scarlet oak, which grow relatively fast and thus create a landscape dominated by the red oak family. The original solid and scattered shortleaf pine which once was in the area gave way to an almost solid oak/hickory forest.

• Existing condition of Vegetation and Forest Health

The dominant tree species commonly found include black, scarlet, northern or southern red (all red oak family), white and post oak, shortleaf pine, various hickories, some walnut, blackgum, and an occasional sugar maple, basswood or ash. Understory trees include suppressed trees of the same species, as well as dogwood, red maple, serviceberry, ironwood, and elm, among others. Primary forest types include shortleaf pine (to include some plantations), black oak, post oak, mixed oak and oak/pine. Because of the extensive logging that occurred in the late 1800s and early 1900s, most trees in these stands are the same age (even-aged). Early Successional

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 69 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Past management has provided some stands in various stages of regeneration, but that is a relatively small amount across the landscape compared to the overall acreage involved. Currently only 1,152 acres, or 0.5% of the Analysis Area, represent the early successional condition which is considered to be an age class of less than 10 years.

Forested stands that have been recently harvested using regeneration techniques are also classified as temporary openings until they reach a height of 15 feet (Forest Plan, p. 2-29). Under these definitions, once a stand is older than 10 years, it is still considered an opening under Forest Plan guidelines for timber management opening limitations but is not contributing to the early successional habitat condition.

Non-forest land (i.e. permanent openings, rights-of-way, range allotments, and historical bottomland pastures), make up less than 1.5% of the national forest ownership, and are dominated by grasses and shrubs. Permanent and early successional openings are needed by wildlife, for various life cycle needs, and are a key component of a diverse landscape in a healthy forest ecosystem.

Mature/Over Mature Other past management intermediate treatments (thinning, uneven-age management, etc.) have occurred across the involved compartments, but these stands and others that have not been treated for decades currently fall within this classification. Stand structure is typically a combination of dominant over-story hardwood (with some pine) trees with suppressed or shade tolerant trees in the understory. This dense understory is best explained by the suppression of fire for many decades over most of the project area, but not all.

Table 3-11: Summary in acres by Forest Type and Age Class

Seedling Sapling/ Small Mature* Over Total acres pole acres sawtimber acres mature* acres Forest type (0-9 (10-49 acres (70-99 acres years) years) (50-69 years) (100+ years) years) Shortleaf 77 8,192 14,782 30,228 6,295 59,574 pine/Pine-Oak Black/Scarlet oak 471 11,139 5,048 41,061 11,314 69,033 Mixed 591. 10,070 6,279 34,648 8,986 60,574 Oak/Hickory White Oak 13 520 1,094 6,748 2,893 11,268 Other 13,770

TOTALS 1,152 29,921 27,203 112,685 29,488 214,219 *Includes old growth acres, FSVEG data

Due to the general mature to over-mature condition of these areas, oak decline is and has been a chronic problem throughout the Missouri Ozarks (Dwyer et. al., 2007). A complex, slow-acting disease syndrome involving the interaction of (1) predisposing factors such as climatic trends, poor

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 70 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

soil or site quality, tree age, and/or tree genetics; (2) inciting factors such as short-term drought, frost, or insect defoliation; and (3) contributing factors such as root disease (Armillaria mellea), bark or wood boring beetles, or canker or decay fungi (Dwyer 2007). A predominate root disease, Armillaria mellea, is known to be well-established in Ozark Highland forest stands. It has been determined that a lethal infection may require at least some degree of compromised host vigor incited by other stresses, largely depending on individual tree vigor (Lee et. al. 2016).

There appears to be no single cause of oak decline and most of the time it can be traced to multiple factors. Mature and over-mature stands of oak growing on poor sites with poor soils exposed to drought, frost damage, or defoliation tend to be more vulnerable to attack by opportunistic organisms which contribute to oak decline. Stand age and site conditions appear to be the greatest influences on vulnerability of the oaks (Pell 1999). Red oak species such as black oak and scarlet oak are more likely to die from decline than white oak (Pell 1999). Oak decline will continue to occur at various times and locations and the severity and duration of decline events will vary depending on climatic and local conditions.

Timber stands that are predominantly black oak and scarlet oak at or in excess of 70 years of age account for 24% (approximately 52,375 acres) of the National Forest land in the Analysis Area. Field surveys conducted during the planning stage of this project verified many of these stands are suffering from moderate to severe oak decline as a result of relatively old age (70+ years), well drained rocky soils, and successive severe droughts, most recently in 2012. This is mainly evident on ridgetops and south and west slopes throughout the Analysis Area. These slopes typically are warmer due to their aspect, and the well-drained soils which cover the area hold little water during most of the year. Aerial reconnaissance (discussed below) has shown the mortality can be spotty or widely broadcast based on the black/scarlet oak component within the affected stands. Secondary factors causing further stress and damage to these trees includes Armillaria root rot and red oak borers (Lawrence et. al. 2002). An additional 42% (approximately 89,798 acres) of the Analysis Area is in oak/pine, white/post oak, or mixed oak/hickory over 70 years of age. The black and scarlet oak component in these stands can range from 20% to 40 %. Many of these individual trees are also experiencing moderate to severe oak decline. Total acres being affected or with the immediate potential to be affected by oak decline is approximately 67 % (142,173 acres) of the analysis area and displayed as bold numbers in Table 3-11 (Mature, Over mature columns).

Old Growth Although ideal stand structure conditions for an old growth stand are relative in the context of the Missouri Ozarks, the best suited and located stands have been set aside and are classified (in the FSVEG database) as such under the Goals and Objectives set forth within the Forest Plan (Objective 1.4e, p. 1-4). Since the minimum desired acreages differ among different Management Prescriptions (MP), the designated amounts are quantified below based on the MP acres within each district/unit included in the project area.

Table 3-12: Designated Old Growth by MP Management Forest Plan Designated Designated (Percent) Prescription Standard (Percent) (Acres) 2.1 & 6.2 8-12 67,269 11.99% 6.1 15-20 4,643 15.0%*

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 71 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

*Includes the Spring Creek Sensitive Area on Willow Springs unit, FSVEG data

• Direct and indirect effects on Vegetation and Forest Health

Alternative 1: (No Action) In the short term (within the next 10 years), selection of Alternative 1 would maintain the current trend of mortality over time, with continued understory development and a gradual loss of oak species in general. Over the long-term, species composition would depend on available seed trees and the amount of natural disturbance from ice storms, wind storms, insect or disease outbreaks, or wildland fire. Trees currently in decline will never recover, and some may persist, though significantly lower growth rates will be realized (Dwyer and Kurtz 1994).

Age-class distribution would tend to become further skewed towards the older-age classes since no new age-classes are being created except in stands suffering from extreme oak decline that results in mortality. Over time, this mortality will continue to contribute to fuel loading both on the ground and in the form of standing and/or fallen snags. This will result in more intense fires, should they occur, which then would more likely be a stand replacing event. Additionally, safety hazards to forest visitors will not be addressed.

No management would typically result in the decline running its course with a result of less oak stocking and the potential for other species, particularly hickory, blackgum, red maple, and pine to become more abundant, although a pine component where it is lacking would be beneficial.

The Northeastern Area Office of State and Private Forestry (USDA-FS) evaluates and reports, at the Forest’s request, an aerial observation and mapping of the current year’s mortality of MTNF forest lands. From 2012 to 2016, an annual average of 25,000 acres experienced a 5 to 10% mortality rate, with some “hot spots” experiencing up to a 20% loss. This analysis is included an ArcMap project “MTNF_Annual_Mortality_Flight_Information” in the electronic projects file. Sample ground verification of this information confirms these stands are currently overstocked, have a red oak family (black, scarlet, or red oak) component, and are classified as mature. Some white oak mortality was noted throughout the state due to the extreme drought of 2012.

Forecasting: Forest Vegetation Simulator (FVS) The forest has collected data on a grid inventory basis since 2007, basically to confirm current conditions within project areas in relation to Forest Plan Desired Conditions. Some of these plots are within the project area for the FHI. The FVS software is an agency supported program that simulates growth and yield, regeneration, mortality, and stocking within a stand level basis over treatment (or non-treatment) regimes and projected selected time periods.

What follows is the results of an unmanaged scenario for a representative group of plots within FHI, specifically on the Doniphan Ranger District within Ripley County. This projection was run in a calibrated FVS scenario based on recommendations outlined and discussed within “Comparison of FVS Projection of Oak Decline on the Mark Twain National Forest to Actual Growth and Mortality as Measured Over Three FIA (Forest Inventory and Analysis) Inventory Cycles” (Vandendriesche and Haugen, 2008). The files generated for this scenario are contained in the project file.

Forty out of 250 plots described above taken over approximately 25,000 acres were typed as

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 72 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

dominate red oak group stands. These 40 plots were run on an initial growth period to the present from the collection year of 2012, then projections were processed in 10 year intervals out to a total of 50 years. The summary is graphically presented in Graph 3-1 on the next page.

These results show mortality (39 ft³/acre/year) in the red oak group occurring in the next decade, and are predominately contained in the larger diameter trees of that group. Overall average stand basal area (BA) still gradually increases as expected as the remaining trees grow, and the declining trees-per-acre (TPA) from mortality and competition is also predicted. These results are further corroborated from FIA analysis from 2010 to 2015 that reveals a decrease in average annual net growth on all forest land in Missouri due to higher than average mortality rates. Oaks, particularly scarlet and black oaks, accounted for 60% of the measured mortality for that period (Piva and Thomas, 2016).

Graph 3 - 1: No Treatment Projections* Trees per Acre, Basal Area, and Mortality 180

160 161 149 140 133 120 111 100 99 88 80

60

40 39 31 29 25 20 16 18 1210 7 8 5.5 0 1 2016 2026 2036 2046 2056 2066 Cubic Ft Mortalty/AC/YR 1 39 7 10 18 25 BA/AC 88 99 111 133 149 161 TPA (100s) 31 29 16 12 8 5.5

*Results for each projection cycle are attributed annually over that cycle.

The expected vegetation implications to the level of oak decline and mortality would be considered to be temporally valid for the next decade, and would include the potential loss of most of the red oak group, and the response of the remaining species.

Projected Stocking and Composition The FVS tree list file shows the existing non-oak, and some white oak where present, to increase in stocking levels over time as the black and scarlet are projected to die out. Since this data is not summarized for all plots, review of each plot representing the black oak component of the project area show examples of the trend where primarily hickory, blackgum, midstory white oak, and other non-oaks present on any given plot are replacing the black and scarlet oak (that are projected to die) within the next two decades (.trl report, project file). The data does show some black oak carrying

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 73 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

through the projection cycle, but by then shows up as a much reduced component of the total stand stocking both in BA (Basal Area) and TPA.

Stand Dynamics Basal area and canopy closure are measurable conditions that are relevant to forest growth and regeneration potential, among other environmental factors affecting wildlife, soil and hydrology factors, botanical microclimate, and fuel loading. The predicted effects on those conditions are described below to allow the evaluation by other disciplines within this analysis. The amount of anticipated BA loss in overstory trees, (not total stand BA) and related canopy closure change by forest type, mainly driven within the red oak group that would likely die without coppice sprouting, are expressed. All projected loss of dominate trees over time are expected to remain as snags for as long as 5-10 years.

Table 3-13: Summary of Basal Area in Jeopardy by Forest Type Projected Canopy Projected Forest Type Acres BA Canopy Closure BA closure ** Shortleaf pine/Pine-Oak 36,523 100-120 100 60-80 90 Black/Scarlet oak 52,375 80-100 95 30-50 40 Mixed Oak/Hickory 44,534 90-110 99 50-70 60 White/Post Oak 9,641 90-100 99 60-80 90 TOTALS 143,073 *All mature age classes within analysis area with or without a harvest prescription. **Law, Johnson, & Houf: Technical Brief, 1994.

Alternative 2: (Proposed Action) Silvicultural Treatments for Timber Management Common silvicultural terms are used here in an effort to describe what the intent of treatments are, and what the end result of stand treatment will look like after completion. What follows are descriptions of the various harvest methods involved in conducting even-aged management (EAM), uneven-age management (UAM), and salvage. The term applied to each individual stand to be treated was based on the current species composition and structure, as the primary trees to be removed in all treatments will be declining black and scarlet oak. Some distressed white oak, post oak, and or pine may also be harvested as needed to reduce canopy cover as required for the regeneration of desired species to create a composition more resistant to oak decline. Although silvicultural methods such as intermediate harvests or uneven-aged techniques can be used to lessen the effects of oak decline if a young component of oak is available in the stand to eventually take over as the new overstory, continued thinning in now declining stands composed predominantly of the red oak group is not recommended (Clatterbuck et. al. 2006). With implementation of these activities, one would then encounter a mosaic of seedling, sapling, pole size timber, sawtimber, and old growth stands across the landscape (Forest Plan, Appendix D). Due to the overlapping prescription levels of retention, the general effects of harvest are described as either intermediate or regeneration, with salvage falling under the regeneration category. Management options in these areas are limited because of the lack of species diversity, potential loss of coppice sprouting, and poor stocking in trees of acceptable condition, i.e., trees resistant to decline.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 74 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Table 3-14: Regeneration Harvest Prescriptions

Prescriptions Description An even-aged regeneration or harvest method that removes most trees in the stand producing an exposed microclimate for the development Stand Clearcut (w/leave of a new age class in one entry. A minor (less than approximately 10% trees) of full stocking) live component is retained for reasons other than

regeneration. Generally retain 20-40 BA/acre (10-30% canopy cover*) A type of cut that removes trees except those needed for the purposes of seed production. Prepares the seed bed and creates a new age class Seed tree Seed Cut (with in an exposed microenvironment. Additional trees may be retained to and without leave trees) provide a minor (less than approximately10% of full stocking) live

component after the removal cut, for reasons other than regeneration. Generally retain 20-40 BA/acre (10-30% canopy cover*) A variable harvest depending on level of affected trees, involving removing trees which are dead or dying because of injurious agents Salvage Cut (includes other than competition, and to recover economic value that would regeneration) otherwise be lost. High levels of treatment are referred to the prescription of clearcut per FSM 2400 Ch 2470 – 2471.31 Generally retain 20-40 BA/acre (10-30% canopy cover*) A type of cut that removes trees except those needed for the purposes of shelter and or seed production. Prepares the seed bed and creates a Shelterwood new age class in a moderated microenvironment. Additional trees may Establishment Cut (with be retained to provide a minor (less than approximately 10% of full or without leave trees) stocking) live component after the removal cut for reasons other than regeneration. Generally retain 20-40 BA/acre (10-30% canopy cover*) A final removal harvest that releases established regeneration from competition with the overwood after it is no longer needed for shelter Shelterwood Removal under the shelterwood regeneration method. A minor (less than Cut (with leave trees) approximately 10% of full stocking) live component after the removal cut for reasons other than regeneration. Generally retain 20-40 BA/acre (10-30% canopy cover*) The cutting of trees constituting an upper canopy layer to release understory trees. The primary source of regeneration is advance Overstory Removal Cut reproduction. A minor (less than approximately 10% of full stocking), (from advanced live component of the upper canopy may be retained for reasons other regeneration) than regeneration. Generally retain 20-40 BA/acre (10-30% canopy cover*) *Law, Johnson, & Houf: Technical Brief, 1994.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 75 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Table 3-15: Intermediate Harvest Prescriptions

Prescriptions Description An optional cut to enhance conditions for seed production and/or Shelterwood Preparatory develop windfirmness for a future shelterwood establishment cut. Cut Generally retain 50-70 BA/acre (50-85% canopy cover*) An uneven-aged harvest method in which trees are cut in small groups and new age classes are established. The width of groups is commonly less than approximately twice the height of the mature Group Selection cut trees. Individual trees in the matrix may or may not be harvested to (small openings of provide improved growing conditions for remaining trees. Multiple regeneration) entries of this activity ultimately results in an uneven-aged stand of three or more age classes. Generally retain 50-70 BA/acre (50-85% canopy cover*) An intermediate harvest with the objective of reducing stand density primarily to stimulate understory herbaceous response, improve growth, enhance forest health, and other resources objectives. Treatment can recover potential mortality while producing merchantable material. Thinning includes the following: crown Restoration Thin (removal of trees from dominant and co-dominant strata); free (no consideration to crown position); low (removal of trees from lower crown classes); selection (removal of the crown class to favor those in the lower crown classes.) Generally retain 50-70 BA/acre (50-85% canopy cover*) An intermediate harvest with the objective of reducing stand density primarily to improve growth, enhance forest health, and other resources objectives. Treatment can recover potential mortality while producing merchantable material. Thinning includes the following: Commercial Thin crown (removal of trees from dominant and co-dominant strata); free (no consideration to crown position); low (removal of trees from lower crown classes); selection (removal of the crown class to favor those in the lower crown classes.) Generally retain 50-70 BA/acre (50-85% canopy cover*) An intermediate harvest removing trees to improve stand health by Sanitation Cut stopping or reducing the actual or anticipated spread of insects and disease. Generally retain 50-70 BA/acre (50-85% canopy cover*) *Law, Johnson, & Houf: Technical Brief, 1994.

Timber Management Results – Ten Year Management Sunset It is optimistic to foresee completing the proposed activities of harvest and site preparation within the next decade, given normally flat annual budgets and limited manpower. However, it is conceivable that the majority of work should be able to be accomplished before the inevitable decline that is expected progresses to the point that a commercial treatment is no longer viable. The expected shift in age class distribution expressed below will occur in small increments over that ten year management timeline expectation.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 76 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Table 3-16: Summary in acres of Post-Harvest Forest Type and Age Class

Small Over Seedling Mature* Sapling/pole sawtimber mature* Forest type (0-9 (70-99 Totals (10-49 years) (50-69 (100+ years) years) years) years)

Shortleaf 2,830 8,269 14,782 28,228 5,465 59,574 pine/Pine-Oak Black/Scarlet 24,547 11,610 7,886 19,297 5,693 69,033 oak Mixed 0 10,661 15,941 28,277 5,695 60,574 Oak/Hickory White Oak 0 533 4,412 3,930 2,393 11,268 Bottomland 13,770 Hardwood/Open TOTALS 27,377 31,073 43,021 79,732 19,246 214,219 *Includes old growth acres.

Optimality in regeneration harvests (Clearcut with Reserves, Seed Tree, and Salvage) Due to developing conditions from oak decline and associated tree mortality, these treatments will help ensure perpetuation of the oak species, and allow for future sustainable forest management under the Forestwide S & G’s. The stands under these prescriptions are normally greater than 60% black and/or scarlet oak, are greater than 70 years of age, and either lack the potential to regenerate naturally to a fully stocked condition of desirable species, or have predisposed conditions that will only result in regeneration to the same composition and condition of susceptibility to the influences that have caused the decline and mortality currently being expressed. This method optimally treats the highest risk red oak group by harvesting most of the existing stand of trees, with residual individuals and clumps of trees being left as reserves throughout the area. Full sunlight exposure with minimum competition creates the conditions necessary for any existing oak and other hardwood reproduction, as well as coppice sprouting to develop. This would also precipitate the establishment of shortleaf pine where pine is a minor component of the reserve trees. Additionally, treatment will provide temporary openings to contribute to the early successional component needed throughout the project area as well as broadening the age class distribution, albeit to a limited extent, to alleviate future expanses of same aged stands across the landscape.

Any residual reserve trees and/or areas will consist mostly of trees with a life expectancy of 20 years or greater. The first priority for reserves is white oak, due to white oak’s longevity and wind- firmness. The next order of reserve species includes any cavity tree, post oak, hickory, or pine. Selected reserve pine will be of good to superior quality, suitable for a seed source, and capable of adding growth. Red oak group individuals will also be included as reserves when no other priority species is available to meet objectives. This treatment also encourages a great variety of early successional plants to meet wildlife habitat needs in the form of temporary forage which is a primary need in this area (Forest Plan Appendix D). Site preparation for natural and/or artificial regeneration treatment specifics, as well as out-year Timber Stand Improvement (TSI) for influencing composition, are discussed below.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 77 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Temporary Openings Temporary openings greater than 40 acres are restricted under guidelines discussed on page 2-28 of the Forest Plan. This is based on guidance provided under 36 CFR 219.11. All temporary openings proposed from even-aged harvest prescriptions that fall under the described categories above have been vetted via ArcGIS analysis to meet those requirements. However, 36 CFR 219.11 paragraph (d) (4) (i) and (iii) allow for openings greater than 40 acres in those specific circumstances, and in the case of the salvage units, there will be some instances where these openings will be adjacent to each other (FHI map series).

Resiliency: Using additional silvicultural tools to influence the future stand composition and structure through management.

• Natural Regeneration (Site Preparation) Natural regeneration site preparation would be completed on most sites proposed for any harvest. This treatment is generally limited to the residual understory. Conducted following harvest, this non-commercial treatment encourages sprouting of desired species and involves chainsaw cutting poorly formed, suppressed, or severely damaged trees that may interfere with development and growth of the desired species. Residual overstory and/or trees specially designated for retention on the site would not be cut. Cutting undesirable species, such as red maple, blackgum, and sassafras will not eliminate them from treated stands since most stumps will produce sprouts, but will reduce the competition for a few years allowing the more desirable oak, pine, and other hardwood sprouts and advance reproduction to become established.

• Artificial Regeneration (Site Preparation) Same treatment as described above, but also allows for planted trees to have an opportunity for establishment.

• Pine Planting Full planting (10x10) and supplemental (20x20) pine planting is prescribed on selected salvage and/or even-age harvest sites. Additionally, supplemental planting is always an option in any regeneration harvest treatment area where post-harvest stocking surveys indicate a lack of regeneration of acceptable species in the desired numbers (Forest Service Manual 2400, Chapter 2470: R9 Mark Twain Supplement 2400-2600-1; 2470.3 Policy). This consideration is appropriate within the documented historical natural range for shortleaf pine in Missouri (FHI map series).

• TSI – Release Additional post-sale work to further influence the composition of regeneration in the early stages of stand establishment includes the practice of release. A silvicultural standard, releasing from adjacent competition planted (or naturally seeded) pine within 5-7 years after planting/establishment ensures a higher percentage of survival to become a component of the future stand, thus increasing the resiliency, diversity, and growth potential of the stand.

• TSI – Pre-Commercial Thinning (PCT) Another post-sale treatment to further influence the composition of regeneration in the stem exclusion stages of stand development includes the practice of PCT. Also a silvicultural standard, a crown release of individual “crop trees” is usually completed in stands 15-25 years of age, and is typically carried out on a 20x20 spacing for crop tree selection. Prioritizing

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 78 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

individuals that are already expressing dominance and superior form over less desirable species and poorly formed trees influences the composition of the future dominant overstory. Favoring white oak, well-formed black oak, pine, as well as scarlet oak, walnut, or sugar maple over blackgum, red maple, post oak, and in some cases hickory ensures a higher diversity for the future stand, again increasing the resiliency, diversity, and growth potential of the stand.

Stand Dynamics - Management As stated in Alternative 1, BA and canopy closure are measurable conditions that are relevant to forest growth and regeneration potential, among other environmental factors affecting wildlife, soil and hydrology factors, botanical microclimate, and fuel loading. The predicted management effects on those conditions are described below to allow the evaluation by other disciplines within this analysis. The amount of anticipated BA removal in overstory trees, (not total stand BA) and related canopy closure change by forest type, mainly driven within the red oak group that would be harvested, are expressed.

Table 3-17: Summary of Post Treatment Basal Area by Forest Type*

Projected Canopy Forest Type Acres Projected BA Closure ** Shortleaf pine/Pine-Oak 26,119 60-80 90 Treated Shortleaf pine/Pine-Oak 10,404 60 70 Black/Scarlet oak 31,200 30-50 40 Treated Black/Scarlet oak 21,175 30 20 Mixed Oak/Hickory 31,124 50-70 60 Treated Mixed Oak/Hickory 13,410 60 70 White/Post Oak White/Post Oak 8,745 60-80 90 Treated White/Post Oak White/Post 896 60 70 Oak TOTALS 143,073 *All mature age classes within analysis area with or without a harvest prescription. **Law, Johnson, & Houf: Technical Brief, 1994.

• Cumulative effects on Vegetation and Forest Health

Components of cumulative effects

Spatial boundary: The cumulative effects spatial boundary for vegetation is the same as the FHI project area’s direct and indirect effects boundary. This includes 214,219 acres of public land (The included compartments that have an FHI harvest prescription within them).

