2015 Green Fuelwood Areas Projecta123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic... · by the...

2015 Green Fuelwood Areas Project 1

Decision Memo 2015 Green Fuelwood Areas Project

USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region Camino Real Ranger District, Carson National Forest

Taos County, New Mexico (T. 21N, R. 11E, sections 7, 8, 17, and 18; T. 22N, R. 11E, sections 11, 13, and 14;

T. 23N, R. 12E, sections 23, 24, 25, and 36; T. 23N, R. 13E, section 5; and T. 24N, R. 13E, section 32)

Background Many people that live within and near the Camino Real Ranger District rely on fuelwood for cooking and heating. Providing fuelwood cutting areas near communities helps meet this important need.

Trees within the proposed fuelwood cutting areas are either over-crowded, diseased, infested, or lack a desired amount of diversity in terms of tree age and species. Cutting fuelwood and other forest products removes selected individual trees and groups of trees, and creates openings. These openings populate with plants and smaller trees, creating more diversity and greater resilience in these areas. Tree-removal treatments are designed to enhance the growth, quality, vigor, composition, and health of residual trees while meeting the fuelwood needs of local communities.

Four treatment units are included in this project: La Leña green fuelwood unit, Sarco personal-use partnership block, Ojito personal-use partnership block, and Ardilla sanitation harvest unit.

La Leña green fuelwood unit is 65.5 acres of mostly ponderosa pine. It is located west of Highway 76, south of Cañada de las Ruedas, and approximately 3.5 miles north of the community of Truchas, within T. 21N, R. 11E, sections 7, 8, 17, and 18.

The Sarco personal-use partnership block is 70 acres of multiple ponderosa pine stands and some Douglas fir. It is located west of Highway 518 and approximately one mile southwest of the Fort Burgwin Southern Methodist University Campus, within T. 23N, R. 13E, section 5 and T. 24N, R. 13E, section 32.

The Ojito personal-use partnership block is 70 acres, comprised of smaller stands of piñon/juniper and ponderosa pine. It is located east of Highway 76, south of Forest Road 160, and approximately two miles west of the community of Ojito, within T. 22N, R. 11E, sections 11, 13, and 14.

The Ardilla sanitation harvest unit is 226 acres of mostly ponderosa pine which has been infested with dwarf mistletoe. It is located west of Highway 518, south of Osha Canyon, and generally north of Forest Road 468, within T. 23N, R. 12E, sections 23, 24, 25, and 36.

The Sarco personal-use partnership block was initially scoped as a green fuelwood unit, though access issues and the presence of sensitive resource areas have contributed to the determination that this unit would be better treated as a personal-use partnership block. All treatment units are located on lands managed by the USDA Forest Service. The maps on pages 8-11 of this document display the locations of the 2015 Green Fuelwood Areas Project.


An interdisciplinary analysis of this project was conducted and is documented in a project record. Source documents from the project record are incorporated by reference throughout this decision memo by showing the document number in brackets [PR #] – please refer to Appendix A for the project record index.

Project The 2015 Green Fuelwood Areas project will allow valid permit holders to cut and remove fuelwood and other forest products from within designated areas. Associated activities will include:

• Clearly marking trees that can be removed. • Designating temporary access for vehicles in fuelwood cutting units. • Improving existing roads with minor reconstruction and/or maintenance to reduce impacts to

other resources. • Making minor repairs such as reshaping ruts or reseeding disturbed areas after the areas are

closed. • Treating slash (cut branches and tops) to reduce potential fire hazards. Treatments may include

cutting slash into smaller pieces and scattering and/or burning slash in small piles. To keep fuels at a reduced level, prescribed burning will be planned on a 2-12 year cycle.

The Forest Service roads that were identified as open to public motor vehicle use in the Decision Notice for Travel Management on the Camino Real Ranger District [PR #41] will be utilized in the course of project activities (see maps on pages 8-11). Closed routes that are identified on the maps on pages 12-15 of this document will be opened for project-specific activities, and will be re-closed upon completion of this project. No new roads will be constructed as part of this project. Prescriptions published in the Carson National Forest Plan will be used to determine which trees will be marked for cutting. Applicable best management practices (BMPs) will be employed (see Appendix B).

Mitigation Measures: • Sensitive resource areas will be flagged for avoidance.

• No road work or maintenance will be conducted on two-tracks that have not been designated as access and/or removal routes

• Visual quality objectives outlined in the Carson National Forest Plan will be incorporated into project activities where applicable.

• Retention of snags and older trees will be prioritized in applicable habitat.

• The retention of coarse woody debris and/or scattered slash for maintenance of soil productivity and stability will be prioritized in applicable forest types.

• Access/removal routes will be reshaped to provide better drainage.

• Off-road vehicle use will be confined to periods of dry soil conditions.

• Permit holders will be instructed not to cut within 100 feet of riparian vegetation.

• Prescribed Fire Burn Plans will guide the management of all prescribed burns conducted as a part of this project.