Temporal boundary:

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 79 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

The temporal boundary was set to analyze 10 years prior and post to this decision because 10 years is the normal management cycle and is the extent of the effects that are measurable and meaningful. Also, due to vegetation being stationary, actions taken on private property would not affect vegetation on National Forest System land.

Past, present, and future activities that may have an effect on Vegetation As can be noticed by the miniscule amount of 0-9 age class within the analysis area, past management practices affecting vegetation have been completed many years ago. The recent (present) projects contributing to effects within these compartments are limited to the Doniphan unit. These projects include Westside, Possum Trot, and Camp 8. Future projects within the Analysis area include Otter Creek on the Poplar Bluff Unit. That project has yet to be designed, so specific harvest prescriptions are as yet unknown, but will be required to account for FHI harvest prescriptions to remain within Forestwide S & G’s. Ongoing work for active (present) projects includes:

Table 3-18: On-going activities within the Analysis Area

Project Treatment Compartment/Stand Acres

Possum Clearcut 240/31,37,39; 241/99; 255/31; 257/76; 258/45,70; 155 Trot w/reserves 264/72,83; 275/1 Possum Seed Tree 241/52,100; 253/63,64; 258/49; 277/42,46 130 Trot Possum Salvage 241/39,40; 257/3,78,100; 258/43,81; 264/32 112 Trot Possum Shelterwood 253/38; 277/1,2,11,13,57 57 Trot 240/4,12,18,19,22; 241/10,11,13,56,78; 253/4,18,31; Possum Group 258/51; 264/2,3,4,26,27,42,47,73,82; 275/19; 631 Trot Selection 277/8,16,22,23,26,27,40,43,45 240/14,20; 241/4,33,34,36,67,86; 253/7,21,32,46; 255/16,17,18,19,25,32,49; Possum Thinning 257/4,29,30,31,80,81,86,87; 878 Trot 264/34,35,37,38,39,54,59,60,61,62,64,66,76; 275/16,17,41; 277/6,15,20,34; 258/1,3,15,42 Clearcut Camp 8 23/1,9,11,27,75 104 w/reserves Camp 8 Seed Tree 2/50,54 39 Camp 8 Salvage 1/49; 23/57 34 1/50,60; 2/41,75,92; 23/13,23,52,69,113; Camp 8 Shelterwood 300 155/4,17,38,55 Camp 8 Thinning 2/40,42,58,73,67; 23/12,18,41,46,47,61; 155/21 305 Clearcut Westside 227/42,98 40 w/reserves

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 80 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Project Treatment Compartment/Stand Acres

Westside Seed Tree 227/10; 228/27 47 Westside Salvage 228/32 19 Westside Shelterwood 227/14,55; 228/79 67 Total 2,918

The initial planning and eventual completion of implementation timeline on a district project can be in some cases up to a 10 year process. These treatments were prescribed within the FHI compartments prior to the now accelerating decline became fully expressed. The planned and ongoing work was accounted for in FHI design, and all projects are in harmony with Forest Plan S & G’s related to temporary openings, riparian protection, and wildlife habitat conservation.

Cumulative effects discussion:

Non-Federal Lands Within the FHI vegetation Analysis Area, approximately 65% of the land base is within federal ownership. The private land base is owned primarily by local landowners, mainly in small farms or woodlots. Some of these private holdings are in open condition either for pasture or agricultural use. The remaining private land is generally in timber consisting of a wide variety of management conditions. Past activities on private land include timber harvest, grazing, and land clearing for conversion to pasture. Some tracts are “unmanaged” areas reserved for aesthetic values by the landowner. Timber harvest within this area is both traditional and generally accepted as legitimate use of land. Public land management as proposed will blend with surrounding private property management history and may well add to overall vegetative diversity and resiliency.

Alternative 1: (No Action) Under Alternative 1, no additional vegetative management would take place. Sixty-six percent (66%) of the stands within the Analysis Area are over 70 years old. In the short term, these stands would continue to mature and the red oak group component will continue to decline. The species composition of stands that are currently primarily red oak species would change as the over-story and mid-story oaks continue to die out and be replaced by non-oak hardwood or pine species present, more (shade) tolerant understory trees that can now compete for canopy space, and/or the existing advance reproduction of all species that are able to respond without coppice sprouting. This change will be less pronounced in stands currently dominated by pine, white oak, or post oak. Over the long term, species composition would depend mainly on available seed source and the amount of natural disturbance from drought, wind, ice storms, or wildland fire. Age-class distribution would tend to become further skewed towards the older age-classes since no new age- classes are being created except in stands suffering from extreme oak decline. In which case, the lack of advance oak reproduction is expected to allow non-mast producing species to become more prevalent. The effects of this alternative would be obvious from the amount of dead and dying oak trees.

Alternative 2: (Proposed Action)

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 81 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Alternative 2 proposes various combinations of vegetative treatments which include salvage, seed tree cuts, various shelterwood cuts, clearcuts, as well as intermediate harvests, such as Group Selection and thinnings.

The effects of regeneration treatments specified in Alternative 2 would be to increase the 0-9 year age class for the next decade (2017-2027). In 2016, the 0-9-age class on federal land within the analysis area is currently less than 1%. In 2016, there are 142,173 acres of the analysis area age 70 years and greater. Many of these stands are the featured areas for treatment due to early through advanced oak decline and recent mortality. The additional intermediate treatment (non- regeneration) stands will treated to 1) allow for growing space of the residual stand 2) capture the value of declining component of mixed oak and oak-pine stands, and 3) allow recruitment on a limited basis of smaller thrifty trees to compete for growing space. The remaining stands that are not currently prescribed for treatment may have decline issues in the future, but for now are retained as part of the maturing forest condition for many resource values, including old growth and riparian areas.

Alternative 2 would address issues of public safety, oak decline, forest health, and wildlife habitat enhancement toward the desired condition within the Forest Plan. Additionally, forest products would be produced as well as the jobs associated with timber harvesting and the wood products industry.

Vegetation Summary: There would be no significant cumulative effects of any kind on vegetation because of the limited nature and extent of the cumulative effects discussed above.

Irreversible or irretrievable commitment on resources None of the alternatives would have an irreversible or irretrievable commitment on this resource in the proposed FHI project area.

Wildlife Resources

Affected Environment The approximately 1.5 million acres of MTNF and the specific project areas are located within the Central Hardwoods region, and are comprised primarily of mixed oak and mixed oak-pine forest communities. The MTNF is drained by several streams and is within one of the nation’s largest karst terrains (see Soils, Hydrology, Karst, and Cave Specialist Report). Past biological surveys have identified hundreds of aquatic and terrestrial animal species present in the counties the FHI project occurs in during all or part of their life cycle (i.e., 56 mammals, 242 birds, 58 reptiles, 39 amphibians, 157 fishes, 19 crayfish, nine freshwater mussels, and countless invertebrates and plants (Missouri Fish and Wildlife Information System, MDC 2016a).

Because the MTNF lies in the transition between the western prairies and eastern deciduous forests, it supports a great diversity of wildlife. Some species are common; others are relatively rare and/or exist on the edge of their ranges. Many warblers and other migratory songbirds breed on the MTNF, including cerulean and Swainson’s warblers. Common browsers include white-tailed deer, turkey, and cottontail rabbit. Other mammals include the short-tailed shrew, groundhog, gray and fox squirrels, southern flying squirrel, gray and red fox, raccoon, skunk, spotted skunk and opossum. Common reptile/amphibian species include the rough green snake, water snakes,

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 82 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

kingsnakes, eastern hognose snake, copperhead, fence lizard, five-lined skink, three-toed box turtle, snapping turtle, northern spring peeper, leopard frog, long-tailed salamander, western slimy salamander, cave salamander, garter and ribbon snakes. Eastern collared lizards are found on western and southern Missouri glades. Black bear, bobcat and wild turkey are also found on the forest.

All forest successional stages on the MTNF are important as habitat for wildlife species. Early successional habitats support blue-winged warblers, chats, prairie warblers, deer, turkey and northern bobwhite. More mature forest/woodlands support species such as bats, woodpeckers, broad-winged hawk, and flying squirrels. Wildlife such as beaver, mink, otter, and muskrat frequent the edge of lakes and streams. Lake and stream edges also provide food and cover for a wide variety of songbirds, predators, waterfowl, shorebirds, and amphibians. Specialized habitats such as glades, fens, caves, cliffs, snags, cavity trees, and downed woody debris also provide important habitat for unique species such as collared lizards, Tumbling Creek cavesnail, Hine’s emerald dragonfly, timber rattlesnakes, and Indiana bats.

The lakes and streams of the MTNF provide a variety of fish including smallmouth and largemouth bass, catfish, walleye, rainbow trout, panfish, and numerous small fish. In addition, several species of mussels and crayfish find homes in MTNF waters, some of which are endemic and others of which are federal and/or state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive (TES). Streams of the Ozarks also harbor the unique and state endangered Eastern and Ozark hellbenders (federal endangered), a large aquatic amphibian.

The MTNF contains almost 800 known cave entrances, and thousands of other karst features such as losing streams, sinkholes, springs, and estavalles. Groundwater recharge is both discrete and diffuse. Water can travel from the surface to underground aquifers very quickly and with little time for particles to adhere to soil or to breakdown through natural processes. Some of the cave species are confined to one or a few caves and many species are quite susceptible to even small changes in their physical environment.

Groups of species to be evaluated in this document The following species groups will be evaluated in this specialist report: • Threatened and endangered species and any associated designated critical habitat; • Regional Foresters Sensitive Species • Migratory Birds

THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES AND ASSOCIATED DESIGNATED CRITICAL HABITAT

• Existing condition of Threatened and Endangered Species

There are 15 threatened or endangered species/critical habitat (TES/CH) that occur on or adjacent to the MTNF. There are no proposed species currently on the MTNF Species list. See Table 3-19 for the list of species that will be analyzed in this project. A thorough search of Missouri Natural Heritage Database (MDC 2016b) by both the District and Forest biologists, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) IPAC system (USFWS 2016), and Forest Service records was conducted to determine known locations of TES/CH. Stands that had known occupancy of any threatened or

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 83 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

endangered species or designated critical habitat were dropped from consideration for treatment in this project.

Table 3-19: Threatened and Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat on the MTNF and those that will be analyzed in this project Will Species be Documented Documented Federal Analyzed Species Occurrence in Occurrence in Status Further in Treatment Area Action Area Document? Indiana bat Endangered (no (Myotis sodalis) critical habitat on No Yes Yes MTNF) Gray bat (Myotis Yes (capture at Endangered (no grisescens) ponds in area but critical habitat on Yes Yes ponds will not be MTNF) treated) Northern long- Threatened No Yes Yes eared bat Hine’s Emerald Endangered Dragonfly (critical habitat on No No No (Somatochlora MTNF) hineana) Pink Mucket Yes (in rivers (Lampsilis Endangered No which will not be Yes abrupta) directly impacted) Scaleshell No (in rivers (Leptodea which will not be leptodon) directly impacted; Endangered No documented No occurrences are well downstream of the action area) Spectaclecase No (in rivers (Cumberlandia which will not be monodonta) directly impacted; Endangered No documented No occurrences are well downstream of the action area) Sheepnose No (in rivers (Plethobasus which will not be cyphyus) directly impacted; Endangered No documented No occurrences are well downstream of the action area) Snuffbox Yes (in rivers (Epioblasma Endangered No which will not be Yes triquetra) directly impacted)

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 84 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Will Species be Documented Documented Federal Analyzed Species Occurrence in Occurrence in Status Further in Treatment Area Action Area Document? Rabbitsfoot No (in rivers (Quadrula which will not be cylindrica directly impacted; cylindrica) documented Endangered (no occurrences are critical habitat on No well downstream No MTNF) of activities on Salem/Potosi; and well upstream of activities on Poplar Bluff) Tumbling Creek Endangered (no Cavesnail critical habitat on No No No (Antrobia culveri) MTNF) Ozark Hellbender Yes (in rivers (Cryptobranchus Endangered No which will not be Yes alleganiensis directly impacted) bishopi) Running Buffalo Clover (Trifolium Endangered No No No stoloniferum) Mead’s Milkweed Threatened No No No (Asclepias meadii) Virginia Sneezeweed Threatened No No No (Helenium virginicum)

Bats: Indiana Bat, Gray Bat, and Northern Long-eared Bat

Status of the Species (threatened and endangered bats) within the action area There are no documented occurrences of the Indiana bat and northern long-eared bat (NLEB) within the treatment areas in the FHI project. All stands with hibernacula (or within ¼ mile of a hibernacula), capture records or known roosts for Indiana or northern long-eared bats were dropped from the proposed action. There are a couple of capture sites for gray bats within the proposed treatment areas at ponds. The ponds are within stands that will be treated but the ponds themselves will not be treated or changed. There are no gray bat maternity caves or hibernacula within the treatment area.

All three species have been found in various habitats across the MTNF. The only units in this project with Indiana bat Areas of Use (Maternity colony areas) are Poplar Bluff, Salem and Potosi. The Salem/Potosi Area of Use has been surveyed multiple times since the initial finding of the maternity colony and has never been relocated. The roost trees that were documented in the original survey have long since fallen. The areas are still suitable for roosting and foraging and will not be impacted by this project. The maternity colony Area of Use on the Poplar Bluff unit is still active, but will not be impacted by this project. The NLEB has been documented across the entire

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 85 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Forest. There are gray bat transient caves, maternity caves and small hibernacula across the Forest. Gray bats have been captured along streams and at upland ponds across the Forest as well.

Since the arrival of White Nose Syndrome (WNS) in Missouri, populations of northern long-eared bats have declined and populations of Indiana bats have increased (Colatskie and Elliot 2016). Gray bats do not seem to be affected by WNS.

Analysis of Effects on Threatened and Endangered Bats The 2005 Programmatic Biological Assessment (PBA) (USDA 2005b) for the Forest Plan analyzed the effects of implementing the Forest Plan on the Indiana bat and gray bat (the NLEB was not listed at the time). The life history, threats, status, and analysis of effects to the gray bat can be found on pages 169 through 194 of the PBA. The Forest determined that the implementation of the Forest Plan “may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect” the gray bat. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service concurred with this determination (Appendix D – 2005 USFWS Programmatic Biological Opinion (PBO)) (United States Department of Interior (USDI) 2005). The life history and analysis of effects to the Indiana bat can be found on pages 195 through 283 of the PBA. The Forest determined that the implementation of several of the activities allowed by the Forest Plan would “adversely affect” the Indiana bat. The USFWS agreed with this determination and issued a PBO in 2005. The same types of treatments that were discussed in the programmatic documents will be used to manage the area project under this project. Effects to the NLEB were analyzed programmatically when the USFWS listed the species as threatened and issued a Section 4(d) rule. The analysis of effects of timber harvest and roads can be found on pages 35-43 of the PBO on the Final 4(d) rule for the NLEB and Activities Excepted from Take Prohibitions (USFWS 2016); the life history . This document and the associated Biological Assessment will tier to the PBA’s and PBO’s for the each of these bat species.

• Direct and indirect effect on the Gray bat

Alternative 1: (No Action) The gray bat does not roost in trees as the Indiana and northern long-eared bats do. The continued decline of the forest condition in this area will generally not affect the gray bats. However, as mortality of the forest increases, the fuel loading both on the ground and in the form of standing and/or falling snags will increase. This could result in more intense wild fires, should they occur, resulting in a likely stand replacing event. Smoke from this type of fire, and resulting watershed effects, could impact cave dwelling bats and could impact water quality which could reduce clean drinking water and aquatic insect prey availability.

Alternative 2: (Proposed Action) Silvicultural treatments and connected/associated actions (e.g., construction of temporary roads) are not expected to affect gray bats, their caves, the habitat around the caves, or foraging habitat. Since gray bats roost year round in caves, logging does not affect their roosting habitat directly. Timber harvest may alter stand structure and composition, but the area would remain forested and suitable, and known occupied caves would be buffered and protected to maintain suitable cave microclimates. Gray bat foraging habitat in forested riparian areas, upland ponds, or travelling corridors between roosting and foraging habitat are unlikely to be affected, due to the inclusion of protective Forestwide S & G’s in the proposed action. The S & G’s prohibit or limit most timber management and associated activities, such as log landings and equipment operation, within Riparian Management Zones (RMZ) and Watershed Protection Zones (WPZ). Timber management

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 86 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

activities are specifically prohibited within 25 ft. of a stream in a WPZ. On MTNF land, a mature forested corridor at least 100 feet wide and with at least 70% canopy closure would be maintained between gray bat caves and foraging areas. A buffer zone at least 100 feet in radius would be established around ponds and wetlands. Mature forest would remain or develop around these water sources.

Cave habitats (any season) would not be affected by silvicultural treatments or associated actions due to the implementation of protective S & G’s; thus, swarming and hibernating bats and gray bat maternity colonies and their habitats would be protected from disturbance from timber-related and vegetation removal activities or associated actions. For example, S & G’s prohibit timber harvest, skid trails, and refueling equipment within 100 feet of cave entrances, and temporary road construction should be avoided above known cave passages and within 100 feet of cave entrances.

All ground-disturbing activities, such as temporary road construction, would be planned using best management practices and S & G’s to minimize or prevent rutting, compaction, rapid runoff, disruption of water movement, and loss of water and soil quality. Erosion control measures, such as water bars, turnouts, or re-vegetating areas of bare soil with sterile annuals or native plants, would be utilized wherever necessary. The proposed transportation system improvements and continued use of roads in the project area are unlikely to adversely affect gray bats/ habitat and, in some cases, may provide beneficial, narrow, canopy-covered travel corridors to all bats. Vegetation downslope of activity areas also slows water runoff and traps soil particles. Streams and ponds may receive a relatively small amount of sediment in the short term as a result of the proposed silvicultural activities, but water quality would not be impaired. Water sources, particularly upland ponds, would continue to provide bats with drinking water and an abundance of aquatic insect prey.

• Direct and indirect effects on Indiana bats and Northern long-eared bats

Alternative 1: (No action) Indiana bats and northern long-eared bats roost in trees that have flaking bark or in cracks and crevices of damaged limbs/boles of dead/dying trees or snags. The continued decline of the forest condition in this area will generally provide suitable roosting structure for Indiana and northern long-eared bats. However, as mortality of the forest increases, the fuel loading both on the ground and in the form of standing and/or falling snags will increase. This could result in more intense wild fires, should they occur, resulting in a likely stand replacing event. Smoke from this type of fire, and resulting watershed effects, could impact cave dwelling bats and could impact water quality which could reduce clean drinking water and aquatic insect prey availability.

Alternative 2: (Proposed Action) Silvicultural treatments and connected/associated actions (e.g., construction of temporary roads) may cause adverse effects to tree-roosting Indiana and northern long-eared bats. Conducting operations (especially tree removal) during the non-hibernation period (spring, summer, and fall) could result in the loss of an unknown, occupied roost tree and potential adult mortality, if the bats are unable to escape prior to or during felling (low probability). Harvests during the non-volant season (generally 1 May to 31 July) could result in juvenile bat mortality, because the pups are non- volant (i.e., flightless), especially in salvage treatments that generally target the types of trees in which the bats are likely to be roosting. The probability of actually removing a tree with a roosting bat or bats is considered to be low (USFWS 2005), but because the type of harvest the MTNF is proposing is specifically targeting dying trees, that probability increases a little. However, there are

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 87 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

no documented occurrences of Indiana bats or northern long-eared bats in the project area, and snags will be retained in all harvest areas unless there is a safety hazard. All harvest areas will retain some reserve trees, especially non-target species such as white oak and shortleaf pine (see Vegetation Section).

The effects of the treatments will be diluted over time and space. The harvests could occur at any time of the year, over the next 10 years. Approximately one-third of our annual timber harvest activities occur during the months when pups are non-volant (June-July). The variety of harvest treatment types that exist across the project area and they vary in the way they will affect bats (from a small number of trees being removed to clearcuts). There are a large number of untreated stands that exist across the project area and they will continue to provide existing bat habitat. The chances of a bat or bats roosting in any given tree is low. The chances of removing an occupied tree during salvage operations is slightly higher than for other treatment types, strictly because salvage sales are conducted in stands where there is substantial tree mortality, leading to the potential for an abnormally high percentage of suitable trees in an area. Some harvest activities may occur during the hibernation season, which would avoid direct effects. Other effects from timber operations could be from noise and temporary, short-term disturbance or flushing, but these effects are not expected to cause measurable, fitness-level impacts to tree-roosting bats.

Operations could have indirect effects by altering roosting and foraging habitat; however, many of these effects may be beneficial over the long term, especially for Indiana bats, by creating more open woodland conditions favored by this species, but also likely NLEB, because they are known to exploit both closed, cluttered forests and forest with canopy gaps and openings (Sheets et al. 2013, Titchenell et al. 2011). Indirect effects to tree-roosting bats may occur if a primary roost tree or several alternate roost trees are removed during any season. Exposed individuals would need to search for new roosting sites. This can lead to increased energy expenditure, torpor, and possibly loss of young (pregnant females), if the expenditure is sufficiently severe and prolonged. However, an individual is considered likely to be able to locate a new roost within or nearby its traditional roosting area, because (1) snags are an ephemeral resource, so bats know of alternate trees and switch roost trees frequently anyway, (2) requirements for leave trees with bat-suitable characteristics are incorporated into proposed treatments, (3) roost trees are not a limiting factor in the project area, and (4) the individual stands are located near untreated forest where an abundance of suitable trees likely exists.

Timber harvest represents an alteration of habitat rather than permanent loss, since trees will be allowed to regrow. Various studies show that, in general, responsible forest management is achievable alongside bat conservation. In the case of Indiana bats, experts consider it compatible so long as structural features important for roosting and foraging, such as snags, small openings, edge habitats, and a continuous supply of suitable roost trees are maintained (BCI 2001, USFWS 2007). In general, Indiana bat (and NLEB) roosting habitat (especially maternity habitat) is protected through general conservation of large-diameter snags (S & G’s). Snags of varying sizes are not a limiting resource in the FHI project area and will still be plentiful after the project activities in both treated and untreated stands.

Treatments such as restorative thinning, seed tree with reserves, and shelterwood with reserves that are included in the proposed action could improve Indiana bat roosting and foraging habitat at least in the short- to mid-term by reducing midstory clutter, creating a more open woodland character, and exposing residual trees to more sunlight, which is preferred for maternity trees. Small harvest

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 88 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

areas within large blocks of forest increase edge on a small scale, which can improve foraging and roosting habitat, because Indiana bats will often forage along forested edges and over small openings and clearcuts, and occupied roost trees typically are located on forest edges or in small gaps and receive solar exposure (BCI 2001, Taylor 2006, USFWS 2007). Harvesting allows more sunlight to penetrate to the forest floor and results in an increase in herbaceous growth that provides a growth medium for insects that bats eat (Taylor 2006). Tree planting on 9,773 acres will beneficially effect these bats in the long-term. Site-prep and pre-commercial thinning, and understory control would occur in the project area after the commercial harvest. These activities would remove smaller “undesirable” species (i.e., red maple, blackgum, and sassafras) from treated stands to reduce competition for a few years allowing the more “desirable” oak, pine, and other hardwood sprouts and advanced reproduction to become established. Trees up to 8” dbh (diameter at breast height) may be removed. Some of these trees may have suitable roosting structure for bats.

Various studies have shown that NLEB willingly use and return over time to managed forest stands that have been harvested with various techniques. Given the diverse geographic and topographic settings and structurally complex habitats that support NLEB summer populations, active forest management could provide an important tool in creation and conservation of habitat for the species over time. Forest management practices that sustain diversity in tree species, tree-size class, and snag-condition class can be an important tool in providing habitat for NLEB; specifically, use of logging practices that allow for the retention of large-diameter snags along with regenerating forests could provide roosting habitat for both female and male NLEBs (Lacki and Schwierjohann 2001, O’Keefe 2009).

Silvicultural practices such as shelterwood harvests and group selection cuts should be compatible with management for NLEB (Broders and Forbes 2004, O’Keefe 2009). Studies in the Westvaco Wildlife and Ecosystem Research Forest in West Virginia found NLEB maternity colonies in intensively managed stands, such as those that had been subjected to a 16ʺ dbh diameter-limit harvest within the previous 10 years (Menzel et al. 2002, Owen et al. 2003), indicating that within broader forested landscapes, stands undergoing partial timber harvests that leave a relatively closed canopy continue to provide suitable habitat for the species. Based on a study of bat activity in two shelterwood harvest levels and control sites, Titchenell et al. (2011) suggested that forest management practices that reduce the amount of structural volume in the understory to mid-canopy provide suitable habitat for foraging bats, including Indiana bats and NLEB. Sheets et al. (2013) also found that using silvicultural treatments to create forest openings would not alter the level of activity by Indiana bats and NLEB, and should increase the activity levels of other bat species. Simulations involving maternity colony networks in Kentucky also indicated that colony fragmentation is unlikely to occur with removals of small proportions of roosts within a network, suggesting that NLEB may respond well to or at least tolerate some types of direct forest management (Silvis et al. 2014).

Cave habitats (any season) would not be affected by silvicultural treatments or associated actions due to the implementation of protective Forest Plan S & G’s; thus, swarming and hibernating Indiana and northern long-eared bats and their habitats would be protected from disturbance from timber-related and vegetation removal activities or associated actions. For example, S & G’s prohibit timber harvest, skid trails, and refueling equipment within 100 feet of cave entrances, and temporary road construction should be avoided above known cave passages and within 100 feet of cave entrances. There are no Threatened and Endangered bat caves in stands being treated.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 89 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

The Proposed Action includes approximately 162.9 mi of system road maintenance and 84.67 mi of system road reconstruction. The transportation system activities would occur across the entire project area and could occur at any time of year.

Cave habitat for all bats should be negligibly affected by these activities. According to S & G’s, new roads should not be built above cave passages or within 100 ft. of known cave or mine entrances, and roads up for reconstruction should be considered for relocation away from cave entrances.

Bat roosting and foraging habitats should be minimally affected by transportation system improvements. Except for hazard tree removal, existing road maintenance (e.g., surface blading, replacement of surface material, mowing and limbing of roadside vegetation, cleaning and restoring drainage features) is unlikely to have measurable effects to bats or bat habitat, other than to address existing erosion issues, which can benefit bats through improvement of aquatic and prey habitats. However, if hazard trees need to be removed along the corridor, potential roost trees may be lost. A Forest Plan guideline states that hazard tree removal for road maintenance should be conducted November 1 to April 1, but if this is not done during this period, bats may be present and mortality could occur, especially if non-volant juveniles are present (generally May 1 to July 31).

Road reconstruction consists of clearing vegetation from the roadway, installing drainage features, and hardening the driving surface. Typically, vegetation consists of young, small diameter trees and brush, and few, if any, would be currently suitable bat trees. In some cases, realignment or slight widening of the road may be necessary, and if so, reconstruction typically occurs in stable soils on ridgetops and avoids steep slopes and the RMZ and WPZ. However, some suitable bat roosting trees may be permanently removed from reconstructed or widened segments, and this could occur at any time of year, which could result in adverse direct effects to tree-roosting bats. Few trees would be removed within the RMZ or WPZ, so riparian corridors would remain intact, and bat foraging and travel corridors would be protected.

Roads proposed for decommissioning are often the greatest contributors to stream sedimentation, so removing these roads from the transportation system should have a beneficial impact on water quality (and thereby bat prey species habitat). The intent is to block these roads and leave them to revegetate and eventually become reforested. In the meanwhile, they would continue to provide travel corridors to all bats.

Indiana bats and NLEB may lose a few suitable roost trees, but direct effects to these bats are expected to be limited, as most of the actions described here do not entail tree removal (except for short sections of reconstruction). Indirect effects from such limited tree loss should be minimal, because these bats naturally know of and use multiple roost trees in an area, and roosting habitat is not a limiting factor in the project area, as described in previous sections. Finally, the roads may contribute relatively small amounts of sediment to streams and ponds, but they are not anticipated to impair water quality. Bat aquatic insect prey is expected to remain abundant.

• Cumulative effects on Gray, Indiana, and Northern Long-eared Bats

Components of cumulative effects:

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 90 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

The Council on Environmental Quality’s regulations for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act define cumulative effects as the impact on the environment that results from the incremental impact of the proposed actions when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (federal or non-federal) or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative effects can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time (40 CFR § 1508.7). Under the Endangered Species Act Section 7 Interagency Cooperation regulations, cumulative effects are those effects of future state or private activities, not involving federal activities, that are reasonably certain to occur within the action area of the federal action subject to consultation (50 CFR § 402.02).

Spatial boundary: The geographic boundary for cumulative effects analysis includes all lands and waters in the FHI Project Area and within five miles of its boundary. This analysis area was chosen because research suggests that a 5-mile buffer would encompass the maximum area used by an Indiana bat traveling between roosting and foraging habitat in spring, summer, and fall (USFWS 2007) and should encompass the entire home range of any individual bat using any part of the project area, also including gray and northern long-eared bats. The terrestrial and aquatic boundaries were deemed appropriate because potential effects of the proposed activities would be insignificant or not occur outside this boundary.

Temporal boundary: The temporal boundary for cumulative effects analysis is the past five years (in which we have relatively accurate knowledge of what has occurred), the present, and the next 10 years. Most project activities would be implemented in the next few years and effects of these actions would be most evident during implementation and immediately upon completion. Project effects would be much less apparent after 10 years.

There are approximately 1,202,700 acres of land and water within the FHI cumulative effects boundary for bats. Ownership is approximately 480,600 acres are private or state owned and 722,100 acres Forest Service.

Past, Present, and Future activities that may have an effect on Gray, Indiana, and Northern Long-eared Bats: Past, present, and future actions within the cumulative effects boundary include activities by private individuals, the National Park Service, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and two state agencies (Missouri Departments of Conservation and Natural Resources). The cumulative effects area is heavily dissected by state highways, county roads, and Forest system and non-system roads.

The Biological Assessment for the Forest Plan details anticipated effects of other activities to Indiana bats and gray bats that are or will be implemented in the foreseeable future under the Forest Plan. Findings in the PBO report that implementation of the Forest Plan is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the Indiana bat and is not likely to adversely affect gray bats (USFWS 2005). Likewise, the 2016 PBO for the Final 4(d) rule for the NLEB (USDI 2016), find that implementing timber harvest activities is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the NLEB.

Landscape scale vegetation management projects have occurred, are occurring, and will occur within the cumulative effects boundary on the NFS lands of the Salem, Potosi, Poplar Bluff, Willow

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 91 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Springs and Eleven Point units. These projects usually involve various timber harvest methods, firewood gathering, transportation system management, prescribed burning, recreation management, openlands maintenance, and pond maintenance. Other projects are analyzed under separate Environmental Analyses.

National Forest System land actions include: The most recent Forest Service projects in or near the project area include: Fremont-Pineknot East Restoration Project (Eleven Point RD), Van Buren Project (Eleven Point RD), Northeast Lake Project (Poplar Bluff RD), MO National Guard New Road Construction (Poplar Bluff RD), Crane Lake Trail Reroute (Potosi RD), Floyd Natural Community Restoration (Potosi RD), East Fork Huzzah Project (Salem RD), and Bunker Area Derecho Fuels (Salem RD). A complete list of past, present, and future projects on all units can be found in the project record. Many of the projects have the same time of activities and effects to species as this project does.

Additional management activities continue to occur in these areas, and there are likely other finished projects of similar nature as those described above that took place in the recent past. Routine maintenance of roads, trails, and recreational facilities also occur in and around the project area, but are unlikely to have measurable negative impacts to bats or bat habitat, because the features already exist, and activities such as hazard tree removal are supposed to occur during the bat hibernation period. There may also be small-scale tree removal and mowing occurring at the fields maintained for wildlife habitat, which will continue into the future. In general, effects associated with these projects are similar to those described for the proposed project: some short- term negative effects to bats, some, if not all of which, are discountable or negligible, and likely some beneficial effects, especially over the long term.

Special use permits are considered on an on-going basis but with no regularity and in unforeseeable locations across the District. The most common permits are for road right-of-ways (ROWs) to adjacent private property and utility line ROWs. Each of these instances for new permits requires site-specific environmental analysis and each activity must be completed according to the S & G’s in the Forest Plan.

Private land activities include: Privately-owned lands within the cumulative effects boundary are relatively smaller blocks interspersed within NFS lands and consist of a mix of forest, pasture, agricultural fields, and single- family residences and farms. Past, present, and future activities by private individuals include clearing upland and riparian forests for hay fields and grazing of cattle and horses. Some landowners harvest their timber and allow the forest to regenerate. Landowners burn their yards, brush piles, and fields, tear down old structures, and construct new residences and outbuildings. In and around smaller communities, additional land may be cleared of timber or converted from pasture to accommodate homes and businesses. Utilities have expanded to provide electric, water, and sewer services to growing populations.

Depending on the timing of any of these activities, they could lead to the direct mortality of Indiana or northern long-eared bats, if they include tree removal. Additionally, these activities could negatively or positively affect potential gray bat foraging habitat, or Indiana or NLEB roosting and foraging habitat, or they may permanently convert suitable habitat to other uses. Use of off-road vehicles is also common on private land and onto NFS land, and vice versa, which can contribute to some erosion and stream sedimentation issues, which might affect bat foraging habitat or foraging

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 92 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

efficiency. Wildfire caused by arson is expected to continue to impact all ownerships into the future; this is of concern because it is not planned nor can affects to bats and bat habitat be mitigated by measures such as the Forest Plan S & G’s. Local fire departments, MDC, and the Forest Service will respond to wildfires on public and private lands and conduct suppression activities, which can happen at any time of year and with the primary focus being human health and safety, not bat conservation.

State of Missouri and Other Federal land activities include: There are several MDC Conservation Areas that fall partly or fully within the FHI Bat cumulative effects boundary. Past, present, and future activities on the conservation areas are similar to activities on the MTNF. Timber harvest and prescribed burns are relatively common activities on conservation areas, but they occur on a much smaller scale than on the MTNF. Other management includes establishing and maintaining water holes, food plots, old growth forest areas, riparian corridors, fields, savannas, glades, and forest. Focus is also on eradicating invasive species, restoring historic natural communities, and conducting surveys for species of concern. There are also a few State Parks within the boundary and they are managed mostly for recreation purposes, so management is likely to include facilities and trail maintenance, trail renovations, and occasionally hazard tree removal.

White-nose syndrome (WNS) was detected during the winter of 2006-2007 in New York State and is associated with massive die-offs of hibernating bats, including Indiana bats and NLEB. Each successive winter, WNS spreads farther west. In March 2010, the fungus (Pseudogymnoascus destructans) that causes WNS was detected on hibernating bats in Missouri for the first time. In May 2010, five gray bats netted just outside a NPS cave in Shannon County tested positive for the fungus and exhibited scarring on their wings that indicated they had probably been infected over the winter. The actual disease was confirmed on hibernating bats in Missouri in early 2012. A substantial number of counties in Missouri are now suspected or confirmed to have WNS. The first confirmation of bat mortality from WNS in Missouri was announced by MDC in 2014. Massive bat die-offs have not been documented in Missouri yet, but researchers are reporting shifts in roost locations within some caves and decreases in bat numbers in several caves, all pointing towards effects of WNS.

MTNF biologists have been in close communication with the USFWS and MDC since WNS first emerged. A Review of New Information for White-Nose Fungus was prepared for the MTNF on February 25, 2008. The Regional Forester signed a Cave Closure Order for all Forest Service caves and mines in the Eastern Region in April 2009 that was in effect for a year. The Forest Supervisor of the MTNF signed a Cave Closure Order that extended the closures until May 1, 2021.

New information is constantly being evaluated for relevance to cave and forest management in Missouri. A Supplemental Information Record for WNS was prepared by the MTNF in April 2013. The disease was unknown when the Forest Plan was approved in 2005, but S & G’s were developed to protect cave integrity and manage cave habitats for threatened, endangered, and sensitive species. After analyzing current WNS information, the Forest Supervisor determined that a Forest Plan amendment was not necessary at this time. A revision would be considered if new information becomes available on management techniques that may stop the spread of WNS. Precautions are being taken while handling bats during mist-net surveys, and strict decontamination protocols are followed before and after entering bat caves to prevent the spread of disease. The MTNF will continue to provide quality cave and forest habitat for all forest bat species.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 93 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Global shifts in climate may contribute to changes in Central Hardwoods ecosystems, which include the FHI Project Area. Temperatures, precipitation in winter and spring, and runoff and streamflow during spring are projected to increase while snow cover and duration are projected to decrease over the next century (Brandt et al. 2014). Increased annual temperatures may cause gray bats to abandon historic summer or winter caves or cause Indiana bats to abandon hibernacula, due to the species’ narrow and specific temperature and humidity ranges for cave roosting/hibernating. Loeb and Winters (2013) modeled suitable climatic habitat of Indiana bats under four future climate forecasts. Missouri was projected to become climatically unsuitable for Indiana bats under most future climates. Their study suggests that maternity colonies in Missouri will begin to decline and possibly disappear in the next 10-20 years (Loeb and Winters 2013). Hibernacula will be protected from disturbances and large-diameter and a variety of other snags will be retained in diverse habitat types throughout the action area and across the District to support gray, Indiana bat, and NLEB conservation. The MTNF will continue to try to provide healthy and resilient forests that can adapt to potential climatic changes.

Cumulative effects Summary discussion and Determinations for Bats:

Alternative 1: (No Action) Cumulative effects are the cumulative impact of the direct and indirect effects of a proposed action when added to the aggregate effects of past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions. Under the no action alternative, there would be no cumulative effects because no new federal actions are proposed.

Alternative 2: (Proposed Action) Potential adverse direct and indirect effects of the proposed activities, and the Forestwide S & G’s that have been incorporated to minimize the risk, duration and magnitude of those effects were described in the preceding sections. Anticipated effects to gray, Indiana, and northern long-eared bats from the proposed project are similar to those anticipated for the proposed activities in the forest and regional programmatic Biological Opinions for each species, respectively. Few, if any, effects are anticipated related to cave habitats or the bats roosting or hibernating in them. The amount of area affected by the proposed silvicultural treatments, approximately 45,885 acres, is only 3.8% of the total cumulative effects area (approximately 1,202,700 ac) and 6.3% of total NFS land within the cumulative effects area. This is relatively small treatment area within the larger context. Proposed activities could alter bat roosting and foraging habitat in the short- to mid-term, but there would not be any permanent loss or conversion to non-forest habitats with this project, except for a very limited space to relocate a poorly placed trailhead parking area that is currently in a riparian corridor (Floyd Natural Community Restoration project). However, roosting and foraging habitat will continue to be available within the analysis area. Proposed activities, especially salvage cuts, could result in limited take of tree-roosting bats during the active season but are otherwise of essentially short duration (e.g., noise and disturbance) and of limited effect at the population level.

In addition, many long-term beneficial effects to Indiana bats and northern long-eared bats are anticipated under the proposed action. In the long term, the proposed silvicultural treatments and prescribed fire (from previous decisions) are likely to maintain or create large-diameter suitable roost trees (both current and future) within the treatment stands and result in a general improvement of roosting and foraging habitat over time. These treatments also ensure future abundance of species that are favored roost trees, such as oaks and hickories. This combination of prescribed

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 94 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

burning and timber harvest is expected to improve forest structure in several ways. Reducing midstory clutter and canopy density while also increasing solar radiation to potential roost trees and the forest floor will lead to more successful oak regeneration in the treatment stands and provide for future roost trees over the long term, as well as improving terrestrial insect production. Critical cave habitats with adjacent forest and riparian habitats will be protected. Creation of temporary access roads, skid roads, and log landings may create small amounts of optimal foraging habitat and flyways for Indiana and northern long-eared bats and flyways for gray bats. Maintenance of ponds (from previous decisions) will improve foraging and water availability for all bats. Past vegetation management projects in the 1.1 and 1.2 Management Areas along with the Proposed Action seek to restore and enhance communities to their full range of historic vegetation composition and structural conditions which occurred under natural disturbance regimes. These natural communities would have greater resiliency and capacity to adapt to projected climate changes. On balance, it is expected that the long-term potential benefits of the proposed project will outweigh the short-term potential adverse effects, and the project as a whole will not contribute to cumulative effects.

The discovery of White-nose Syndrome does not present a seriously different picture with regard to the environmental effects disclosed in the Environmental Impact Statement for the Forest Plan. Prior to the onset of WNS, the NLEB was a common species across much of its range, and populations of federally-endangered gray and Indiana bats were considered stable or increasing (USFWS 2009, 2015e), despite on-going forest management across the region. While a causal relationship cannot be confirmed, it is reasonable to assume MTNF efforts to safeguard cave habitat, reduce cave (summer and winter) disturbances, and avoid and minimize effects during year round routine management were successful in providing adequate protection to bats. WNS is the primary threat to the species’ continued existences. All of the other (non-WNS) threats combined, including forest management, did not lead to imperilment of gray, Indiana, or northern long-eared bats. The Forest Plan S & G’s for gray and Indiana bats and the conservation measures in the 4(d) rule for the NLEB, all adopted as a part of this proposed action, focus on protecting individual bats in known roosts and hibernacula to minimize deaths of bats during the species’ most sensitive life stages and to help protect roosting, foraging, and hibernation habitats. It is likely that forest management helped create and maintain a variety of quality bat habitats across the landscape. Forest Inventory Analysis (FIA) data shows that summer habitat for Indiana and northern long- eared bats (i.e., snags) is not a limiting factor on any eastern national forests (numbers are in the hundreds of billions) (USDA 2014). Even so, forest-dwelling bat populations during the post-WNS period appear to have declining trends that can be directly attributed to the disease, rather than forestry management practices. And finally, the MTNF continues to promote projects through implementation of the Forest Plan that provide quality habitat for all bats. Therefore, there will be no incremental effects of the proposed action when combined with the impacts of other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future activities as outlined above.

Aquatic Species: Pink Mucket, Snuffbox, and Ozark Hellbender

Status of the Species within the Action Area The pink mucket and snuffbox has been documented in the Black River within the Poplar Bluff Ranger District Boundary. The Ozark hellbender has been documented in the Eleven Point River, Current River, and North Fork of the White River (the North Fork sites are well outside of the project boundary, the project activities occur in the uplands, and will not be analyzed). The three species have experienced declines for reasons that are unclear but habitat alteration is a known threat to them all.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 95 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Analysis of Effects on Endangered Aquatic Species A complete life history, status, threats and analysis of effects to the pink mucket can be found on pages 93 through 114 of the 2005 PBA. The MTNF determined that the implementation of the Forest Plan “may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect” the pink mucket. The USFWS concurred with that determination (2005 PBO Appendix D). An analysis of effects of Forest Plan implementation to the snuffbox and Ozark hellbenders was completed in a BA in 2014 (USFS 2014 pages 32-53). The MTNF determined that the implementation of the Forest Plan “may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect” snuff box and Ozark hellbender. The USFWS concurred with that determination in November 2014 (USFWS 2014).

• Direct and indirect effect on Endangered Aquatic Species

Alternative 1: (No Action) Widespread mortality of oaks will continue under the no action alternative. The mortality continue to contribute to fuel loading both on the ground and in the form of standing and or fallen/snags. This will result in more intense fires, should they occur, which would then likely lead to a catastrophic stand replacing event. The loss of vegetation in this case could lead to erosion events that might reach any of the rivers occupied by the pink mucket, snuffbox, and Ozark hellbender. No roads would be upgraded to current standards under this alternative. According to the Hydrology, Karst, and Cave Specialist Report (see project record), three indicators of watershed function would be altered under the no action alternative: fire regime condition, forest cover, and forest health. Watershed condition could decline under the no action alternative.

Alternative 2: (Proposed Action) There are no activities proposed in the riparian zones that could have a direct effect on streambanks or streambank stability. There are no instream activities planned in the FHI project, therefore no direct effects to these species would occur. Timber harvest and post-sale activities and associated skid trails, landings, and temporary road construction could create erosion and sedimentation into streams indirectly effecting the species. As noted in the above documents, there are numerous Forestwide S & G’s and BMP’s that will be implemented during project implementation that will reduce or eliminate instream effects to mussels or hellbenders.

According to the Hydrology, Karst, and Cave Specialist Report for this project, in all watersheds analyzed the proposed road work adds up to 1% or less of the total tons of sediment per year reaching the stream network (see Table 45 of the Hydrology, Karst, and Cave Specialist Report). This report also concluded that the vegetation management activities associated with this project will contribute less than 1% to 9% of the total tons/year of sediment reaching the stream network in all watersheds analyzed in the analysis area (see Table 46 of the Hydrology, Karst, and Cave Specialist Report). Recent BMP monitoring of timber harvest activities on the Forest indicate that the BMP’s implemented during commercial timber harvest on temporary roads, skid trails, and landings are effective in preventing soil erosion from reaching the stream network. Therefore, the amount of sediment reaching the Current River, Eleven Point River, and the Black River from the implementation of Alternative two will have an insignificant or discountable effect to the pink mucket, snuffbox, and Ozark hellbender.

• Cumulative effects to Endangered Aquatic Species

Components of cumulative effects:

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 96 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Spatial boundary: The geographic boundary for cumulative effects for Endangered Aquatic Species includes the HUC-6 (12 digit code) watershed boundary where planned activities are occurring that may affect these species.

Temporal boundary: The cumulative effects temporal boundary for Endangered Aquatic Species is the past five years, the present, and the next 10 years. Most project activities would be implemented in the next few years and the effects of these actions would be most evident during implementation and immediately following implementation. Project effects would be much less apparent after 10 years.

There are approximately 751,721 acres within the FHI cumulative effects boundary for these three aquatic species. Four percent of the watershed acres (30,163 acres) will be treated under Alternative 2 (see Table 3-20).

Table 3-20: Watershed information for the Endangered Aquatic Species cumulative effects area

Total Stream # of HUC-6 Total Project Ranger District Watershed Name(s) Watersheds Acres Acres Current River, Eleven Point Eleven Point 26 605,766 28,048 River Black River Poplar Bluff 5 145,955 2,115

Past, Present, and Future activities that may have an effect to Endangered Aquatic Species: National Forest System land actions include: The most recent Forest Service projects in or near the project area include: Fremont-Pineknot East Restoration Project (Eleven Point RD), Van Buren Project (Eleven Point RD), Northeast Lake Project (Poplar Bluff RD), and MO National Guard New Road Construction (Poplar Bluff RD). A complete list of past, present, and future projects on all units can be found in the project record. Many of the projects have the same time of activities and effects to species as this project does.

Additional management activities continue to occur in these areas, and there are likely other finished projects of similar nature as those described above that took place in the recent past. Routine maintenance of roads, trails, and recreational facilities also occur in and around the project area, but are unlikely to have measurable negative impacts to these species because BMP’s will be implemented during this type of work. There may also be small-scale tree removal and mowing occurring at the fields maintained for wildlife habitat, which will continue into the future. In general, effects associated with these projects are similar to those described for the proposed project, very little sediment will be contributed to the stream systems.

Special use permits are considered on an on-going basis but with no regularity and in unforeseeable locations across the District. The most common permits are for road ROW’s to adjacent private property and utility line ROW’s. Each of these instances for new permits requires site-specific

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 97 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

environmental analysis and each activity must be completed according to the S & G’s in the Forest Plan.

Private land activities include: Privately-owned lands within the cumulative effects boundary are relatively smaller blocks interspersed within NFS lands and consist of a mix of forest, pasture, agricultural fields, and single- family residences and farms. Past, present, and future activities by private individuals include clearing upland and riparian forests for hay fields and grazing of cattle and horses. Some landowners harvest their timber and allow the forest to regenerate. Landowners burn their yards, brush piles, and fields, tear down old structures, and construct new residences and outbuildings. In and around smaller communities, additional land may be cleared of timber or converted from pasture to accommodate homes and businesses. Utilities have expanded to provide electric, water, and sewer services to growing populations. These activities may contribute sediment to the Current, Eleven Point and Black Rivers.

State of Missouri and Other Federal land activities include: There are several MDC Conservation Areas that fall partly or fully within the FHI cumulative effects boundary. Past, present, and future activities on the conservation areas are similar to activities on the MTNF. Timber harvest and prescribed burns are relatively common activities on conservation areas, but they occur on a much smaller scale than on the MTNF. Other management includes establishing and maintaining water holes, food plots, old growth forest areas, riparian corridors, fields, savannas, glades, and forest. Focus is also on eradicating invasive species, restoring historic natural communities, and conducting surveys for species of concern. There are also a few State Parks within the boundary and they are managed mostly for recreation purposes, so management is likely to include facilities and trail maintenance, trail renovations, and occasionally hazard tree removal. Activities such as these on state lands are also implemented using BMP’s and little sediment is expected to arrive in these streams during project implementation.

Global shifts in climate may contribute to changes in Central Hardwoods ecosystems, which include the FHI Project Area. Temperatures, precipitation in winter and spring, and runoff and streamflow during spring are projected to increase while snow cover and duration are projected to decrease over the next century (Brandt et al. 2014). Instream temperature increase may affect aquatic species, depending on habitat connectivity and other factors (USGS online article (http://northatlanticlcc.org/news/all-news/climate-change-threatened-north-americans-freshwater- mussels-usgs) accessed 11/22/2016).

Cumulative effects Summary discussion for Endangered Aquatic Species:

Alternative 1: (No Action) Cumulative effects are the cumulative impact of the direct and indirect effects of a proposed action when added to the aggregate effects of past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions. Under the no action alternative, there would be no cumulative effects because no new federal actions are proposed.

Alternative 2: (Proposed Action) There are no potential adverse direct from the proposed action. Other projects on the Forest have had determinations of “no effect” or “may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect” the pink mucket, snuffbox, or the Ozark hellbender. Forestwide S & G’s and the implementation of

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 98 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

additional BMP’s limits the effects of MTNF activities on these species. Implementation of BMP’s on state or other Federal lands also limits the effects of similar management activities to these species. Activities on private lands directly adjacent to these streams could occur at the landowners will and could affect streambank stability or instream habitat if riparian buffer zones were not protected and instream activities occurred.

REGIONAL FORESTER SENSITIVE SPECIES

• Existing Condition of Regional Forester Sensitive Species

There are 137 Regional Forester Sensitive Species (RFSS) on the MTNF. There are four mammals, six birds, one reptile, one amphibian, 10 fish, one arachnid, four bivalves, seven crustaceans, one gastropod, five insect, five non-vascular plants, and 92 plants. The Missouri Natural Heritage Database was searched for occurrences of these species. There are no known occurrences of these species in the stands that will be treated. Habitat for many of these species occurs in the project area and unknown/undocumented occurrences may be present. For the purposes of this analysis, the RFSS have been separated by habitat type: aquatic, Bluff, cave, glade, open woodland, riparian, and wetland.

Aquatic Species

Status of the Species in the Action Area The following aquatic dependent RFSS may occur in watersheds that have at least one stand proposed to be treated: Purple Lilliput (Taxolasma lividum), Western fanshell (Cyprogenia aberti), Ouchita kidneyshell (Ptychobranchus occidentalis), coldwater crayfish (Orconectes eupunctus), Artesian agapetus caddisfly (Agapetus artesus), A heptageniid mayfly (Maccoffertium bednariki), alligator snapping turtle (Macroclemys temminckii), Crystal darter (Crystallaria asprella), Arkansas saddled darter (Etheostoma euzonum euzonum), Ozark shiner (Notropis ozarcanus), Stargazing darter (Percina uranidea), and Eastern slim minnow (Pimephales tenellus parviceps). There is at least one record of each of these species in the Missouri Natural Heritage Database in the watersheds that will be treated. Watersheds that have records of these species are in Table 3-21.

Table 3-21: Watersheds with at least one record of a Regional Forester Sensitive Species that uses aquatic habitat

Majority Land Watershed Name Watershed Acres Project Acres Ownership Cedar Creek – 22,264 350 (2%) Public Land (88%) Current River Briar Creek – Current 39, 924 1296 (11%) Private Land (87%) River Whites Creek- Eleven 32,365 2669 (8%) Public Land (82%) Point River South Fork – Buffalo 18,221 4007 (22%) Public Land (77%) Creek

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 99 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Majority Land Watershed Name Watershed Acres Project Acres Ownership Denny Hollow – Eleven Point River 12,812 291 (2%) Private Land (83%)

Little Hurricane Creek – Eleven Point 28,479 1465 (5%) Public Land (62%) River Big Barren Creek 26,321 1327 (5%) Public Land (70%) Buffalo Creek 5,127 240 (5%) Public Land (88%) Bat Cave Hollow- 26,653 557 (2%) Private Land (54%) Eleven Point River Mill Creek – Black 15, 283 377 (less than 1%) Private Land (66%) River Indian Creek – Black 36,613 1236 (3%) Private Land (69%) River Middle West Fork- 24,567 39 (less than 1%) Public Land (71%) Black River Zach’s Branch – 29,454 825 (3%) Private Land (63%) North Fork River

• Direct and indirect effects to Aquatic RFSS

Alternative 1: (No Action) These species are mostly or fully aquatic. The oak mortality would continue to contribute to fuel loading both on the ground and in the form of standing and or fallen/snags. This will result in more intense fires, should they occur, which would then likely lead to a catastrophic stand replacing event. The loss of vegetation in this case could lead to erosion events that might reach any of the rivers occupied by these species. According to the Hydrology, Karst, and Cave Specialist report, three indicators of watershed function would be altered under the no action alternative: fire regime condition, forest cover, and forest health. Watershed condition would decline under the no action alternative.

Alternative 2: (Proposed Action) There are no project activities in streams, ponds, or in the stream corridors that are occupied by these species. Therefore, no direct effects to the aquatic species are expected to occur. Road construction and maintenance activities that are planned will reduce the amount of sediment reaching the stream network, as many of the current roads in the project area are not up to current standards. All road activities will be implemented with current Forestwide S & G’s and BMP’s.

Indirect effects to RFSS aquatic species could occur from any vegetation treatments including the creation and use of skid trails, landings, and temporary roads by increasing erosion and sedimentation entering streams from the removal of effective ground cover. The implementation of Forestwide S & G’s and BMP’s will greatly reduce this effect. Only 5.58% of the watershed area will be treated over a number of years. This also reduces the amount of sediment produced in any given year.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 100 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

• Cumulative effects to Aquatic RFSS

Components of cumulative effects:

Spatial boundary: The geographic boundary for cumulative effects for RFSS aquatic species includes the HUC-6 (12 digit code) watershed boundary where planned activities are occurring that may affect the species.

Temporal boundary: The temporal boundary for RFSS aquatic species cumulative effects is the past five years, the present, and the next 10 years. Most project activities would be implemented in the next few years and the effects of these action s would be most evident during implementation and immediately following implementation. Project effects would be much less apparent after 10 years.

There are approximately 262,900 acres within the FHI cumulative effects boundary for these aquatic species. About 5.6 percent of the watershed acres (approximately 14,700 acres) will be treated under Alternative 2 (see Table 24 above).

Past, Present, and Future activities that may have an effect to Aquatic RFSS: National Forest System land actions include: The most recent Forest Service projects in or near the project area include: Fremont-Pineknot East Restoration Project (Eleven Point RD), Van Buren Project (Eleven Point RD), Northeast Lake Project (Poplar Bluff RD), MO National Guard New Road Construction (Poplar Bluff RD), Crane Lake Trail Reroute (Potosi RD), Floyd Natural Community Restoration (Potosi RD), East Fork Huzzah Project (Salem RD), and Bunker Area Derecho Fuels (Salem RD). A complete list of past, present, and future projects on all units can be found in the project record. Many of the projects have the same time of activities and effects to species as this project does.

Additional management activities continue to occur in these areas, and there are likely other finished projects of similar nature as those described above that took place in the recent past. Routine maintenance of roads, trails, and recreational facilities also occur in and around the project area, but are unlikely to have measurable negative impacts to these species because BMP’s will be implemented during this type of work. There may also be small-scale tree removal and mowing occurring at the fields maintained for wildlife habitat, which will continue into the future. In general, effects associated with these projects are similar to those described for the proposed project, very little sediment will be contributed to the stream systems.

Special use permits are considered on an on-going basis but with no regularity and in unforeseeable locations across the District. The most common permits are for road ROW’s to adjacent private property and utility line ROW’s. Each of these instances for new permits requires site-specific environmental analysis and each activity must be completed according to the S & G’s in the Forest Plan.

Private land activities include: Privately-owned lands within the cumulative effects boundary are relatively smaller blocks interspersed within NFS lands and consist of a mix of forest, pasture, agricultural fields, and single- family residences and farms. Past, present, and future activities by private individuals include clearing upland and riparian forests for hay fields and grazing of cattle and horses. Some

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 101 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

landowners harvest their timber and allow the forest to regenerate. Landowners burn their yards, brush piles, and fields, tear down old structures, and construct new residences and outbuildings. In and around smaller communities, additional land may be cleared of timber or converted from pasture to accommodate homes and businesses. Utilities have expanded to provide electric, water, and sewer services to growing populations. These activities may contribute sediment to the Current, Eleven Point and Black Rivers.

State of Missouri and Other Federal land activities include: There are several MDC Conservation Areas that fall partly or fully within the FHI cumulative effects boundary. Past, present, and future activities on the conservation areas are similar to activities on the MTNF. Timber harvest and prescribed burns are relatively common activities on conservation areas, but they occur on a much smaller scale than on the MTNF. Other management includes establishing and maintaining water holes, food plots, old growth forest areas, riparian corridors, fields, savannas, glades, and forest. Focus is also on eradicating invasive species, restoring historic natural communities, and conducting surveys for species of concern. There are also a few State Parks within the boundary and they are managed mostly for recreation purposes, so management is likely to include facilities and trail maintenance, trail renovations, and occasionally hazard tree removal. Activities such as these on state lands are also implemented using BMP’s and little sediment is expected to arrive in these streams during project implementation.

Global shifts in climate may contribute to changes in Central Hardwoods ecosystems, which include the FHI Project Area. Temperatures, precipitation in winter and spring, and runoff and streamflow during spring are projected to increase while snow cover and duration are projected to decrease over the next century (Brandt et al. 2014). Instream temperature increase may affect aquatic species, depending on habitat connectivity and other factors (USGS online article (http://northatlanticlcc.org/news/all-news/climate-change-threatened-north-americans-freshwater- mussels-usgs) accessed 11/22/2016).

Cumulative effects Summary discussion for Aquatic RFSS:

Alternative 1: (No Action) Cumulative effects are the cumulative impact of the direct and indirect effects of a proposed action when added to the aggregate effects of past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions. Under the no action alternative, there would be no cumulative effects because no new federal actions are proposed.

Alternative 2: (Proposed Action) There are no potential adverse direct or indirect effects from the proposed action. All other projects implemented on the Forest have had a “no impact” or “may impact individuals” determination of effects. Forestwide S & G’s and the implementation of additional BMP’s limits the effects of MTNF activities on these species. Implementation of BMP’s on state or other Federal lands also limits the effects of similar management activities to these species. Activities on private lands directly adjacent to these streams could occur at the landowners will and could affect streambank stability or instream habitat if riparian buffer zones were not protected and instream activities occurred. There will be no cumulative adverse effects on aquatic RFSS from the implementation of this project.

Terrestrial Species

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 102 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Status of the Species in the Action Area

The terrestrial species group includes species that use the following habitat types: bluff, cave, glade, open woodland, riparian and wetland. A search of the Missouri Natural Heritage Database and other Forest Service records determined that there are no known records of any of these species in the stands to be treated. A list of the species are included in Table 3-22. While there are no documented occurrences in the treatment areas, there is suitable habitat for some of these species adjacent to or even within the treatment areas where occupancy is unknown.

Table 3-22: Terrestrial Regional Forester Sensitive Species that may occur on the MTNF

Species Species Scientific Name Common Name Habitat Group Group Seligeria donniana Moss Moss BLUFF Calamagrostis porteri insperata Ofer Hollow reedgrass Plant BLUFF Dirca decipiens No name Plant BLUFF Falco peregrinus anatum Peregrine falcon Bird BLUFF Tradescantia ozarkana Ozark spiderwort Plant BLUFF, SLOPES Triosteum angustifolium Yellowleaf tinker's Plant BLUFF, SLOPES weed Pseudosinella espana Springtail Insect CAVE Allocrangonyx hubrichti Central Missouri cave Crustacean CAVE amphipod (Hubricts long-tailed amphipod)

Sabacon cavernicolens Cavernicolous Arachnid CAVE harvestman Myotis leibii Eastern small-footed Mammal CAVE, BLUFF bat Vertigo meramecensis Bluff vertigo Gastropod CAVE, BLUFF Perimyotis subflavus Tri-colored bat Mammal CAVE/FOREST Myotis lucifugus Little brown bat Mammal CAVE/FOREST Spilogale putorius Eastern spotted skunk Mammal FOREST Panax quinquefolius Ginseng Plant FOREST Carex timida Sedge Plant GLADE Carex tonsa var. rugosperma Parachute sedge Plant GLADE Phyllanthus polygonoides Knotweed leaf-flower Plant GLADE Scurtellaria bushii Bush's skullcap Plant GLADE

Vallerianella ozarkana Ozark cornsalad Plant GLADE Metzgeria furcata Liverwort Moss GLADE Rhynchospora harveyi Harvey's beakrush Plant GLADE Rudbeckia fulgida var speciosa Orange coneflower Plant GLADE, OPENINGS, WETLAND Liatris scariosa var. nieuwlandii Nieuland's blazing star Plant GLADE/BLUFF

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 103 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Species Species Scientific Name Common Name Habitat Group Group Tragia ramosa Branched noseburn Plant GLADE/BLUFFS

Triodanis lamprosperma Prairie venus looking Plant GLADE/OPEN WOODLAND glass Agalinus skinneriana Purple false foxglove Plant GLADE/OPEN WOODLAND (Skinners False foxglove) Aimophila aestivalis Bachman's sparrow Bird GLADE/OPEN WOODLAND Echinacea paradox var paradox Yellow coneflower Plant GLADE/OPEN WOODLAND Matelea baldwyniana Baldwin's milkvine Plant GLADE/OPEN WOODLAND Callirhoe bushii Bush's poppy mallow Plant GLADE/OPEN WOODLAND Delphinium treleasei Trelease's larkspur Plant GLADE/OPEN WOODLAND Castanea pumila var ozarkensis Ozark chinquapin Plant GLADE/OPEN WOODLAND Orconectes quadruncus St. Francis River Crustacean GLADE/OPEN WOODLAND crayfish Draba aprica Open ground Whitlow Plant GLADE/OPEN WOODLAND grass Oenothera triloba Stemless evening Plant GLADE/OPEN WOODLAND primrose Silene regia Royal catchfly Plant GLADE/OPEN WOODLAND

Solidago gattingerii Gattinger's goldenrod Plant GLADE/OPEN WOODLAND

Echinacea simulata Wavy-Leaf Purple Plant GLADE/OPEN WOODLAND Aster Lanius ludovicianus migrans Migrant loggerhead Bird GLADE/OPEN WOODLAND shrike Carex woodii Pretty sedge Plant OPEN WOODLANDS Eurybia macrophylla Bigleaf aster Plant OPEN WOODLANDS Oenothera fruticosa Narrowleaf evening Plant OPEN WOODLANDS primrose Carex willdenowii Willdenow's sedge Plant OPEN WOODLANDS Dendroica cerulea Cerulean warbler Bird RIPARIAN Limnothlypis swainsonii Swainson's warbler Bird RIPARIAN Halieaeetus leucocephalus Bald Eagle Bird RIPARIAN Viburnum recognitum Northern arrow-wood Plant RIPARIAN Phlox carolina carolina Carolina phlox Plant RIPARIAN Carex oxylepis var. pubescens Sedge Plant RIPARIAN, SLOPES Juglans cinerea Butternut Plant RIPARIAN, SLOPES

Isotria verticillata Large whorled pogonia Plant RIPARIAN, SLOPES

Carex communis Fibrous-root sedge Plant RIPARIAN, SLOPES

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 104 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Species Species Scientific Name Common Name Habitat Group Group Diarrhena americana American beakgrain Plant RIPARIAN/BLUFF Tipularia discolor Crippled cranefly Plant RIPARIAN/BLUFF

Viburnum molle Softleaf arrowwood Plant RIPARIAN/BLUFF Trillium pusillum var ozarkanum Ozark trillium Plant SLOPES Waldsteinia fragarioides Barren strawberry Plant SLOPES, BLUFF Carex laxiflora var laxiflora Broad looseflower Plant SLOPES/RIPARIAN sedge Carex sterilis Dioecious sedge Plant WETLAND Carex gigantea Large sedge Plant WETLAND Carex fissa var. fissa Sedge Plant WETLAND

Carex decomposita Epiphytic sedge Plant WETLAND Carex cherokeensis Cherokee sedge Plant WETLAND Campanula aparinoides Marsh bellflower Plant WETLAND Symphyotrichum dumosus var. Tradescant aster Plant WETLAND strictior Carex straminea Straw sedge Plant WETLAND Caecidotea dimorpha Isopod Crustacean WETLAND Carex buxbaumii Buxbaum's sedge Plant WETLAND Carex trichocarpa Hairy fruit sedge Plant WETLAND Sabatia brachiata Narrow-leaf pink Plant WETLAND Woodwardia areolata Netted chainfern Plant WETLAND Campylium stellatum Yellow starry fen moss Moss WETLAND Dichelyma capillaceum Moss Moss WETLAND

Sacciolepis striata Gibbous panic grass Plant WETLAND Carex atlantica Star Sedge Plant WETLAND Polygonum arifolium Halberd-leaf tearthumb Plant WETLAND Carex opaca Bicknell's sedge Plant WETLAND Scirpus etuberculatus Canby's bulrush Plant WETLAND Eleocharis lanceolata Daggerleaf spikerush Plant WETLAND

Filipendula rubra Queen-of-the-prairie Plant WETLAND Helianthus angustifolius Swamp sunflower Plant WETLAND Lilium superbum Turk's cap lily Plant WETLAND Liparis loeselii Yellow widelip orchid Plant WETLAND

Xyris torta Slender yelloweyed Plant WETLAND grass Carex gracillima Graceful sedge Plant WETLAND Juncus debilis Weak rush Plant WETLAND

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 105 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Species Species Scientific Name Common Name Habitat Group Group Carex tetanica Ridged sedge Plant WETLAND Carex triangularis Fox sedge Plant WETLAND

Cayaponia quinqueloba Southern cayaponia Plant WETLAND Dryopteris celsa Log fern Plant WETLAND Dryopteris goldiana Goldie's woodfern Plant WETLAND Eupatorium semiserratum Small-flower Plant WETLAND thoroughwort Torreyochloa pallida var fernaldi Fernald's pale manna Plant WETLAND grass Hottonia inflata Featherfoil Plant WETLAND Carex stricta Tussuck sedge Plant WETLAND Ludwigia microcarpa Small-fruit seedbox Plant WETLAND Menyanthes trifoliata Bog bean Plant WETLAND

Phlox maculata pyramidalis Spotted phlox Plant WETLAND Platanthera ciliaris Yellow-fringed orchid Plant WETLAND Platanthera clavellata Small green woodland Plant WETLAND orchid Quercus texana Nuttall's oak Plant WETLAND Geum virginianum Pale avens Plant WETLAND Hydrocotyl verticillata var Whorled pennywort Plant WETLAND, RIPARIAN verticillata Platanthera flava var herbiola Pale green orchid Plant WETLAND, RIPARIAN Sphagnum angustifolium Narrowleaf peatmoss Moss WETLAND, RIPARIAN Platanthera flava flava Southern rein orchid Plant WETLAND, RIPARIAN Juncus filipendulus Ringseed rush Plant WETLAND/GLADE Anemone quinquefolia Wood anemone Plant WETLAND/RIPARIAN Carex aquatilis var. aquatilis Water sedge Plant WETLAND/RIPARIAN Carex cumberlandensis Cumberland sedge Plant WETLAND/RIPARIAN Gentiana andrewsii Closed bottle gentian Plant WETLAND/RIPARIAN Triadenum tubulosum Lesser march St. John's Plant WETLAND/RIPARIAN wort

• Direct and indirect effects to Terrestrial RFSS

Alternative 1: (No Action) Under the No Action Alternative, no vegetation management and associated activities, or road maintenance/reconstruction would occur. The continued decline of the forest condition in the proposed areas to be treated may affect woodland or forest species. Species in other habitat areas are not likely to be adversely impacted by the implementation of this alternative.

Alternative 2: (Proposed Action)

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 106 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Project activities will not occur on bluffs, in caves, in wetlands and riparian areas. Cave & forest species that may be affected by project activities include: Eastern small-footed bat, Tri-colored bat, and little brown bat. There are some small glades in the project area that are part of a larger forested area, and some glade species may be impacted. Forest and open woodland species may be impacted by project activities as well.

The little brown bat and tri-colored bat may be impacted by project activities if undocumented roost trees are removed for timber harvest or associated activities (landings, skid trails, temporary roads, and road reconstruction and maintenance). The forested foraging areas for all three RFSS bats may also be affected by project activities. The waterways or ponds they drink from or forage over will not be adversely affected. There is very little research on the habitat needs of these species but similar effects would likely occur to these species as to the Indiana, gray and northern long-eared bats (see discussion in Threatened and Endangered Species section). Habitat patches will be affected over time and across the Forest as the project is implemented. Habitat will remain suitable in most stands being treated except for clearcuts that will still retain reserve trees and snags that are not hazards. Habitat will also remain in the action area in adjacent stands that are not being treated. Forestwide S & G’s are in place to protect and manage cave and buildings for bats and will be implemented.

RFSS birds are not likely to be impacted by this project. The Bachmans’ sparrow has not been found on any of the units being treated in many years. The Cerulean warbler, Swainson’s warbler, peregrine falcon, and bald eagle are not known to occur in habitat areas being treated. Forestwide S & G’s limit work in these types of habitat and stands that may be affected by oak decline in the riparian zones or with records of these species were dropped from consideration.

Some RFSS plants that occupy glade, forest, and open woodland areas may be impacted by project activities. As mentioned above, no documented occurrences are found within the stands to be treated, but there are probably unknown locations where some of these species may occur. Individuals may be run over or trampled by harvest activities and road re-construction, maintenance, or temporary road construction. It is unlikely that any entire population would be impacted to the point where viability would be affected since there are no known populations within the project area.

RFSS plants that occur in riparian areas, bluffs, and wetlands will not be impacted because project activities will not occur in those habitat types.

• Cumulative effects to Terrestrial RFSS

Components of cumulative effects:

Spatial and Temporal boundary: The same cumulative effects boundary for Threatened and Endangered bats above will be used for the terrestrial RFSS group as it encompasses all of the areas that could be occupied by these terrestrial RFSS.

Past, Present, and Future activities that may have an effect to Terrestrial RFSS: The same activities on Federal, State and private lands that are mentioned above apply here as well.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 107 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

The same cumulative effects to the terrestrial threatened and endangered bats will occur for the RFSS bats and will not be repeated here. White nose syndrome has affected populations of tri- colored bats and little brown bats and populations continue to decline as the disease spreads. Cave habitats could be altered on private lands and since little brown bats tend to use human buildings to roost in (e.g., barns and attics), private land owners could potentially kill or injure individuals in an attempt to remove them. Education efforts continue to help landowners effectively exclude bats from using buildings using proper techniques and timing.

Forest, open woodland, wetland, riparian, and glade species will be impacted by the same types of activities mentioned in the above cumulative effects sections. Timber removal, prescribed burning, road work, livestock grazing, outdoor recreation, and other private development may occur in the cumulative effects boundaries. Individuals could be affected depending on when the activities took place and the areas’ occupancy.

RFSS birds may be impacted by the same types of activities in the cumulative effects boundary. Removal of riparian forests on private lands sometimes occurs to facilitate agricultural practices or rural or recreational development. Bald eagles are also protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and any entity impacting bald eagles should at a minimum visit the USFWS website (https://www.fws.gov/midwest/MidwestBird/eaglepermits/bagepa.html) to determine impacts of any project.

Cumulative effects Summary discussion for Terrestrial RFSS:

Alternative 1: (No Action) Cumulative effects are the cumulative impact of the direct and indirect effects of a proposed action when added to the aggregate effects of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions. Under the no action alternative, there would be no cumulative effects because no new federal actions are proposed. No project activities would occur if Alternative 1 was chosen that would mitigate the effects of a dying forest and poor road conditions. As mentioned in previous effects analysis above this could lead to catastrophic fire conditions developing, possibly destroying habitat for many of these terrestrial RFSS.

Alternative 2: (Proposed Action) The cumulative effects to terrestrial species could range from none to many depending on what other agencies and private landowners decide. Potential adverse direct and indirect effects of a proposed activities, and the Forestwide S & G’s that will be implemented were described above and will minimize the risk, duration and magnitude of those effects were described in the preceding sections. Anticipated effects to these terrestrial species are similar to the effects described in the Forest Plan FEIS.

MIGRATORY BIRDS

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act, as amended, made the taking, killing or possessing of migratory birds unlawful. Executive Order 13186 of 2001 clarified the responsibilities of Federal agencies regarding migratory bird conservation and directed Federal agencies to evaluate the effects of Federal actions on migratory birds with an emphasis on species of concern. The Executive Order also directed Federal agencies to develop a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the USFWS regarding their role with respect to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. In December 2008, the

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 108 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

USFS entered into a MOU with USFWS that further clarified the responsibility of the Forest Service to protect migratory birds (USDA and USDI 2008). The 2008 MOU expired on December 8, 2013, however, both parties have agreed to extend the MOU as currently written for 2 years while the USFS and USFWS work together to evaluate the MOU to ensure that is meeting the stated purpose, scope, and responsibilities, identified in Executive Order 13186 (USDA and USDI 2014). In the 2008 MOU, the USFS agreed to consider the most up-to-date USFWS list of Birds of Conservation Concern when developing or amending land management plans, and to evaluate the effects of agency actions on migratory birds within the NEPA process, focusing first on species of management concern along with their priority habitat and key risk factors (USDI 2008). When negotiating the 2008 MOU both the USFWS and USFS focused on bird populations and effects at that level, not at the individual level. There are 26 birds on the migratory birds of concern list found on the official species list for this project obtained from USFWS (see Table 26. (USDI IPAC 2016)).

Under the National Forest Management Act (NFMA), the Forest Service is directed to “provide for diversity of plant and animal communities based on the suitability and capability of the specific land area in order to meet overall multiple-use objectives. . . .” 16 U.S.C. § 1604(g)(3)(B)). The January 2000 USDA Forest Service Landbird Conservation Strategic Plan, followed by the U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan and Executive Order 13186 in 2001, the Partners in Flight (PIF) specific habitat Conservation Plans for birds and the January 2004 PIF North American Landbird Conservation Plan all reference goals and objectives for integrating bird conservation into forest management and planning.

• Existing condition of Migratory Birds

Various bird surveys, including the North American Breeding Bird Survey, have documented drastic declines in populations of some once-common species over the past several decades (Rich et al. 2004). Primary threats to migratory birds includes loss of habitat (change in structure and species composition or permanent removal), fragmentation and degradation of remaining habitat, failure to identify and protect or manage migration and winter habitats, and widespread increases in dispersed mortality factors not directly related to habitat (e.g., communication towers, wind turbines, and feral cats) (Rich et al. 2004). The MTNF falls within PIF’s Ozark/Ouachita Plateau physiographic area, which has 33 priority bird species that require immediate conservation efforts to ensure their viability (Fitzgerald and Pashley 2000).

Table 3-23: Migratory birds that may be in the FHI Project Area

Seasonal Occurrence Missouri Trend Common Name Scientific Name in the Project Area Index1 (habitat) Breeding (glade, open Bachman’s sparrow Aimophila aestivalis No data pinewoods) Haliaeetus Year-round (forest Bald eagle No data leucocephalus near water) Breeding Decreasing Bell’s vireo Vireo bellii (successional – scrub) (-1.22)

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 109 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Seasonal Occurrence Missouri Trend Common Name Scientific Name in the Project Area Index1 (habitat) Thryomanes bewickii Year-round (open Decreasing Bewick’s wren ssp. Bewickii woodland) (-3.30) Breeding Decreasing Blue-winged warbler Vermivora pinus (successional – scrub) (-0.27) Increasing Cerulean warbler Dendroica cerulean Breeding (woodland) (0.67) Decreasing Dickcissel Spiza americana Breeding (grassland) (-1.09) Fox sparrow Passerella liaca Wintering (forest) No data Increasing Henslow’s sparrow Ammodramus henslowii Breeding (grasslands) (7.90) Increasing Kentucky warbler Oporirnis formosus Breeding (forest) (1.94) Ixobrychus exilis Least bittern Breeding (marsh) No data hesperis Year-round (open Decreasing Loggerhead shrike Lanius ludovicianus woodland) (-6.72) Breeding (open Mississippi kite Ictinia mississippiensis No data woodland) Painted bunting Passerina ciris Breeding (scrub) No data Peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus Breeding (bluff) No data Pie-billed grebe Podilymbus podiceps Year-round (wetland) No data Breeding Decreasing Prairie warbler Dendroica discolor (successional-scrub) (-3.90) Breeding (woodland Increasing Prothonotary warbler Protonotaria citrea near swamps) (2.07) Red-headed Melanerpes Year-round (open Decreasing woodpecker erythrocephalus woodland) (-4.41) Rusty blackbird Euphages carolinus Wintering (wet forest) No data Decreasing Sedge wren Cistothorus platensis Migrating (marsh) (-1.91) Short-eared owl Asio flammeus Wintering (openlands) No data Breeding (floodplain Swainson’s warbler Limnothlypis swainsonii No data forest) Increasing Willow flycatcher Empidonax trailii Breeding (marsh) (3.34) Decreasing Wood thrush Hylocichla mustelina Breeding (forest) (-0.23) Helmintheros Increasing Worm eating warbler Breeding (woodland) vermivorum (2.24) 1From the USGS Breeding Bird Survey data (Sauer et. al. 2014).

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 110 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Four Breeding Bird Survey routes exist on the Forest: the Palace, Bennet, Centerville, and Hilda routes. Trend information for the above species is unreliable at the route level and Table 3-23 includes trend information available for several species from USGS Breeding Bird Surveys (Sauer et. al. 2014). No lakes, marshes, or true grasslands exist in the project area on NFS lands. Openlands are not being treated under the proposed action.

• Direct and indirect effects on Migratory Birds

Alternative 1: (No Action) Under the No Action Alternative, no vegetation management and associated activities, or road maintenance/reconstruction would occur. The continued decline of the forest condition in the proposed areas to be treated may affect migratory birds

Migratory bird species that prefer mature forest would benefit the most from this alternative and bird species dependent on shrub habitat, and early successional forest would benefit the least. Potential habitat for mature riparian forest, openlands/grasslands, marsh, or wetland dependent species would not change, since no activities would occur. Since this alternative would not authorize any activities in project area, it would have no direct effects on migratory birds, although it would have the indirect effects discussed above.

Alternative 2: (Proposed Action) Under the Proposed Action Alternative, vegetation management and associated log landings and temporary roads and road maintenance/reconstruction would occur. Areas proposed for regeneration harvest would become open areas for a short period and eventually early successional forest for approximately the next 10 to 20 years. Openlands, grasslands, marshes, wetlands and riparian forest will not be treated in this alternative. Migratory bird species that prefer openlands and early successional forest would benefit the most from this alternative. Bird species associated with mature forest would be temporarily negatively impacted, but since approximately the majority of NFS lands would remain untreated, mature forest will remain abundant throughout the project area and treated stands will become mature forest eventually.

Direct impacts to individuals is likely during project implementation, particularly during the breeding season. Loud equipment noise may drown out singing males and affect their ability to mate and defend territories. Repeated disturbances may force birds to move out of the immediate area and find new territories. Management actions would likely remove trees with bird nests or destroy ground nests. Adults could fly away and possibly re-nest, but non-volant young may be killed. Some individual birds are likely to be harmed or killed as a direct result of implementing the Proposed Action, but the entire population of a species is not expected to be eliminated from the project area.

• Cumulative effects on Neotropical Migrant Birds

Components of cumulative effects

Spatial and Temporal boundary: The Council on Environmental Quality’s regulations for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act defines cumulative effects as the impact on the environment that results from the incremental impact of the proposed actions when added to other past, present, and reasonably

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 111 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (federal or non-federal) or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time (40 CFR § 1508.7). Please refer to the above section “Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Activities Relevant to Cumulative Effects Analysis” for specifics on temporal and spatial boundaries and activities considered in this cumulative effects analysis that are common to all species and habitats.

Past, Present, and Future activities that may have an effect to Migratory Birds habitat: The details of MTNF ongoing activities, management on other federal and state lands, climate change, and white-nose syndrome are all discussed in detail in the above section and will not be repeated here. The Council on Environmental Quality’s regulations for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act defines cumulative effects as the impact on the environment that results from the incremental impact of the proposed actions when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (federal or non-federal) or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time (40 CFR § 1508.7).

Since many birds species of concern are migrants, impacts to individuals and populations is not entirely dependent on activities that occur on the MTNF. Through ongoing land management activities, the MTNF and other land management agencies, are continuing to provide a mosaic of habitat types that address the needs of most bird species of concern for the project area. Typically, the amount of forest that is harvested is a minority compared to the forest not treated within project areas. Species associated with forested have the highest potential to be affected by cumulative impacts from various forest management projects. However, the amount of habitat available, projects not occurring at the same time or in the same area, and forests regenerating over time, ensures that suitable forested habitat is available for species.

Maintenance of openland habitat is likely to be occurring in other project areas in the cumulative effects boundary. Other MTNF ongoing activities typically do not create nor destroy the amount of openland habitat available, rather they maintain what already exists. While grazing allotments do provide openland habitat, the habitat can be suboptimal comprising of non-native cool season grasses. Furthermore, these areas are primarily managed for grazing and livestock. Other federal and state management agencies manage openlands similar to the Forest Service, and typically don’t allow grazing of cattle. Climate change will likely impact openland habitat through changes in species composition and intensity of which cattle are allowed to graze. During years of low rainfall, cattle can be moved or completely removed to buffer against drought conditions.

The proposed changes in the riparian corridor would result in more forested cover, therefore there would be no adverse impacts to riparian areas in the project area. Furthermore, for any MTNF ongoing activities, the same Forestwide S & G’s are applied to project activities that minimize or prohibit what actions can occur in WPZs and RMZs. Other federal and state agencies typically follow best management practices for working in riparian areas and their ownership is limited along major waterways. Climate change will likely affect forest structure and species composition in riparian corridors. Changes in precipitation may alter stream flows and hydrologic events such as large floods.

Cumulative effects Summary discussion for Migratory Birds:

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 112 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Migratory birds vary in their habitat needs throughout the year and among species. The most important thing the Forest Service can do for conserving migratory bird habitat is to provide a mosaic of habitat types on the landscape. While some individuals and habitat may be impacted in the short term, diversifying the habitat on the landscape will likely benefit most. Species that depend on mature forest have the highest potential to be impacted from project implementation, however due the large amount of mature forest that would remain in the project area and on the district, the impact is not expected to be significant. Consequently, the action alternative in conjunction with the past, present and reasonably foreseeable actions may impact migratory birds or their habitat, but will not likely contribute to a trend towards Federal listing or cause a loss of viability to the population or species.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 113 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Social and Economic Environments

Recreation

• Existing condition of Recreation

According to Ouachita-Ozark Highlands Assessment (OOHA), approximately 58 million people (21 percent of the US. population) live within a 1-day drive of outdoor recreation opportunities in the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands. In 1996, travel expenditures in the Assessment area counties of Arkansas and Missouri totaled over $9 billion and accounted for nearly 167,000 jobs. Public lands, by providing many of the settings for outdoor recreation, are important to maintaining and enhancing a strong tourism industry. Private lands that dominate the forested landscape and influence scenic quality in a large part of the Highlands are also important to the region’s tourism industry. State and national parks, national forests, national wildlife refuges, and US. Army Corps of Engineer lands and waters account for 13 percent of the Highlands’ area and provide the principal settings for many kinds of outdoor recreational activities that are based on natural resources. The three national forests, including the Mark Twain provide recreation opportunities principally in roaded-natural (75 percent) and semi-primitive (20 percent) settings, accounting for six percent of the area’s campsites. The private sector provides 12 percent, States provide 30 percent, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers provide 51 percent. Sixty-three percent of the trail miles in the assessment area are located on national forests. There are 283,012 acres of federally designated wilderness in the Highlands that represent five percent of the land area managed by the Forest Service, USDI National Park Service, and the US. Fish and Wildlife Service. Wilderness accounts for 4.4 percent of all national forest lands. Approximately 523 miles of rivers in the Highlands have received federal designations based on their exceptional scenic and recreational value. Residents of the Highlands’ “draw area” exceed the national average in percent of population participating in every major category of outdoor recreation available in the Highlands. More than 90 percent of the draw area population participates in activities associated with viewing and learning about nature and human history, such as sightseeing, bird watching, and visiting historic sites. Approximately 40 percent participate in fishing, 41 percent participate in outdoor adventure activities (such as hiking or off-road driving), about 35 percent participate in boating, 31 percent participate in camping, and 14 percent participate in hunting.

Within the Roaded Natural setting, the area is characterized by predominantly natural or natural- appearing environments with moderate evidences of the sights and sounds of humans. Such evidences usually harmonize with the natural environment. Interaction between users may be low to moderate, but with evidence of other users prevalent. Resource modification and utilization practices are evident, but harmonize with natural the environment. Conventional motorized use is provided for in construction standards and design facilities. Equal probability exists to experience contact with other user groups and for isolation from sights and sounds of humans. Opportunity exists to have a high degree of interaction with the natural environment. Challenge and risk opportunities associated with more primitive type of recreation are not prevalent. Practice and testing of outdoor skills is possible. Opportunities for both motorized and non-motorized forms of recreation are available. The area is managed in such a way that minimum on-site controls and restrictions may be present, but are subtle. Motorized use is permitted but restricted.

Within the Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized setting, the area is characterized by predominantly natural or natural-appearing environments with low evidences of the sights and sounds of humans.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 114 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Interaction between users may be low, but there is often evidence of other users. High, but not extremely high, probability of experiencing isolation from the sights and sounds of humans, independence, closeness to nature, tranquility and self-reliance through the application of woodsman and outdoor skills in an environment that offers challenge and risk. The area is managed in such a way that minimum on-site controls and restrictions may be present, but are subtle. Motorized use is not permitted.

Within the Semi-Primitive Motorized setting, the area is characterized by predominantly natural or natural-appearing environments with low evidences of the sights and sounds of humans. Interaction between users may be low, but there is often evidence of other users. Opportunity to have a high degree of interaction with the natural environment Moderate probability of experiencing isolation from the sights and sounds of humans, independence, closeness to nature, tranquility and self- reliance through the application of woodsman and outdoor skills in an environment that offers challenge and risk. The area is managed in such a way that minimum on-site controls and restrictions may be present, but are subtle. Motorized use is permitted.

There are five developed recreation areas within the proposed harvest areas in the Analysis Area: Council Bluff, Falling Spring, Fourche Lake, and Ripley Lake. Council Bluff Recreation Area offers camping, picnicking, beaches, and boating. Falling Spring offers picnicking. Fourche Lake Recreation Area offers boating and picnicking. Ripley Lake offers picnicking and fishing. Recreation use in these areas varies from low at Falling Springs, Fourche Lake, and Ripley Lake and higher at Council Bluff.

The Ozark Trail traverses much of the Analysis Area on multiple Ranger Districts. There are also multiple trailheads for the Ozark trail and other forest system trails in the analysis Area.. The Eleven Point River, which is a Congressionally designated Wild and Scenic River, is in the Analysis Area, however harvest locations are not in the Wild and Scenic Corridor. Bell Mountain and Irish Wilderness areas are also in the Analysis Area, but harvest locations are not in or adjacent to the Federally Designated Wilderness areas.

Dispersed Recreation opportunities and uses in these areas are similar to those found in many areas across the Analysis area. Most general recreation use in the Analysis Area occurs on weekends and consists mainly of hunting, horseback riding, fishing, swimming, camping, picnicking, hiking, viewing scenery, and driving for pleasure. Dispersed camping primarily occurs during the spring and fall in areas other than campgrounds, mostly during the hunting seasons for deer and turkey.

Special Use Permits are authorized for the following recreation activities; outfitting and guiding, recreation special event permits, and motorized events on system roads. All of these activities are within the S & G’s of the Forest Plan. Environmental analyses have been conducted to evaluate the environmental effects of these activities.

There are quite a number of State Highways that traverse the area. This network of state, county and forest service roads creates a scenic byway for people to view dogwoods, fall colors, or wildlife. It is very well traveled on weekends, with traffic heaviest in the summer and during hunting seasons.

• Direct and indirect effects on Recreation Resources

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 115 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Alternative 1: (No Action) The no action alternative would have increasing negative effects on dispersed recreation for quite some time since the character of the area would change as the trees die and fall, making moving through the woods more difficult. The natural regeneration of tree species, decay of slash and tree trunks would take longer than if management activities were to take place. The Analysis Area would continue to provide opportunities for dispersed recreation, driving for pleasure, and both consumptive and non-consumptive wildlife uses. In the absence of vegetation management, the quality of deer and turkey hunting (and consequently the amount of hunting-season camping), and berry picking opportunities may be somewhat reduced after a period of time. Firewood gathering opportunities would increase as declining black oak die and fall to the ground.

As more trees are affected potential safety hazards would increase in all areas of the forest including developed and dispersed recreation sites. Though few accidents have been reported in the last two years, there have been instances of trees falling in campgrounds, blocking trails, trees falling across roads, and limbs falling near people recreating in the forest. Overall, this alternative would still provide recreation opportunities. People could continue to use all the Forest Roads within the project area. There would be increased costs to maintain roads beyond regularly scheduled maintenance, and remove hazard trees from recreation areas and along trails and roads.

Habitat diversity resulting from harvesting would not occur under this alternative, and consequently, opportunities to observe species associated with these habitats would likely not be as great.

Alternative 2: (Proposed Action) In this Action Alternative, logging activities and skidding operations would create intermittent noise and could reduce the enjoyment recreationists get from experiencing the natural environment. The actual impact of the noise depends on the time of day, time of year, and proximity of the recreation user to the harvest operation. The highest risk of recreationists encountering noise would occur during summer weekends from Memorial Day to Labor Day. No harvest operations are scheduled within developed recreation areas, though hazard tree removal contacts may take place outside of the recreation season.

Another risk of recreationists encountering noise would occur during the spring and fall turkey seasons, and the deer hunting seasons (firearm and archery) in the fall. Hunters are camping, hiking and hunting throughout the proposed harvest area at these times. Hunters in the project area would be most affected if harvesting were active at that time. Fuel wood cutting activities, a form of recreation to some people, would be made available following commercial timber sales.

Recreationists could also encounter traffic and adverse road conditions during logging operations that could increase the risk of accidents. The traffic problem would be mitigated by the use of signs to warn recreationists of logging traffic in the area. The road surfaces would be repaired using money (road maintenance deposits) collected from the timber purchaser.

This alternative would also provide roaded natural motorized recreation opportunities, as most system roads would accommodate passenger car traffic although several roads would likely be more suitable for pick-up truck travel.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 116 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

In the short term, timber harvesting and other management activities would cause temporary disturbance or displacement of dispersed hunting and camping opportunities due to unattractive conditions, disturbance of wildlife, and slash on the ground making walking difficult. Vegetation management would also have some short-term negative effect on sightseeing due to the appearance of disturbed vegetation; however, leaf-off logging, log-landing location, and slash treatment along area roads would help minimize this effect. See visual resources mitigation VR1 for mitigation along Travelways and along the Ozark Trail in the project area.

The long term, improved stand vigor, wildlife habitat, and road conditions would result in improved roaded natural recreation opportunities. Hunting opportunities would likely be enhanced in the vicinity of the harvested areas due to temporary concentration of game species, and improved visual conditions and accessibility. However, the hunting experience may be less enjoyable or productive for some hunters due to increased encounters with other hunters and/or wildlife disturbance resulting from increased access. Berry picking would also likely benefit from the increase in temporary openings.

The opportunity to view species associated with early successional habitat would be greatest under this Alternative due to the amount of regeneration cutting. Conversely, the opportunity to view forest-interior species would be reduced. Hunting for game animals associated with temporary openings and edge would be enhanced.

The sections of the Ozark Trail that traverse the Analysis Area receive routine maintenance. If hazard trees along the trail became a serious problem, actions may be taken to remove the dying trees.

• Cumulative effects on Recreation

Components of cumulative effects

Spatial boundary: The cumulative effects spatial boundary in regards to recreation is the Forest Health Analysis Area boundary. This boundary was selected because the recreational use is dispersed recreation use and limited in the scope of the proposed vegetative management activities.

Temporal boundary: A cumulative effects temporal boundary in regards to recreation of 10 years was selected because that is considered the life of the expected effects of the FHI project activities. This boundary was selected because this is the extent where the cumulative effects information would be measurable and meaningful and the effects would be relevant.

Past and present actions that may have an effect on Recreation On Federal and Private lands, past and present activities include in part: wildfire suppression, prescribed fire, fire line construction, timber harvest, timber stand improvement, road construction, road maintenance, wildlife habitat improvements, pond maintenance, pond construction, power- line/utilities maintenance, fence construction, insect and disease occurrences (such as the oak borer), the influences from highways and numerous county roads.

No changes would be made to the management of developed recreation sites in the area.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 117 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Dispersed and developed recreation opportunities would continue to be provided in Alternative 2, but would improve in the long run because of the improvements to the diversity of forested stands through thinning and harvesting. This should provide for more wildlife and wildflower viewing, hunting, etc.

Past Forest Service projects with actions still being implemented or may be still producing affects in the FHI recreation cumulative effects boundary are listed below (Forest Service decision type and signature dates shown in parentheses):

National Forest System land actions include: Integrated Non-native Invasive Plant Control Project (ROD, 2/14/2012) This was a Decision that was Forest-wide with the main focus to treat non-native invasive plant infestations on the MTNF using an integrated combination of manual, mechanical, cultural, chemical, prescribed fire and biological control treatment methods.

Indian Creek Project EA (DN, 9/05/13): This Willow Springs Ranger District project is utilizing a combination of commercial harvest (Salvage/Sanitation, Seed Tree and Shelterwood harvest), non-commercial timber, wildlife, and prescribed fire treatments, and other activities designed to enhance natural communities and improve forest health conditions while providing opportunities for wildlife habitat improvement, dispersed recreational uses, and harvest of timber products. This project lies on the northern boundary of the recreation cumulative effects boundary of the Willow Springs Ranger District activities.

Crane Lake Trail Re-route (DM, 9/1/2016) This Potosi Ranger District project should improve the condition of the existing trail. Portions of the trail will be decommissioned and reconstructed to follow the contour of the landscape.

East Fork Huzzah EA (DN, 4/20/2016): This Salem Ranger District project has a small portion within the FHI viewshed along State Hwy 32. Activities inside the FHI project area include Shelterwood harvest, Thinning, Crop tree release and Trash dump clean-up. Additional activities are used to improve forest health by treating oak decline, enhancing ecosystems, improving wildlife habitat, and managing the transportation system. This project lies on the northern boundary of the recreation cumulative effects boundary of the Salem Ranger District activities.

Cattail Creek Salvage (DM, 8/8/2013): This Poplar Bluff Ranger District project is approximately 4.0 miles northeast of Poplar Bluff, Missouri, near the rural community of Rombauer. The purpose of the projects was to conduct salvage harvest and resource management activities in 13 stands totaling an estimated 250 acres to meet objectives in the MTNF Forest Plan. Activities inside the FHI project area include multiple Salvage harvest cuts.

Cane Ridge West (DN, 9/25/2009): This Poplar Bluff Ranger District project is located west of U.S. Highway 67, north of U.S. Highway 60, and south of the Black River. The purpose of this project was to move the project area toward the Forest-wide goals and objectives, and the prescription for the 1.1 MP found in the Forest Plan. Activities inside the FHI’s recreation cumulative effects boundary include Restoration Thinning (Open and Closed Woodlands), Crop tree release and Trash dump clean-up.

Handy (DN, 10-21-2009): This Doniphan/Eleven Point Ranger District project generally lies around and adjacent to Handy, Missouri. This project is designed to improve plant communities

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 118 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

that reflect naturally occurring historic structure and composition by providing a variety of habitat conditions that meet the needs of plant, fish and wildlife species. Activities inside the FHI’s recreation cumulative effects boundary include Restoration Thinning, Clearcut with reserves, Crop tree release Salvage/Plant/Release treatment and Understory control.

Van Buren (DN, 9-07-2011): This Doniphan/Eleven Point Ranger District project generally lies west and southwest of Van Buren, Missouri. The purpose for this project was to move existing conditions in the project area which are not in compliance with the Forest Plan toward Forest-wide goals and objectives, and the prescription for MP 2.1 found in the Forest Plan. Activities inside the FHI project area include Shelterwood Preparation cut, Pre-commercial thinning, and Group Selection harvest.

Fremont-Pineknot (DN, 7/31/2015): This Doniphan/Eleven Point Ranger District project is located near the community of Fremont, Missouri. The purpose of this project was to restore and enhance fire-adapted pine and pine-oak bluestem woodlands to their full range of historic vegetation composition and structural conditions that occurred under natural disturbance regimes (e.g. fire and drought). Activities inside the FHI project area include Restoration thinning, Pre-commercial thinning, and commercial thinning.

Other projects that justify the rationale for a 10 year cumulative effects temporal boundary include: Westside (4-11-2007), Camp 8 (10-24-2007), Compton (8-28-2006).

Private land actions include: The following activities occur on privately owned lands. The activities include in part: land clearing for farms and/or home sites, beef farm operation expansions, and the construction of new homes.

Reasonably foreseeable actions: Dispersed recreation opportunities would be provided in both alternatives. The cumulative effect of either of the alternatives would have minimal effects on the overall recreation setting and the potential recreation use pattern into the future. Some dispersed recreation use (such as hunting and firewood cutting) may increase due to the manipulation of the forested resources and providing a more diverse wildlife habitat. Some users of the unauthorized routes would have limited access and would have to seek use on private lands or forest service open roads. Some recreation use takes place on private land (such as hunting, viewing wildlife, hiking, river access, off-road use, fishing and horseback riding) and that is unlikely to change because of the projects proposed. Individual landowners may change what types and amounts of use take place on their land for reasons of their own.

Cumulative effects discussion: The Analysis Area features dispersed opportunities such as hunting, hiking, sightseeing and gathering of forest products (firewood, berries and mushrooms). The developed recreation areas receive use from both local and urban dwellers. The amount of recreation use has been increasing and is in compatible with past management practices, which have included mining, various silvicultural harvests, prescribed fire and follow up reforestation work. Old logging slash from these past activities decays in a few years and is no longer noticeable to the casual forest user. The proposed actions (with mitigation measures as appropriate) are considered to be consistent with the ROS recreation objectives for each of the Management Prescriptions found in the Analysis Area.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 119 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

The cumulative effect of any of the action alternatives would have minimal effects on the overall recreation setting and the potential recreation use pattern into the future.

Alternative 1: (No Action) Dispersed recreation activities would continue to occur in the foreseeable future across the project area as it has in the past, but visitor’s enjoyment of the National Forest would remain relatively the same as exists.

Alternative 2: (Proposed Action) It is anticipated that there would be additional management activities in the reasonably foreseeable future in the Analysis Area. Impacts experienced are expected to be similar to those described in the direct and indirect effects portion for recreation in this document.

Some dispersed recreation use (such as hunting and firewood cutting) may increase due to the manipulation of the forested resources and providing a more diverse wildlife habitat. Wildfires, prescribed burns, continued recreation use and timber sales that include regenerating and thinning may take place in the foreseeable future in the area.

The combined effects of past actions, the proposed action and its alternatives, and action in the reasonably foreseeable future on the project areas and lands immediately adjacent are not significant. The only effects of proposed activities would be to increase the quality of recreation opportunities in the future though there may be short-term negative impacts while management activities are being conducted.

Maintaining old growth, in combination with other such designated areas on National Forest System lands within the cumulative effect boundary, would provide a unique forest condition that may not be found on private lands. Therefore the recreation use and/or wildlife viewing of wildlife and bird species using these old growth areas would improve.

Some recreation use takes place on private land (such as hunting, hiking, fishing, off-road vehicle use, horseback riding, viewing wildlife, etc.) and this is unlikely to change in this alternative. There has been some harvesting conducted on private lands removing sawtimber size trees, thinnings and land clearing. There are other in-holdings in that have not recently been harvested or are reverting to overgrown fields. Many of the private blend in with the government lands and are located in the major valleys as open land, pasture, or cropland. The bottomlands were cleared and lend a semi- pastoral setting to the general area in conjunction with the forested slopes. It’s been in this condition since European settlers moved into the area and will remain this way in the foreseeable future.

Irreversible or irretrievable commitment on Resources None of the alternatives would have an irreversible or irretrievable commitment on this resource in the proposed FHI project area.

Recreation summary: There would be no significant cumulative effects of any kind on the Recreation resource, because of the limited nature and extent of the cumulative effects discussed above. This conclusion was reached after analyzing all of the above information regarding the past, present and reasonably foreseeable future activities on all ownerships within the specified spatial and temporal boundaries.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 120 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Historic Properties

Background/Overview

Inventory Survey Coverage: Broad scale cultural resources inventory surveys in the FHI project area have been undertaken at various levels of intensity by private sector archaeologists under contract and by MTNF Heritage Program personnel as components of the FHI project in an effort to identify historic properties within the project area, such that the Forest Supervisor may take into account any adverse effects to such properties that may result from the proposed undertaking. These surveys were focused specifically on those areas in which FHI project activities are proposed that have the potential to affect historic properties.

The entire FHI project area was inventoried for purposes of identifying historic properties within the project’s Area of Potential Effects (APE). This includes field surveys totaling 51,497 acres, all of which were inventoried to a “complete coverage” standard, primarily by qualified professional contracting firms, during the period November 2013 through August 2017. Smaller-scale inventories conducted by MTNF Heritage Program professionals were also included in the analysis. Reports and associated forms documenting cultural resource surveys within the project area can be found in the FHI Project File.

Inventory Survey Limitations: Activity Locations Not Yet Known Cultural resource surveys have not necessarily been completed for various activities because additional planning/adjustment may be required prior to implementation; these activities include, but are not limited to: • Temporary roads, skid trails, and log landings that may be outside areas already surveyed Areas in which such activities will take place that have not yet been surveyed for the presence of historic properties will be surveyed prior to implementation of any activities that have the potential to affect such properties. Any cultural resources identified during the course of such surveys will be evaluated for eligibility for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), and regulatory consultation will be completed prior to project implementation.

Section 106 Consultation: Regulatory consultation with the Missouri State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) has been carried out for the activities proposed in the FHI Project. Such consultation is required under the National Historic Preservation Act, as Amended (NHPA) and the accompanying regulations found at 36 CFR 800 with respect to the adequacy of the inventory survey in the APE, the National Register eligibility of cultural resources within the APE, and the expected effects on historic properties of the various actions proposed in the project alternatives. Formal consultation has been completed. Letters of concurrence for all FHI-associated inventories have been received from the SHPO and are available in the FHI Project File. These concurred with the NRHP site eligibility determinations and the cumulative effects analysis made by the Forest, with regard to project effects on historic properties, provided that mitigation measures as described in the case report are implemented.

• Existing condition of Heritage Resources

The surveys identified a total of 350 cultural resources within the FHI project area. Of these a total of 3 have been evaluated as eligible for nomination to the NRHP, and 55 remain unevaluated as to

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 121 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

their NRHP eligibility, pending further investigation. These 58 sites will be managed as historic properties. The remaining 292 sites have been determined not eligible for nomination to the NRHP, and are therefore released from management by the MTNF. Further details on survey, consultation, and identification and management of historic properties in the FHI project area are presented below.

Archaeological Site Information: Prehistoric archaeological sites/site components investigated to date in the FHI project area indicate that the region saw moderately widespread and occasionally intensive use by peoples throughout prehistory. Sites occur on a variety of landforms, including broad ridge divides, ridge tops, ridge toes, shoulders, saddles, knolls, bluff tops, alluvial terraces, benches, floodplains, as well as in bluff rock shelters/overhangs. As regards the size and complexity of these sites, the majority are very small limited activity loci (incidental activity areas) represented by one or more artifacts, though some more extensive sites, interpreted as seasonal camps/activity areas, were identified. Temporally diagnostic prehistoric artifacts recovered within the project boundary indicate that the area was being utilized by prehistoric peoples at least from the Middle Archaic to the Mississippian Periods. Descriptions of the diagnostics recovered within the project area can be found in the associated reports and site recordation forms generated in support of this undertaking, and are available in the project record.

Archaeological investigations in the FHI project area as well as information derived from archival sources have provided evidence of Euro-American agrarian and industrial land use and settlement that dates from at least the mid-nineteenth to the mid-twentieth centuries. The settlement period within the project area is bounded on the terminal end by the U. S. Government’s acquisition of local land tracts; however, it is possible that such settlement was in decline prior to that time. Site- types observed within the project area include rural farmsteads/homesteads, abandoned agricultural field areas, rural schoolhouse locations, fire lookout tower site locations, logging-era tram lines, lead mining and extraction sites, historic artifact/trash scatters, and historic family cemeteries. Sites are represented by various features, frequently including structural foundations, rock walls, artifact scatters, floral indicator species, field clearing piles/alignments of local stone, and water impoundment features, such as check dams and/or ponds.

Additional information on the cultural sequences and on both the historic and prehistoric backgrounds for the FHI project area can be found in the FHI Project File.

National Register of Historic Places Significance: With a number of exceptions, investigations of the 350 archaeological sites and other cultural resources identified within the FHI project area to date have been of an intensity sufficient to credibly evaluate them with respect to NRHP Significance Criteria, as found in 36 CFR 60.4 The MTNF has determined that 292 of these sites (83.4 %) are “not eligible” for inclusion on the National Register (see below: Overview of Eligibility Determinations), and three sites (0.9 %) are eligible for NRHP nomination. Additionally, 55 sites (15.7 %) are being managed as “unevaluated” properties that have the potential to meet one or both of principally two NRHP Significance Criteria (reference 36 CR 60.4), as being: Properties associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad pattern of our history (Criterion A) and/or, Properties that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history (Criterion D)

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 122 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Sites are generally considered “unevaluated” as a result of a professional archaeologist’s conclusion that additional levels of identification are warranted prior to issuance of final NRHP site eligibility determinations. Although “unevaluated” sites do not fall within a formal National Register site eligibility category under 36 CFR 800.4(c)(2), such sites are managed as “historic properties”, and as such are afforded the same level of consideration regarding assessment of adverse effects under 36 CFR 800.5 as sites determined to be “eligible” for the National Register. Following consultation and concurrence with the Missouri SHPO, sites that are determined to be ineligible for inclusion on the National Register are not necessarily protected from all effects during project implementation. Additionally, historic features are not considered to be eligible for inclusion on the National Register; because they are not considered to be historic or eligible properties, historic features are not necessarily protected during project implementation.

A summary of site information and NRHP eligibility determinations is presented below. For additional details on archaeological sites, historic features, and isolated finds recently recorded within the FHI project area, the reader is referred to the FHI Project File.

Distribution of Site Components and Types An overview of the distribution of historic versus prehistoric sites in the project area reveals that of the 350 sites recorded, the majority (n=242, or 69.2%) are represented by historic-era components, a total of 76 (21.7%) of the recorded sites represent prehistoric occupations, and 32 (9.1%) represent combined prehistoric and historic components.

Sorting the 242 historic sites by site type, it is revealed that of the sites that could be interpreted as to their use, a total of 83 (or 34.3%) are agricultural in nature. Site types in this category include farmsteads, abandoned field, outbuildings, and associated agricultural facilities such as livestock pens, improved ponds, and etc. A total of 49 (20.3 %) sites are residential in nature, including old homestead, cabin, and town sites. Mineral extraction sites account for 31 (or 12.8 %) of the 242 historic components, represented by old mines, prospecting pits, and the like. A total of 20 (8.3%) transportation related sites were identified; these include abandoned railroad beds, tram lines and tram segments, as well as roads and road segments. Fifteen (6.2 %) of the sites are associated with local industries, such as saw mills, woodcutting camps, charcoal making and tar kiln facilities. Finally, four sites (1.6%) related to CCC-activities and three sites (1.2%) associated with churches/small cemeteries were identified. The remaining 37 (or 15.3%) historic component sites are represented by non-descript refuse dumps, surface scatters, and etc.

Sorting the 76 prehistoric sites by site type, it is revealed that 53 (or 69.8%) of these may be categorized as relatively low density deposits of lithic debris associated with the production and maintenance of stone tools. A total of 15 (or 19.7%) are represented by the presence of a single stone artifact, and six (or 7.9%) are characterized by the presence of lithic debris and one or more stone tool or tool fragments. The remaining two sites (2.6%) include a stone cairn, and a rock shelter.

Overview of Eligibility Determinations As stated above, a total of 350 sites have been recorded within the FHI Area of Potential Effects. Of these, 292 (83.4%) have been determined not eligible for nomination to the NRHP. Three site (0.9%) have been determined eligible, and 55 (or 15.7%) are categorized as “unevaluated” pending further investigation. Sites in the eligible and unevaluated categories are managed as historic properties by the Mark Twain National Forest.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 123 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Sorting eligibility determinations by component, 207 (or 85.5%) of the 242 historic site recorded have been determined ineligible for NRHP listing, and 35 (or 14.5%) are categorized as either eligible or “unevaluated”, and will be managed as historic properties.

Of the 76 prehistoric sites recorded, a total of 63 (or 82.8%) have been determined ineligible for NRHP listing, and 13 (or 17.2%) are categorized as being of “unevaluated” eligibility, and will therefore be managed as historic properties.

Of the 32 sites recorded that include both historic and prehistoric components, a total of 22 (or 68.7%) have been determined ineligible for NRHP listing, and 10 (or 31.3%) are categorized as being of “unevaluated” eligibility, and will therefore be managed as historic properties.

During August and September of 2017, the Missouri State Historic Preservation Office issued letters of concurrence with regard to the NRHP eligibility determinations submitted during consultation for the FHI Project.

Definition of Effects and Area of Potential Effects An Effect to a cultural resource is defined as "…alteration to the characteristics of a historic property qualifying it for inclusion in or eligibility for the National Register." [36 CFR 800.16(i)]. An “adverse effect” is found "when an undertaking may alter, directly or indirectly, any of the characteristics of a historic property that qualify the property for inclusion in the National Register in a manner that would diminish the integrity of the property's location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, or association." [36 CFR 800.5(a)(1); see also subsection (a)(2)]. Effects to historic properties may be either Direct or Indirect.

The APE is defined as "…the geographic area or areas within which an undertaking may directly or indirectly cause alterations in the character or use of historic properties…. The area of potential effects is influenced by the scale and nature of an undertaking and may be different for different kinds of effects caused by the undertaking." [36 CFR 800.16(d)].

• Direct and indirect effects on Historic Properties

Direct effects: With respect to the FHI project, direct effects are those that will occur during project implementation. In essence, any activity that has the potential to disturb the ground has the potential to directly affect archaeological sites.

Specific activities outlined in the FHI project that have the potential to directly affect historic properties, and therefore are considered to be undertakings for the purposes of this project, include but may not be limited to the following:

• Commercial timber harvesting • Construction and use of landings, skid trails, and temporary roads used to access treatment areas • Maintenance of Forest Service roads where ground disturbance takes place outside existing road prisms and ditches.

The APE for the above-listed project activities are those geographic areas in which the ground disturbing activities will take place.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 124 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Activities proposed in the various alternatives that do not have the potential to affect historic properties, and therefore, are not considered undertakings for purposes of this project include the following:

• Non-commercial thinning/timber stand improvements using “cut and leave” • Rehabilitation/closure of temporary roads, landings, and skid trails using non-ground disturbing methods • Ongoing maintenance of existing constructed Forest Service roads where ground disturbance does not take place outside existing road prisms and existing drainage features

Indirect effects: In general, project activities of the kind proposed for the FHI have the potential to indirectly affect historic properties by encouraging increased visitor use to those areas of the forest in which historic properties are located. Increased visitor use of an area in which archaeological sites are located can render the sites vulnerable to both intentional damage and unintentional damage. Intentional damage can occur through unauthorized digging in archaeological sites and unauthorized collecting of artifacts from sites. Unintentional damage can result from such activities as driving motorized vehicles across archaeological sites, as well as from other activities, principally related to dispersed recreation, that lead to ground disturbance.

Mitigation Measures: Several Mitigation Measures have been identified as being appropriate to this undertaking. They include the following:

CR1: Site Avoidance during Project Implementation CR2: Other Mitigation Measures CR3: Discovery of Cultural Resources during Project Implementation

Analysis of effects by Alternative Comparison methods: The parameters listed below guide the discussion of the expected effects on archaeological sites by alternative. Comparisons of effects on historic properties among the alternatives in this analysis are based primarily on the presence of archaeological sites within the APE that could be affected by the proposed activities.

Parameters 1. Only those activities proposed in the various alternatives that are defined as undertakings, as listed above in Definition of Effects and Area of Potential Effects, are used in this analysis; 2. The sites considered in this analysis include only those sites that are currently considered either “eligible” or “unevaluated” with respect to National Register significance, i.e. they qualify for consideration as “historic properties”.

Alternative 1: (No Action) At the present time, many of the archaeological sites in the FHI project area are suffering adverse effects from the buildup of hazardous fuels and the potential effects of unmanaged forest decline on surface and subsurface archaeological site integrity, generally due to the potential for increased tree mortality, resultant tree-tips, and wildfire intensity. Fires occurring in areas with dense concentrations of combustible material have the potential to burn with greater than normal intensity

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 125 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

and duration, thereby altering the physical integrity and/or research value of archaeological sites or site components. Resulting denudation can lead to a sharp increase in soil erosion, thus disturbing or leading to a loss of archaeological soil matrices and/or site components.

With no change in current management activities and direction, adverse effects (and the potential for them) on a number of the archaeological sites in the FHI project area may continue.

Alternative 2: (Proposed Action) Activities that have the potential to directly affect the archaeological sites in this group are listed above (Definition of Effects and Area of Potential Effects), and include commercial timber harvesting; construction and use of landings, skid trails, and temporary roads used to access treatment areas; ground disturbance that takes place outside existing road prisms and ditches.

The MTNF believes that potential adverse effects to historic properties resulting from FHI project activities can be mitigated provided appropriate measures are properly applied. In that instance, project activities are not expected to adversely affect historic properties and the effects of project activities will be as follows:

(1) In those stands and project areas where no historic properties are present, the proposed project activities have “no potential to affect” cultural resources.

(2) In those stands and other project areas in which potentially ground disturbing or other activities with a potential to adversely impact cultural resources would be carried out as listed above, Definition of Effects and Area of Potential Effect, and where historic and/or unevaluated properties are present, and where Mitigation Measures CR1, CR2, and CR3, are feasible and implemented, the proposed project activities are expected to have “no adverse effect” [36 CFR 800.4(d)(1)] on historic properties.

(3) In the case of “not eligible” sites whose data-producing potential have been exhausted through investigations prior to project implementation, and in the case of project activities undertaken in locations where no historic properties are present, project activities are expected to have “no effect.”

(4) In the case of “unevaluated” sites occurring in stands where no activity is proposed, project implementation is expected to result in a finding of “no effect” to historic properties.

(5) Where archaeological sites occur along routes of access (such as old non-system roads that have not been maintained) and where operating condition restrictions and/or site avoidance (CR1) is not feasible, Mitigation Measure CR2 will be applied with the expectation that a mitigation plan can be developed to result in a finding of “no adverse effect” [36 CFR 800.4(d)(1)].

• Cumulative effects on Historic Properties

Because there are not expected to be any adverse effects to historic properties as a result of FHI project activities, there are not expected to be any cumulative adverse effects to historic properties. There are, however, opportunities in the proposed alternatives to provide for long-term beneficial effects to historic properties.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 126 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Irreversible or irretrievable commitment on resources None of the alternatives are anticipated to have an irreversible or irretrievable commitment on historic properties within the proposed FHI project area.

Economics

• Existing condition of Regional and Local Economies related to Forest Land

The OOHA area (which includes the MTNF) contains 4.4 million acres of national forest land, which produces approximately 2.4% of the total United States output of forest products. The associated forest products industry contributes 5% of the industrial output, 3% of the employment and 3% of the employee compensation directly attributive in the OOHA area. 35 of the 107 OOHA counties had at least double the national average percentage output, employment, and/or employment compensation from the forest products industry. These counties derived an average 16% of their output, 8% of their employment and 11% of their employment compensation from the forest products industry. National Forests influence about 1% of the Highlands overall employment (1.9 million jobs). Of the three principal national forest programs affecting the Highlands’ economy (timber, mineral and recreation), timber has the greatest influence on employment, employee compensation, and total income when all three forests are considered together (OOHA, 1999).

Additionally, according to a National Hunting, Fishing and Wildlife Survey conducted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, forest related recreation activities in Missouri has contributed approximately 1.6 billion in sales and 3.5 billion in business activity (jobs) annually in the state. The direct economic impact for the Missouri wood products industry includes 27,762 jobs, contributing $1.69 billion in Gross State Product (Missouri Economic Impact Brief - Forest Products Industries 2007).

In addition to industry related economies, Missouri counties also receive direct payments from the federal treasury. One venue is Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILT). Where federal land is held within a county, the county receives direct payments to help off-set the loss of tax revenue that would otherwise be assessed on private holdings. The key law that implements these payments is Public Law 94-565, dated October 20, 1976. This law was rewritten and amended by Public Law 97-258 on September 13, 1982 and codified at Chapter 69, Title 31 of the United States Code. The Law recognizes that the inability of local governments to collect property taxes on Federally-owned land can create a financial impact. PILT payments help local governments carry out such vital services as firefighting and police protection, construction of public schools and roads, and search-and- rescue operations. The payments are made annually for tax-exempt Federal lands administered by the BLM, the National Park Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (all agencies of the Interior Department), the U.S. Forest Service (under the U.S. Department of Agriculture), and for Federal water projects and some military installations. PILT payments are one of the ways that the Federal government can fulfill its role of being a good neighbor to local communities. In 2016, 29 Missouri counties received over $3.7 million (See PILT Payments – project file reference E-1, or https://www.nbc.gov/pilt/states-payments.cfm?fiscal_yr=2016&Search.x=39&Search.y=6

Other federally mandated payments include those made under Payments to States legislation known as the Secure Rural Schools Act. In 2015 the Forest Service distributed over $3.1 million within 29 Missouri counties (containing federal lands) under this legislation. These payments include 25%

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 127 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

payments, special acts payments and Secure Rural Schools Act State payments. On April 6, 2015, the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 was reauthorized as part of Public Law 114-10. The SRS Act has yet to be reauthorized for 2016. (See Payments to States: project file reference E-2).

Financial measures for this analysis include implementation expenditures (costs), and realization of priced commodities (revenues). The main relative non-commodity benefits include healthy forest conditions, improved wildlife habitat, and continued recreational opportunities such as camping, hunting, fishing, hiking, horseback riding, wildlife viewing, berry picking and so on. Recreation activities on the Forest include a wide range of settings. Opportunities available for recreation range from semi-primitive dispersed opportunities, motorized trail use, or specific developed recreation areas. Most recreation use occurs at the developed recreation sites such campgrounds, trails, or fishing areas. The nature of dispersed recreation is that it is flexible, based on the needs of the user and the characteristics of the local surroundings at a given time. Local and non-local recreation users of the Analysis Area contribute to the local economy as they pass through or stay overnight in the area.

The following analysis focuses on incremental economic differences between the alternatives. The analysis includes only variable costs associated with the alternatives. Since fixed costs, such as general administration and program management, do not change among alternatives, these costs are not included. Furthermore, the costs included in the economic analysis are only those to be incurred by the Forest Service. Costs incurred by timber purchasers or other parties are not included. The estimates are based on historical costs and benefits for similar projects on the MTNF.

• Direct and indirect effects on Economics

This project identified the ongoing need to broaden the process of treating at-risk stands experiencing various stages of oak decline.

Alternative 1: (No Action) With selection of Alternative 1, no vegetative treatments would be carried out. Economic value of the timber resource would continue to decline over time due to continued decline and mortality becoming prevalent throughout the specific areas proposed for treatment. In the short term, no change in local jobs or income would result from the implementation of Alternative 1, but there would be no monetary benefit from timber harvesting either in supplying jobs directly, indirectly, or generating additional revenues within the local economy or to the federal treasury. Other than the investment made for the reconnaissance and environmental analysis for this proposed project, there would normally be no additional monetary cost for the government with the selection of Alternative 1.

However, in the current condition of the project area, the continued decline and mortality will effectively be a loss of past investment in any management within proposed stands, as well as, nuisance and hazardous trees becoming a liability as situations occur when dead and dying trees near improvements continue to fall in the right-of-way of Forest Service, county, and some state highway system roadways. Costs for removal or treatment of these areas to allow access for normal maintenance activities (mowing and brushing roadsides) under service contract or Forest Service workforce will jeopardize funding appropriated for other resource management projects. Certain types of normal custodial or stewardship costs associated with managing a National Forest would be

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 128 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

expected in any alternative regardless, but if these treatments can be accomplished as a result of commercial operations rather than service or project operations it is just that much more efficient.

Alternative 2: (Proposed Action) In Alternative 2, associated long range benefits for other resources include: habitat for wildlife species requiring early successional and semi-open areas, variety in canopy closure in remaining mature stands, healthy mast producing stands, reduced potential fire severity, decreased fire suppression costs, and a less hazardous outdoor experience due to treatment of areas adjacent to roads with oak decline damage.

While there would be costs to the government associated with the implementation of this alternative, the costs would be offset by the revenues returned to the national treasury. Job production will result in maintaining a tax base for federal, state, and local infrastructure. Finally, reduced hazards and improved roadside access will require less investment over time, and will promote availability for multiple use by all forest visitors.

Employment Jobs and income in the 29 Missouri counties affected by management activities on the MTNF include; direct employment in mining support operations (the MTNF administers the permits for surface exploration drilling), road construction and maintenance contracts, timber harvest, forest regeneration through tree planting and/or natural regeneration site preparation contracts, timber stand improvement contracts, non-native invasive vegetation herbicide treatment contracts, botanical and forest land inventory contracts, heritage resource reconnaissance contracts, wildfire suppression and prescribed burning operations support, campground concession, guiding services, motorized and non-motorized trail construction and maintenance contracts, as well as employment providing needed goods and services necessary to support these activities.

This project is expected to have an economic activity horizon of 10 years. In the Proposed Action Alternative, timber harvested as a result of vegetative treatments would provide economic benefits beyond revenues generated by the timber sales. These benefits include local employment for harvest crews, wood products industries, and the local and surrounding businesses associated with goods and services support. In the short term, income and jobs would be produced through timber harvesting, and any subsequent reforestation work, or wildlife habitat improvement activities. As the indirect employment described above is variable, the direct employment from this project can be analyzed and expressed as crew weeks. A crew week is equivalent to three individuals producing 50 thousand board feet (MBF) of timber harvesting in a five day week. An estimated harvest of approximately 46,000 acres is expected to produce roughly 138,000 MBF. That would then provide approximately 2,760 crew weeks of employment needed to complete the proposed harvests. Additionally, the action alternative includes economic dynamics known as a “ripple effect”, or economic multipliers, associated with primary production, secondary production, distribution, and market related to direct employment and support, local and regional tax benefits, and secondary benefits that are not captured in an investment analysis.

Cash Flow Analysis Agency supported software QuickSilver was used to run an economic analysis scenario. Table 27 below shows a net cash flow comparison of priced activities proposed in each alternative for a relative comparison. Appendix E-1 includes the QuickSilver Economic Analysis of the project economic factors. In actual implementation of any action alternative, costs and revenues will be

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 129 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

spread out over multiple years. The year of realization for costs and revenues may vary in actuality from those used in this analysis. Actual yields, values, and costs are estimates based on previous projects, and actual realized costs and values may vary also. It is also recognized that many of the values generated by the various alternatives (both positive as well as negative) involve goods and services that are not priced in the market place, i.e. reducing hazard trees, and are not captured for representation in this comparison. The cost of producing some of these non-priced goods are also not included in the total project cost figures.

Total Cost was computed by summing costs of all the timber sale preparation and sale administration work needed to implement each alternative. Total Revenue was derived from multiplying the expected volume in each alternative with the estimated stumpage value by product. Net Present Value (NPV) is the value left after subtracting Total Cost from Total Revenue.

Table 3-24: Cash Flow Comparisons of Alternatives

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Total Volume (MBF 0 138,000 equivalent) Total Cost* $0 $11,932,351 Total Revenue** $0 $14,510,744 Benefit/Cost Ratio NA 1.22 Net Present Value $-175,994*** $2,578,393 * All planning, sale preparation, road work, reforestation, and sale administration activities – planning costs ignored in Alt. 1. ** All measurable commodities (reports in project file). *** Value as an opportunity cost by Alternative

The NPV is considered to be the most reliable of all the investment performance criteria (North Central Region Forest Management Guide, 2006). The negative NPV of Alternative 1 is expressed as an opportunity cost, or a foregone opportunity value, from doing nothing. The opportunity cost cannot be inferred to be what it may require to complete the necessary work to the desired condition non-commercially.

The NPV analysis shows that the economic benefit for the action alternative is $2,578,393 for Alternative 2. The positive net return at this level is moderately sensitive and dependent on employment cost inflation and stumpage rates that may in actuality fluctuate enough to become more or less positive in such a short time window.

The Benefit/Cost Ratio defines the amount costs may rise and still make the project economically feasible. The project can be accepted as economically feasible as long as the ratio is equal to or greater than 1. For Alternative 2, this ratio is 1.22, which has an appreciable economic margin. This does not compel a decision for implementation, it merely defines the expected performance of the investment in relation to the expected and desired benefits (i.e. timber salvage and forest health restoration). A ratio this positive in Alternative 2 allows a relative “safety margin”, as (employment) costs have historically risen at a rate of less than 5% (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2016).

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 130 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

It is recognized that a certain amount of market variability will dictate investment performance. The green data in the graph below still shows a stumpage rate over the past five years well above the rate used in the QuickSilver analysis (Missouri Timber Price Trends Quarterly Market Report, Vol. 26 No.1), so project viability is considered very stable.

Graph E1 – Timber Price Trends

• Cumulative effects on Economics

Components of cumulative effects

Spatial Boundary: The cumulative effects spatial boundary for economics is the project activity stands included in the proposal.

Temporal Boundary: The temporal boundary for economic cumulative effects is the 10 year project activity horizon discussed under Employment.

Past and present actions, as well as reasonably foreseeable actions: Since the analysis as presented is specific to the project and independent of influences other than inflation (or deflation), employment costs, and stumpage rates, no continuing or near future activities on any public or private lands will affect the analysis.

Alternative 1: (No Action)

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 131 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Under the no action alternative, the opportunity to contribute to recovery both economically and ecologically would be deferred to a point that it may no longer be feasible to be accomplished commercially.

Alternative 2: (Proposed Action) Within the action alternative, cumulative economic activities will remain a factor in local and regional economies for many years. It is unlikely that these benefits will displace other opportunities within the area of influence, but will strengthen and gain stability of economic factors within the area. It is expected that management activity disturbance may displace some recreation opportunities over the short term, resulting in lower generated income locally from these visitors. Conversely, the work to minimize, or at least reduce, the prevalence of oak decline and mortality, will eventually bring more recreation opportunities to the area as safety issues are alleviated, forest health is moved toward restoration, and wildlife habitat is maintained and improved.

Irreversible or irretrievable commitment on resources None of the alternatives would have an irreversible or irretrievable commitment on this resource in the proposed FHI project cumulative effects area. Implementation of Alternative 1 does not preclude other vegetative management opportunities for the future, but could potentially create more demand on private land to supply timber need.

Economic summary: There would be no significant cumulative effects on economics due to the limited nature and extent of the cumulative effects discussed above. This conclusion was reached after analyzing all of the above information regarding the past, present and reasonably foreseeable future activities on all ownerships within the specified spatial and temporal boundaries.

Visuals

• Existing condition of Visual Resources

The FHI project area shows visual variety through naturally appearing areas along the travelways with occasional encounters of small rural communities (Boss, Briar, Eastwood, Ellsinore, Thomasville, Wilby, and Rombauer). These travelways have a variety of hardwood and conifer trees that make a continuous tunnel effect on one or both sides of the roads or waterways, opening up to ridgetops with views over valleys covering long distances. Within the project area, there are pastoral and agricultural landscapes and small areas where you encounter a local clustering of residences. The visitor would see hay being grown and harvested (private property) and cattle grazed. Due to the changes in elevation of the terrain and the vegetation, it is not common to see most of the roadways from other areas, especially during the time of year when deciduous trees have their leaves.

The existing landscape character is one that has evolved naturally over time without glaciation. The terrain has areas of changes in elevation that are several hundred feet. There are creeks and springs that provide interesting sights and sounds that change with the volume and speed of the water. The viewer would encounter rock outcroppings of interesting shapes that look different during different times of day or year or depending on the weather. There are mixed vegetative species that provide seasonal color and texture in all vertical levels of the forest from the little mayapples that sprout and bloom in the spring to the large oak trees turning colors in the fall. Many bird and animal species

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 132 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

can be seen and heard throughout the year. The roadways are primarily narrow gravel or native surfaces that are winding and climb up and down hill with the exception of a few blacktop Federal and State highways used to access the project area.

In response to increasing environmental concerns, the Forest Service developed the Visual Management System to inventory, classify, analyze, and manage its visual resources. Maintenance and enhancement of the natural appearance of the characteristic landscape while actively managing for various resource benefits such as timber, grazing, wildlife, and recreation are the system’s main objective. The Visual Management System measures and evaluates two main elements; the physical and man-made features of land and the public’s concern for scenic quality.

A general discussion of visual management and effects of the different types of management activities can be found in the Landscape Aesthetics “A Handbook for Scenery Management”- Forest Service-U.S. Department of Agriculture-Agriculture Handbook Number 701, December 1995 incorporated here by reference.

The Visual Quality Objective (VQO) requires that we meet scenic integrity levels. As stated on page 2-5 of Agriculture Handbook 701, “In general, a specific integrity level can be achieved by decreasing the visual contrast of the deviation being viewed.” Several approaches may meet integrity levels:

The following are those pertaining to this project area: 1. “Usually the most effective way is to repeat form, line, color, texture, pattern and scale common to the valued landscape character being viewed.”…“If repetition is accurate and well designed the deviation may blend so well the change is not evident (HIGH). It may only borrow well enough to be noticeable but visually subordinate (MODERATE).” 2. “Another approach is to borrow form, line, color, texture, pattern and scale from similar but different valued landscapes outside that being viewed.”…“Because these are introduced elements from landscape character outside the one being viewed these are usually evident (MODERATE) if not dominant (LOW).” 3. “An approach used for the VERY LOW level is to shape and blend only with the landforms. Harvest unit boundaries, for example, would follow draws where low branched trees and brush exist over ridge or hill tops to avoid dominance of unnatural appearing edges. Roads and landings would conform to folds and ridge lines in the landscape to avoid dominance. Harvest boundaries would normally utilize all breaks in topography to avoid excessive unit size.”

Visual Quality Objectives There are two things that determine the VQO for an area; they are Variety Class and Sensitivity Level. Appendix G of the Forest Plan documents the criteria for determining Variety Classes and Sensitivity Levels. Each district has variety classes and sensitivity levels mapped, however, they may be changed based on field conditions. After Variety Class and Sensitivity Level is determined for an area then the visual quality matrix (found in the S & G’s for each management prescription in the Forest Plan) can be used to figure out the VQO. The following paragraphs describe Variety Classes, Sensitivity Levels, and ultimately Visual Quality Objectives.

Variety Classes

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 133 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

The physical and man-made features are evaluated within the context of the local physiographic character type in terms of three degrees of quality. These variety classes consider the presence and quality of the elements’ landform, rock form, vegetation, streams, lakes and cultural features (man-made elements). They are expressed and mapped as the following Variety Classes:

• Variety Class A (Distinctive) – Areas where landform, vegetation patterns, water characteristics, and cultural features combine to provide unusual, unique, or outstanding scenic quality. These landscapes have strong positive attributes of variety, unity, vividness, mystery, intactness, order, harmony, uniqueness, pattern, and balance. (36% of project) • Variety Class B (Common) - Areas where landform, vegetation patterns, water characteristics, and cultural features use combine to provide ordinary or common scenic quality. These landscapes have generally positive, yet common, attributes of variety, unity, vividness, mystery, intactness, order, harmony, uniqueness, pattern and balance. Normally they would form the basic matrix within the ecological unit. (53% of project) • Variety Class C (Minimal) - Areas where landform, vegetation patterns, water characteristics, and cultural land use have low scenic quality. Often water and rockform of any consequence are missing in these landscapes. These landscapes have weak or missing attributes of variety, unity, vividness, mystery, intactness, order, harmony, uniqueness, pattern, and balance. (10% ac. of project)

Sensitivity Levels The sensitivity levels for the travelways were developed by user related concerns and expectations. Landscape visibility is subject to many essential, interconnected considerations. These include: context and experiences of viewers, expected images, position of observer in the landscape, number of people, and viewer scrutiny of the landscape caused by duration of view, viewing distance, air clarity, and visual magnitude.

Peoples concern for scenic quality is measured and evaluated in terms of the number and type of users and the distance they are able to view the landscape from travelways and use areas.

The number and type of users is classified as the following Sensitivity Levels: • Sensitivity Level 1 Roads - Highest (46 Road segments, approx. 347 miles) • Sensitivity Level 2 Roads - Moderate (44 Road segments, approx. 246 miles) • Sensitivity Level 3- Seldom Seen (All other roads/areas not listed above) • Sensitivity Level 1 Waterways - Highest (7 Waterway segments, approx. 142 miles) • Sensitivity Level 2 Waterways - Moderate (2 Waterways segments, approx. 27 miles)

Table 3-25: Select Roads / Waterways with notable visual concerns in the FHI project area* Road/Waterway Name Ranger District Sensitivity Miles Level (approximate) State Highway 181 Willow Springs 1 16 State Route AP Willow Springs 1 6 State Highway 76 Willow Springs 1 10

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 134 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Road/Waterway Name Ranger District Sensitivity Miles Level (approximate) State Route AA Willow Springs 3 2 State Highway 32 Salem and Potosi 1 25 State Highway 72 Salem 1 5 State Route KK Salem 2 5 State Route DD Potosi 1 and 2 3 and 3 Forest Road 2245 Potosi 1 3 Forest Road 2228 Potosi 3 5 U.S. Highway 160 Doniphan 1 26 State Highway 19 Doniphan 1 23 Current River Doniphan 1 29 Eleven Point National Scenic River Doniphan 1 44 State Route V Doniphan 2 7 State Route AA and County Road Doniphan 1 7 127 Forest Road 3190 Doniphan 3 3 State Route C Doniphan 1 26 State Route T Poplar Bluff 1 11 U.S. Highway 67 Poplar Bluff 1 33 State Route V Poplar Bluff 2 16 * expanded list of roads and waterways can be found in the FHI project file Distance Zones The actual area viewed is considered by distance zones and classified as: • Foreground (fg) – The limit of this zone is based upon distances at which details can be perceived. • Middleground (mg) – This zone extends from foreground zone to 3-5 miles from the observer. • Background (bg) – This zone extends from middleground to infinity.

The premise is that the closest area (fg) is the most critical. Thus, Sensitivity Level 1 in the foreground (fg) is the most sensitive viewing area.

The physical components of the landscape as Variety Classes are combined with the user related Sensitivity Levels to produce Visual Quality Objectives of management. There are five differing levels of VQO’s: • Preservation (P) - Allows ecological change only. Management activities are prohibited except for very low visually impacting recreation facilities. • Retention (R) - Management activities may not be visually evident. Contrasts in form, line, color and texture must be reduced during or immediately after the management activity. • Partial Retention (PR) - Management activities must remain visually subordinate to the characteristic landscape. Associated visual impacts in form, line, color and texture must be reduced as soon after project completion as possible but within the first year.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 135 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

• Modification (M) - Management activities may visually dominate the characteristic landscape. However, landform and vegetative alterations must borrow from naturally established form, line, color or texture so as to blend in with the surrounding landscape character. The objective should be met within one year of project completion. • Maximum Modification (MM) - Management activities including vegetative and landform alterations may dominate the characteristic landscape. However, when viewed as background they must visually appear as natural occurrences within the surrounding landscapes or character type. Reduction of contrast should be accomplished within five years.

The VQO for a specific area is determined by referring to the visual quality matrix found in the S & G’s for each management prescription.

The following Visual Quality matrix would be followed during implementation for MP 1.1 (Natural Community Restoration, Roaded Natural ROS) and for MP 2.1 (General Forest, Roaded Natural ROS) is from pages 3-5 and page 3-12 respectively of the Forest Plan.

Table 3-26: Forest Plans Visual Quality matrix for MP’s 1.1 and 2.1

Sensitivity Sensitivity Sensitivity Sensitivity Sensitivity Sensitivity Sensitivity Level 1 Level 1 Level 1 Level 2 Level 2 Level 2 Level 3 Variety (Highest) (Highest) (Highest) (Moderate) (Moderate) (Moderate) (Seldom Class fg mg bg fg mg bg Seen) ALL Class A - R PR PR PR M M M Distinctive Class B - PR M M PR M MM MM Common Class C - PR M M M MM MM MM Minimal

The following Visual Quality matrix would be followed during implementation for MP 6.1 (Semi- Primitive Non-Motorized ROS) and for MP 6.2 (Semi-Primitive Motorized ROS) is from pages 3- 34 and page 3-38 respectively of the Forest Plan.

Table 3-27: Forest Plans Visual Quality matrix for MP’s 6.1 and 6.2

Sensitivity Sensitivity Sensitivity Sensitivity Sensitivity Sensitivity Sensitivity Level 1 Level 1 Level 1 Level 2 Level 2 Level 2 Level 3 Variety (Highest) (Highest) (Highest) (Moderate) (Moderate) (Moderate) (Seldom Class fg mg bg fg mg bg Seen) ALL Class A - R R R PR PR PR PR Distinctive Class B - R PR PR PR M M MM Common

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 136 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Sensitivity Sensitivity Sensitivity Sensitivity Sensitivity Sensitivity Sensitivity Level 1 Level 1 Level 1 Level 2 Level 2 Level 2 Level 3 Variety (Highest) (Highest) (Highest) (Moderate) (Moderate) (Moderate) (Seldom Class fg mg bg fg mg bg Seen) ALL Class C - PR PR M M M MM MM Minimal

Table 31 shows the VQO for Management Area 8.1 (Designated “Special Areas” other than Wilderness) identified on pages 3-50 to 3-53 in the Forest Plan.

Table 3-28: VQO’s for MP 8.1 "Special Areas" in the FHI project

Designated Special Area Ranger District VQO Ozark Trail Multiple Retention Blue Buck Knob Scenic Byway Willow Springs Retention Lower Current River Doniphan Retention Eleven Point River * Doniphan Retention Carmen Springs State Natural Area * Willow Springs Retention Overcup Oak Sink State Natural area * Doniphan Retention Brushy Pond State Natural Area * Doniphan Retention Bald Hill Glade State Natural Area* Doniphan Retention Red Maple Pond State Natural Area * Doniphan Retention *Activity only adjacent to this “Special Area”

Forestwide S & G’s for Visual Management The Forest Plan (page 2-24) provides the following required standards: • Resource management activities must meet or exceed the established VQO. • Allow a short-term reduction, the equivalent of one VQO, for central hardwood regeneration or similarly impacting activities. • Foreground sensitivity level 1 (fg1) or foreground sensitivity level 2 (fg2) areas must not be reduced below modification. • Retain the original VQO for adjusted areas, and meet it within 20 years after initial entry into the corridor or viewshed. • Residue treatment requirements must meet those specified for the original VQO.

• Within fg1 and fg2 areas with a VQO of retention or partial retention:  Mitigate negative visual impacts concurrently with or immediately after each phase or activity;  Complete mitigating measures for each cutting unit or project area before beginning activities in the next sequential block or project area in the same corridor or viewshed; and  Complete obligations specified by a contract or a project prescription within one year from initiation of activities for any single cutting unit or project area. Emphasize

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 137 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

completing all work within these areas in a systematic manner within the shortest practical time. • Within fg1 and fg2 areas with a VQO of modification, the standards are the same as above except the total lapsed time from initiation of activities to completion of obligations specified by a contract or a project prescription shall not exceed two years for any sale block or project area.

Table 3-29 presents the Maximum residual heights (above ground surface) for designated travelways in inches for each VQO by sensitivity level in the FHI project area. Table 3-29: Maximum residue treatment heights (above ground surface) for designated travelways and use areas by sensitivity levels Visual Travel Sensitivity Sensitivity Sensitivity Quality Distance Zone Speed Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Objective - MPH (Mandatory) (Mandatory) (Optional) VQO 0-10 18 inches Retention – Near foreground 11-35 24 inches N.A. N.A. (R) (0-300') 36-55 30 inches 0-10 6 feet Retention – Secondary Zones 11-35 8 feet N.A. N.A. (R) (up to 600') 36-55 8 feet Partial 0-10 18 inches 30 inches 36 inches Near foreground Retention – 11-35 30 inches 30 inches 36 inches (0-300') (PR) 36-55 36 inches 36 inches 48 inches Partial 0-10 8 feet 10 feet 12 feet Secondary Zones Retention – 11-35 8 feet 10 feet 12 feet (up to 600') (PR) 36-55 12 feet 12 feet 12 feet 0-10 36 inches 48 inches Modification Near foreground 11-35 N.A. 48 inches 48 inches (M) (0-300') 36-55 48 inches 48 inches Modification Secondary Zones All Speeds N.A. 12 feet N.A. (M) (up to 600')

Maximum Near foreground Modification All Speeds N.A. N.A. 48 inches (0-300') (MM) Maximum Secondary Zones Modification All Speeds N.A. N.A. N.A. (up to 600') (MM) Reproduced from the Forest Plan, Table 2.6, page 2-26 (Amendment 2)

Forestwide S & G’s specific to the Eleven Point National Scenic River The Forest Plan (page 3-54 to 57) provides the following required guidelines:

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 138 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

• These areas are not included in the suitable timber base.

Note, This Standard and Guideline information for the Eleven Point National Scenic River is presented in this document due to public concerns raised during scoping. No timber activities are planned in this National Scenic River corridor.

Forestwide S & G’s specific to the Lower Current River Special Area The Forest Plan (page 3-60 to 61) provides the following required standards:

• This area are not included in the suitable timber base. • Prohibit timber management practices except as necessary for public safety, response to special wildlife habitat needs, to enhance visual resources, or salvage.

Forestwide S & G’s specific to National Forest Scenic Byways The Forest Plan (page 3-62) provides the following required guidelines: • The primary objective for these routes is to enhance and protect the scenic condition along the near foreground and to regulate visual effect of some management activities beyond the buffer. • Activities related to recreation, scenic quality, heritage resources travel and tourism will take priority within and adjacent to these routes.

• Direct and indirect effects on Visuals

This section describes the area of analysis for direct and indirect effects and the area evaluated for cumulative effects. The scope of the analysis will include the scenic resources within the FHI project area and potential visual quality effects from the travelways within and adjacent to the area. Because the Forest provides a wide range of recreation opportunities and scenic landscapes, there are no scenery resources or recreation activities limited or specific to the FHI project area. Therefore, any analysis beyond that described above will not be necessary.

Alternative 1: (No Action) No sudden changes from the existing condition would be expected to occur. Barring natural disturbance, it is anticipated that the existing visual condition of the project area would slowly change. In the future, the project area as a whole would appear as a natural mature or old growth forest with a lot of dying trees and degradation of the stream channels and fields would continue. Vehicle/tree collisions may increase from falling debris or dead trees falling on the roadway.

By leaving the diseased and damaged timber, the forest visitor would not be able to see as far into stands for either wildlife viewing, seasonal viewing or hunting. The oak decline would continue to kill mature Red oak group (black, red and scarlet oaks) and some white oak trees in the project area decreasing the inherent scenic attractiveness of these oak stands. Over time, this mortality would continue to contribute to fuel loading both on the ground and in the form of standing and/or fallen snags. Visual variety of forested stands with differing age classes would not occur. Temporary roads, skid trails, log landings, and tree residue as the result of harvesting the dead and dying oaks would not occur.

Alternative 2: (Proposed Action)

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 139 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

By harvesting the dead and declining oak species, thinning out dense canopies of numerous oak/pine and pine stands and providing an opportunity for new growth, the area would continue to have added visual variety. Immediately after timber management activity, it would appear more open and the slash disposal would be visible for a short period of time.

Scenery would show young thick stands of trees (many of which would be thinned in this alternative) and older, larger stands with a semi open understory. It would allow the visitor to see further into some of the areas allowing an opportunity to view wildlife and differing vegetation such as the service berry, redbud and dogwood blooming in the spring or the oak trees turning colors in the fall. Keeping coniferous and deciduous trees healthy in an area would give a seasonal variety experience to the forest visitor.

The planned activity of firewood sales (in areas after commercial harvests and non-commercial treatments) also help minimize the visual quality concerns of tops and unusable logs being left behind. This utilization would occur only after the sale has been closed so some degradation of the visual experience may happen for a short time.

This alternative would have management activity visible along Sensitivity Level 1, 2, and 3 roads and Sensitivity Level 1 and 2 waterways. Many designated “Special Areas” other than Wilderness (MA 8.1) occur within the FHI project boundary. Not only are timber activities not planned in any Forest Wilderness Area, but, they are also not planned within the following Special Areas: Lower Current River Special Area, Eleven Point National Scenic River corridor, and any designated State Natural Area identified in the Forest Plan.

This alternative would have some management activity visible from portions of many Federal and State Highways, County roads, Forest Service System and Non-system roads, and temporary roads throughout the project area.

Visual Mitigation Measure - VR1: Where possible and feasible in stands with an assigned VQO of Retention, remove only standing hazard trees, trees with signs of oak decline, and damaged trees in the near foreground (0-300 feet) along the following: 1) Travelways State Highways 19, 32, 181-National scenic byway State Routes DD, C, AP, AA Forest Roads 2245, 3145, 3190, 3152, 3002, 3155 County Road 156, 127 U.S. Highway 67 2) The Ozark Trail.

A list of stands can be found in Appendix C, Table C2. Maximum residue treatment heights will follow Table 32 seen previously in this document.

• Cumulative effects on Visuals

Components of cumulative effects:

Spatial boundary:

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 140 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

A one mile corridor around the FHI project treatment areas for each district was selected as the visual resource cumulative effects boundary. This area was used because it will adequately address any effects related to vegetative management on the scenery resources.

Temporal boundary: The temporal boundary was set to analyze 10 years prior to this decision, plus 10 years following this decision. The boundary was selected because 10 years is the normal management cycle and this is the extent the effects are measurable and meaningful.

Past and present actions that may have an effect on the Visual resource: On Federal and private lands activities includes: wildfire suppression, prescribed fire, fireline construction, timber harvest, timber stand improvement, road maintenance, fish and wildlife habitat improvements, opening maintenance, pond maintenance, pond construction, illegal dump removal, power-line installation, utilities installation, herbicide use, insect and disease occurrences (such as the oak borer), the influences from Highways and numerous county roads.

National Forest land actions include: Past projects within the Scenery cumulative effects boundary include the following (Decision type, date):

Integrated Non-native Invasive Plant Control Project (ROD, 2/14/2012) This was a Decision that was Forest-wide with the main focus to treat non-native invasive plant infestations on the MTNF using an integrated combination of manual, mechanical, cultural, chemical, prescribed fire and biological control treatment methods.

Indian Creek Project EA (DN, 9/05/13): This Willow Springs Ranger District project is utilizing a combination of commercial harvest (Salvage/Sanitation, Seed Tree and Shelterwood harvest), non-commercial timber, wildlife, and prescribed fire treatments, and other activities designed to enhance natural communities and improve forest health conditions while providing opportunities for wildlife habitat improvement, dispersed recreational uses, and harvest of timber products. This project lies on the northern boundary of the Visuals cumulative effects boundary of the Willow Springs Ranger District activities.

East Fork Huzzah EA (DN, 4/20/2016): This Salem Ranger District project has a small portion within the FHI viewshed along State Hwy 32. Activities inside the FHI viewshed include Shelterwood harvest, Thinning, Crop tree release and Trash dump clean-up. Additional activities are used to improve forest health by treating oak decline, enhancing ecosystems, improving wildlife habitat, and managing the transportation system. This project lies on the northeastern boundary of the Visuals cumulative effects boundary of the Salem Ranger District activities.

Cattail Creek Salvage (DM, 8/8/2013): This Poplar Bluff Ranger District project is approximately 4.0 miles northeast of Poplar Bluff, Missouri, near the rural community of Rombauer. The purpose of the projects was to conduct salvage harvest and resource management activities in 13 stands totaling an estimated 250 acres to meet objectives in the MTNF Forest Plan. Activities inside the FHI viewshed include multiple Salvage harvest cuts.

Cane Ridge West (DN, 9/25/2009): This Poplar Bluff Ranger District project is located west of U.S. Highway 67, north of U.S. Highway 60, and south of the Black River. The purpose of this project was to move the project area toward the Forest-wide goals and objectives, and the

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 141 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

prescription for the 1.1 MP found in the Forest Plan. Activities inside the FHI viewshed include Restoration Thinning (Open and Closed Woodlands), Crop tree release and Trash dump clean-up.

Handy (DN, 10-21-2009): This Doniphan/Eleven Point Ranger District project generally lies around and adjacent to Handy, Missouri. This project is designed to improve plant communities that reflect naturally occurring historic structure and composition by providing a variety of habitat conditions that meet the needs of plant, fish and wildlife species. Activities inside the FHI viewshed include Restoration Thinning, Clearcut with reserves, Crop tree release Salvage/Plant/Release treatment and Understory control.

Van Buren (DN, 9-07-2011): This Doniphan/Eleven Point Ranger District project generally lies west and southwest of Van Buren, Missouri. The purpose for this project was to move existing conditions in the project area which are not in compliance with the Forest Plan toward Forest-wide goals and objectives, and the prescription for MP 2.1 found in the Forest Plan. Activities inside the FHI viewshed include Shelterwood Preparation cut, Pre-commercial thinning, and Group Selection harvest.

Fremont-Pineknot (DN, 7/31/2015): This Doniphan/Eleven Point Ranger District project is located near the community of Fremont, Missouri. The purpose of this project was to restore and enhance fire-adapted pine and pine-oak bluestem woodlands to their full range of historic vegetation composition and structural conditions that occurred under natural disturbance regimes (e.g. fire and drought). Activities inside the FHI viewshed include Restoration thinning, Pre-commercial thinning, and commercial thinning.

Other projects that justify the rationale for a 10 year cumulative effects temporal boundary include: Westside (4-11-2007), Camp 8 (10-24-2007), Compton (8-28-2006).

State of Missouri and Other Federal land activities include: Peck Ranch, Rocky Creek, University Forest Conservation areas: These are just a few of the State managed Conservation areas with Wildlife, Forest and Woodland resource management. Missouri Department of Conservation (MDC) protects and manages Missouri's fish, forest, and wildlife resources. These three Conservation areas comprise over 60,000 acres of lands adjacent to or within the FHI visual cumulative effects spatial boundary. Management activities in Missouri Conservation areas are similar to those of the MTNF. Additional conservation areas considered in this cumulative effects analysis can be found in the FHI project file.

Private land activities include: The following activities do not occur on Forest Service lands; however they do occur on privately owned lands. The activities include: land clearing for farms and/or home sites, beef farm operations, hobby farms, horse and goat grazing and the construction of new homes. East of County Road KK (Salem Ranger District) active mine exploration activities can be seen on private land.

Doe Run Resources Corporation: Within the FHI project area, two active underground (800 – 1200 feet below the surface) mines associated with Doe Run Resources Corporation are ongoing. These two active (Casteel, 29 Mine) mines truck material from private land within the Salem and Potosi/Fredericktown Ranger Districts to the Buick Mine/Mill for refining. Above-ground mining structures include the mine headframe, tailings ponds and dams, along with various buildings and

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 142 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

parking lots. Large trucks can be seen travelling Missouri State Highways KK, 32, and 49 which traverse the Viburnum Trend, where the mining is occurring. Most of the mining structures are not visible from the road. An unsuspecting visitor may not realize they are traveling above one of the largest lead (Pb) deposits in the world.

The Doe Run Buick Resource Recycling facility is located on private land to the east of Highway KK, about a mile south of Highway 32. The facility recycles lead batteries. The large industrial complex is conspicuous among the forested landscape. A traveler looks down into the complex because it is at a lower elevation than the road.

The West Fork Mine and Mill is no longer active, but the head rig and buildings are still in place. A traveler headed south on Highway KK looks directly at the tailings dam, which is most conspicuous on the east side of road after the West Fork River Bridge.

Reasonably foreseeable actions that may have an effect on Visuals:

Future actions on National Forest lands may include: Cane Ridge Small Tree Project (Ongoing): This Poplar Bluff Ranger District project is located west of U.S. Highway 67, and north of U.S. Highway 60. The nearest rural community is Williamsville, Missouri. The project is needed to restore natural communities. The purpose of the Cane Ridge Small Tree project is to move habitat conditions toward their historic natural community types, structure, and composition. Activities inside the FHI viewshed include Pre- commercial Thinning, and mid-story control of understory.

Blackwell Ridge (Ongoing): This Poplar Bluff Ranger District project is located west of U.S. Highway 67, and north of the Black River. The purpose of the project is to improve forest health, develop sustainable forest conditions, and provide wildlife habitat diversity by harvesting declining trees. Activities inside the FHI viewshed include Seed tree with reserves, Salvage harvest, Group Selection harvest and understory control. Future actions on State of Missouri land may include: State of Missouri Conservation areas: At this time there are no known projects or activities proposed in the future on MDC lands that would affect the visuals resource. Activities similar to that of the MTNF are expected, such as prescribed fire, forest thinning, and logging.

Future actions on Private lands may include: Reasonable foreseeable actions based on past trends in the area include some timber harvest and some prescribed burning occurring on the surrounding private ownerships. Other activities on private include some pasture conversion and housing development on a percentage of the lands being harvested. The lands most suitable for pasture are already in pasture; new housing developments have a close correlation to good access.

Doe Run Resources Corporation: Within the FHI project area, prospecting/drill site activities associated with Doe Run Resources Corporations’ Buick Mine is expected to continue into the future. Large truck traffic should be expected along State Highway 32 and County Road KK. Also along Hwy KK one will continue to see active lead recycling activities at the Doe Run facility.

Cumulative effects discussion:

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 143 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Vegetation and ground disturbing activities would be necessary to implement the action alternative. These activities would result in short-term increases of sediment and slash on the ground. Various items such as the S & G’s in this analysis, items found in the Forest Plan, and timber sale contract provisions would be implemented to minimize any short-term impacts.

There would be no long term negative impacts on any of the visual quality for this area. In fact, over time, the proposed activities would improve the quality and quantity for most visual and recreational activities such as driving for pleasure, wildflower and wildlife viewing, hunting and hiking.

It is important to consider the overall end result desired while at the same time maintaining the current Forest Plan direction. Harvests would cause a reduction in number of trees per acre, additional slash on the ground, and possibly temporary roads or landings visible from the county or Forest Service roads. The negative effects of harvest activity on visual values adjacent to these roads would be minor because the vegetation that is removed in the near foreground would be mitigated with the required slash disposal height, while opening up the understory allowing the visitor to see further into the forest and creating variation in both the size of the trees and appearance of the timber stands.

Thinning of overcrowded stands and harvest of declining trees reduces natural mortality, decreasing the fire fuel load and reducing the threat of stand replacing wildfire. These activities also decrease the threat of insect and disease epidemics and enhance the ecosystem. The visual effects of these proposed harvesting activities would be more noticeable to residents, hunters and other visitors using the local forest roads and trails, especially as pedestrians or other low speed travel. Visual effects may be more noticeable from a few places on private lands within the area, but views would primarily be of thinned areas. Oak decline would continue to kill mature oak trees in the FHI project area.

The continued presence of open areas with a carpet of native grasses and wildflowers along some roadsides would provide a break from the wooded corridor. The cut areas would be laid out on the ground in a manner that would reflect natural lines and be visually subordinate to the characteristic landscape (See visual Mitigation measure #1).

Past and present actions on private and National Forest lands were considered in forming the affected environment of the area as described above. No anticipated future actions are known that would be inconsistent with the visual quality objectives for the analysis area.

Under all the alternatives, there would continue to be open woods due to natural low soil fertility, natural disturbance (windstorm, insect & disease, etc.) or wildfire. Most existing roads would continue to be maintained. The cumulative effect for the action alternative should meet the VQO for all levels.

There would be no significant cumulative effects of any kind on the Visual resource because of the limited nature and extent of the cumulative effects discussed above. This conclusion was reached after analyzing all of the above information regarding the past, present and reasonably foreseeable future activities on all ownerships within the specified spatial and temporal boundaries.

Irreversible or irretrievable commitment on resources

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 144 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

None of the alternatives would have an irreversible or irretrievable commitment on this resource in the proposed project area.

Environmental Justice

Environmental Justice is defined as “the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies” (U.S. EPA 2013). Historically, low income and minority populations stood a disproportionate risk of suffering adverse environmental affects in their communities. Examples include the siting of toxic waste facilities, garbage disposal operations, or unmonitored factory dumping grounds in impoverished or heavily ethnic areas. Presidential Executive Order 12898, signed February 11, 1994, focused Federal attention on the environmental and human health conditions in these communities. Executive Order 12898, “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations,” states: … each Federal agency shall make achieving environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities on minority populations in the United States… (Section 1-101).

Environmental Justice efforts safeguard low-income and minority populations against environmental programs and policies that would have disproportionate effects on their communities. Available demographic and socio-economic resources such as those provided by the U.S. Census Bureau and Economic Profile System-Human Dimensions Toolkit (EPS-HDT) (Headwaters Economics, 2014) have been reviewed and analyzed to characterize populations in the geographic area that are likely to be most affected by the proposed action. This quantitative analysis can reveal useful information about the analysis area and highlight any potential environmental justice conflicts.

• Existing condition of Environmental Justice

Environmental Justice effects are typically analyzed at the county level as that is the level for which key demographic data is available. The FHI project area is spread across portions of 12 counties in southern Missouri all which fall within the 8th Congressional District. The project area covers about 45,885 acres of harvest activities on National Forest land. According to Census Bureau data, 207,967 people reside in the 12 counties found in the 8th Congressional District of Missouri. This Environmental Justice analysis examines the indicators that may suggest environmental justice implications associated with the proposed action. In order to accurately assess the potential for Environmental Justice issues, county demographic and socio-economic information have been analyzed and are summarized in this section.

Minority Population The USDA departmental regulations define a minority as “a person who is a member of the following population groups: American Indian or Alaskan Native; Asian or Pacific Islander; Black, not of Hispanic origin; or Hispanic (USDA 1997, p. 2).” Table 3-30 provides a summary of the presence of these population groups within the 12 counties in southern Missouri within the 8th Congressional District. Minority residents account for an average of 5.9 % of the total 12 county population within the analysis area. Minority populations in the analysis area ranges from 2.2 % to

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 145 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

10.3 % of the reported populations in the state of Missouri. Consequently, minority populations do not constitute an environmental justice concern within the project area.

Additional demographic statistics by county and the 8th Congressional District can be found in the FHI project file. This analysis is also tiered to the Mark Twain National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision (9/05)

Table 3-30: Summary of Population by Race/Ethnicity in 2014 for 12 Missouri Counties in the 8th Congressional District

Number of Percent individuals Total Population: 207,967 n/a Male 105,485 50.7 Female 102,482 49.3 Ethnicity - Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 2,806 1.3 Ethnicity - Not Hispanic or Latino 205,161 98.7 White alone 195,770 94.1 Black/African American alone 3,327 1.6 American Indian alone 1,348 0.6 Asian alone 633 0.3 Native Hawaiian & Other Pacific Islander 13 0.0 alone Some other race alone 73 0.0 Two or more races 3,997 1.9 Sources: Data adapted from Economic Profile System-Human Dimensions Toolkit (EPS-HDT) (Headwaters Economics, 2014)

Low-Income Population According to the U.S. Census Bureau, families and persons are classified as below poverty if their total family income or unrelated individual income was less than the dollar value of the poverty threshold specified for the applicable family size, age of householder, and number of related children under 18 present (U.S. Census Bureau, 2009). The poverty thresholds established for 2015-6 was $24,300 for a household containing four people and $11, 880 for a household of only one individual.

Table 3-31 Summary of the Economic Variables 12 Missouri Counties in the 8th Congressional District County Percent of persons Median Household Unemployment Rate below Federal Income (2010 Census) Percent Poverty Level Butler $41,273 21.6 5.2 Carter $31,212 25.6 5.6 Dent $41,259 18.5 5.2 Douglas $38,363 20.5 6.6 Howell $37,553 20.3 5.5

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 146 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

County Percent of persons Median Household Unemployment Rate below Federal Income (2010 Census) Percent Poverty Level Iron $42,757 24.5 6.1 Oregon $35,026 25.9 5.3 Reynolds $39,483 17.8 5.3 Ripley $33,482 25.0 6.7 Shannon $34,071 26.7 6.4 Washington $41,258 20.7 5.2 Wayne $38,003 21.2 4.6

Additional indicators assessed to determine the presence low-income populations in the counties within the analysis area include Percent of Persons below Federal Poverty Level and Unemployment Rates (Table 3-31). While the percentage of people living below federal poverty level in each of the 12 counties exceeds that of the state of Missouri (15.6 %) the Median Household Income for the counties are above the poverty threshold as determined by the U.S. Census Bureau for 2010.

Additional indicators in data adapted from Economic Profile System-Human Dimensions Toolkit assessed whether minorities in the counties of the analysis area are disproportionately affected by poverty when compared to those residents who do not belong to a minority group. Minority groups made up 6.4 % of the population in poverty in the analysis area in 2014.

No disparity exists for any minority living in poverty in any of the counties within the analysis area in 2014. In addition, no vulnerability (health, social, economic, cultural, etc.) exists that predisposes low-income or minority populations to adverse environmental or socio-economic impacts.

Table 3-32: Demographics of the FHI Project Area

Demographic Indicators Number of individuals Percent Age of Population: Persons under 18 years old 48,260 23 19-64 years 121,788 59 + 65 years 37,919 18 Employment by Occupation 79,457 n/a Management, Professional 19,606 25 Sales, Office 17,469 22 Service 16,294 21 Farming, Fishing, and Forestry 1,424 2 Education Population 25 years or older 143,329 n/a No high school degree 30,451 21 High School graduate 112,878 79 College (Bachelor’s degree or higher) 17,078 12 Total Working Population: n/a n/a Population 16 years and older 127,169 n/a

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 147 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Demographic Indicators Number of individuals Percent In labor force (16+ and over) 85,989 68 Did not work, last 12 months 41,180 32 % Sources: Data adapted from Economic Profile System-Human Dimensions Toolkit (EPS-HDT) (Headwaters Economics, 2014)

People falling below the poverty level in the 12 county area of the 8th Congressional District exceeds the Missouri census statistics of 15.6 %, but still falls below the threshold figure of 25%. Population growth from 2000 to 2014 was 4.9 % for the 12 county area of the 8th Congressional District.

The racial and ethnic composition for the 12 county area of the 8th Congressional District has changed over time but still remains predominately white (94.1%). Education levels are relatively high with 79 % graduating high school and 12% with college degrees in the12 county area of the 8th Congressional District. Farming, fishing, and forestry occupations account for 1.8 % of the civilian employed population in the 12 county area of the 8th Congressional District.

Unemployment rate for October 2016 in Missouri was 5.1% up slightly from earlier in the year when it was 4.2%. Rates for each of the 12 counties were somewhat higher than the state average in most months in 2016. This differs with other counties in the 8th Congressional District in southern Missouri (i.e. Perry County, Cape Girardeau), having slightly lower unemployment rates than the state average. This demographic information indicates that this project area does not qualify as environmental justice community.

• Direct and indirect effects on Low Income and Minority Communities (Environmental Justice)

Alternative 1: (No action) No project activities would occur, so fewer employment opportunities would exist compared to the other action alternatives.

Alternative 2: (Proposed Action) The local economy and local employment opportunities would benefit through logging activities in the 12 counties, wood processing material, and various contract work that may be conducted under the proposed actions.

• Cumulative effects on Environmental Justice

Components of cumulative effects

Spatial boundary: The cumulative effects spatial boundary of the 12 county area of the 8th Congressional District was selected for Environmental Justice because they are the counties that comprise the analysis area. The proposed resource management projects would not have greater influence outside the project boundaries in relation to environmental justice.

Temporal boundary:

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 148 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

The cumulative effects temporal boundary of 10 years was selected because that is the life of the expected effects of the FHI project activities. This is the extent that the effects are measurable and meaningful in relationship to Environmental Justice.

Past, Present, and Reasonably foreseeable actions that may have an effect on Environmental Justice

Past actions (all of which are ongoing) on private or other lands within or adjoining the analysis area include: • Vegetation management- timber harvest, prescribed burning, grazing, mowing, weed control (herbicide/mechanical) • Mining activities- drill sites, tailings ponds, mines, vent shafts, roads • Lead recycling facility • Building and facility construction and maintenance • Dispersed recreation - hunting, fishing, berry picking • Developed recreation- camping, floating, hiking, horse trails • Road maintenance and construction • Wildland fire suppression • Powerline right-of-way maintenance • Recreation area maintenance • Concentrated livestock farming • Gravel removal

Past actions on National Forest lands within the analysis area include (some of which are also ongoing): • Vegetation management, Mining activities- drill sites and temporary roads (on going), vent shafts • Dispersed recreation- hunting, fishing, berry picking (on going) • Camping and recreation at Forest Service campgrounds (on going) • Recreational trail use (hiking, mountain biking, and horseback riding on the Forest Roads, County Roads and other foot trails) (on going) • Road maintenance, construction, and paving (on going) • Wildland fire suppression (on going) • Prescribed burning (on going) • Wildlife habitat improvements (on going) • Special use roads (on going)

Present specific actions on National Forest lands within the analysis area include: • Drill sites and temporary roads on mineral leases and permits • Forest-wide Non-native Invasive Species (NNIS) projects (use of herbicides to control NNIS plants)

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 149 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Foreseeable actions on National Forest lands within the analysis area include: • Prescribed burns • Timber harvest • Drill sites and temporary roads

No negative cumulative effects were identified in the proposed alternatives in relation to environmental justice.

No environmental justice concerns were identified based upon review of the demographic profiles as compared to that of the state of Missouri and measures provided by the U.S. Census Bureau.

Effects on Consumers, Civil Rights, Minority Groups and Women Forest Service activities must be conducted in a discrimination free atmosphere. Contract work that may be generated from a decision would include specific clauses offering civil rights protection. The Forest Service would make a concerted effort to enforce these policies. Executive Order 12898 of February 11, 1994, Environmental Justice as part of the National Environmental Policy Act calls for consideration of the environmental, health and economic efforts on minority and low-income areas including the consumption patterns for fish and wildlife. The FHI area project would have limited direct, indirect, or cumulative effects on minorities and low-income populations. The proposed actions do not pose a disproportionate high and adverse environmental, human health, economic, or social effect on the 12 county area of the 8th Congressional District.

Irreversible or irretrievable commitment on resources None of the alternatives would have an irreversible or irretrievable commitment on environmental justice in the proposed FHI project area.

Environmental Justice Summary: There would be no significant cumulative effects of any kind on the Environmental Justice resource, because of the limited nature and extent of the cumulative effects discussed above. This conclusion was reached after analyzing all of the above information regarding the past, present and reasonably foreseeable future activities on all ownerships within the specified spatial and temporal boundaries.

Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 150 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

CHAPTER 4 – PROJECT COORDINATION

Table 4-1: Preparers and Contributors Core Expertise/ Natural Interdisciplinary Professional Document Resource Team Member Discipline Contributions Experience Name NEPA, Visuals, B.S. Forestry Mark Hamel Environmental University of Wisconsin 36 years Justice Madison, WI B.S. Forest Management Silviculture, John Bryan University of Missouri 29 years Economics Columbia, MO B.S. Civil Engineering University of Missouri - Rolla Darren Morris Transportation 22 years (MO Science & Technology) Rolla, MO B.S. Geology and Geophysics University of Missouri - Rolla Rolla, MO Kelly Whitsett Hydrology 15 years M.S. Hydrogeology University of Arkansas Fayetteville, AR B.S. Forestry University of WI – Stevens Point Kyle Steele Soils M.S. Forestry 12 years University of Missouri Columbia, MO B.S. Natural Resource Management Theresa Davidson Wildlife, Fisheries, 28 years Lincoln University Jefferson City, MO B.A History BA Anthropology Heritage Daniel Cain M.S. Anthropology 22 years Resources University of Wisconsin Madison, WI B.S. Conservation Science Amanda Walker Recreation Muskingum College (University) 17 years New Concord, OH

Chapter 4 – Project Coordination and Monitoring Page 151 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

Table 4-2: AdHoc Team Contributors Ad-Hoc Team Expertise/ Natural Professional Member Document Resource Discipline Name Contributions Experience

BFA/BA. Anthropology Heritage James Halpern Florida State University 25 years Resources Tallahassee, FL

B.S. Forest Management Mike Norris Silviculture Southern Illinois University 12 years Carbondale, IL

B.S. Environmental Resource Management Beth Hardman Silviculture 39 years Pennsylvania State University State College, PA

B.S. Forest Management Michael Stevens Silviculture University of Missouri 28 years Columbia, MO

B.S. Forestry Scott Robinson Silviculture Oklahoma State University 25 years Stillwater, OK

Chapter 4 – Project Coordination and Monitoring Page 152 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

APPENDICES

Appendix A: References

Appendix B: Glossary and Acronyms

Appendix C: Compartment/Stand Treatment Activity Table

Appendix D: Standards and Guidelines, Mitigation Measures and Best Management Practices

Appendix E: Oak Decline Phones

Appendix F: Forest Health Initiative Project Maps

Appendices Page 153 Mark Twain National Forest Forest Health Initiative Project Environmental Assessment

(Insert Appendix Document here)

Appendices Page 154