Public Involvement This proposal was first listed in the quarterly Schedule of Proposed Actions (SOPA) on January 1, 2015 [PR #47], and it has been republished every quarter since then. A letter describing the proposed action and a 17-day comment period was mailed on March 3, 2015 to 50 individuals, organizations, and agencies who had expressed interest in similar past projects or who were otherwise determined to be interested or affected [PR #49]. A notice of scoping email was sent out on March 4, 2015 to an additional six individuals and organizations [PR #50].

On January 22, a copy of the January SOPA was mailed to 31 tribal contacts representing 16 governmental entities in order to meet Tribal Consultation obligations under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act [PR #48]. Copies of additional quarterly SOPAs have been mailed to tribal contacts every quarter since then.

One email of support was received during the comment period [PR #51]. Two letters were returned to sender [PR #52]. No alternative addresses were identified, though the Peñasco Area Communities Association was called in order to inform them of the project.

I have considered external comments received during scoping [PR #53], in addition to input from Forest Service resource specialists who have analyzed the proposal. No significant issues have been identified that had not been addressed by prior environmental review, and all practical means have been employed to avoid or minimize environmental impacts.

Reasons for Categorically Excluding the Decision Decisions may be categorically excluded from documentation in an environmental impact statement or an environmental assessment when they are within one of the categories identified by the U.S. Department of Agriculture in 7 CFR part 1b.3 or the proposed action is within a category listed in 36 CFR 220.6 (d) and (e), and there are no extraordinary circumstances related to the decision that may result in a significant individual or cumulative environmental effect. La Leña green fuelwood area and the Sarco and Ojito personal-use partnership blocks are consistent with 36 CFR 220.6(e)(12) – “Harvest of live trees not to exceed 70 acres, requiring no more than ½ mile of temporary road construction.” The Ardilla sanitation harvest unit is consistent with 36 CFR 220.6(e)(14): “Commercial and non-commercial sanitation harvest of trees to control insects or disease not to exceed 250 acres, requiring no more than ½ mile of temporary road construction.”

The following resource conditions were considered in determining whether extraordinary circumstances related to the decision warranted further analysis and documentation in an environmental impact statement or an environmental assessment (36 CFR 220.6 (b)(i-vii)):

i. Federally listed threatened or endangered species or designated critical habitat, species proposed for Federal listing or proposed critical habitat, or Forest Service sensitive species

The Endangered Species Act (ESA, 16 U.S.C.§§ 1531 – 1544) requires Federal activities not jeopardize the continued existence of any species federally listed or proposed as threatened or endangered, or result in adverse modification to such species’ designated critical habitat. As required by the ESA, potential effects of this decision on listed species have been analyzed and documented in a biological assessment, which has determined that there will be “no effect” to federally listed species or critical habitat from the proposed project. [PR #59]

A biological evaluation was prepared to address Forest Service sensitive species. The proposed project may impact individuals of the Forest Service-sensitive northern goshawk, but is not likely to


lead toward federal listing or a loss of viability of this species. Any disturbance during implementation will likely be short-term and localized. Any foraging goshawk individuals will likely move out of the disturbed area into adjacent, undisturbed habitat. Areas that have marginally suitable breeding habitat were surveyed and no goshawk individuals were detected. The remaining Forest Service sensitive species that were considered were eliminated from detailed analysis because habitat is not present, habitat is present but would not be affected, or the species does not occur in the geographic area. [PR #59]

ii. Floodplains, wetlands, or municipal watersheds

The project was evaluated for potential effects to floodplains, wetlands, or municipal watersheds. There are no inventoried wetlands or water bodies within the project units. National Forest System Road 468, which will be used to access the Ardilla Sanitation Harvest Unit, crosses the head of a meadow, which has been inventoried as a wetland by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Continued use of this road segment was analyzed and approved in 2013 in the environmental assessment and decision notice for the Travel Management on the Camino Real Ranger District project [PR #41 & #42]. Road conditions within this area are stable and road use is not expected to cause any disturbance or damage to resources. No significant effects to floodplains or wetlands are anticipated so long as mitigation measures and BMPs, described above, in Appendix B, and in the watershed specialist reports [PR #62 & #63], are adhered to in the course of project activities.

The Carson National Forest Plan, as amended [PR #4], does not recognize the lands within the project area as a municipal watershed.

iii. Congressionally designated areas, such as wilderness, wilderness study areas, or national recreation areas

This project is not within congressionally designated areas such as wilderness, wilderness study areas, or national recreation areas. A portion of this project is located approximately seven miles from the Pecos Wilderness, which has been designated as a Class I Airshed under the Clean Air Act of 1955. Prescribed burning associated with this project will be coordinated with the New Mexico Environment Department’s Air Quality Bureau in accordance with the state’s Smoke Management Program in order to mitigate any potential impacts to air quality.

iv. Inventoried roadless areas or potential wilderness areas

There are no inventoried roadless areas or potential wilderness areas within the project area. This decision will not affect future management decisions on inventoried roadless areas or on potential wilderness designations.

v. Research natural areas

There are no research natural areas within or near the project area; therefore, this decision will not affect research natural areas.

vi. American Indians and Alaska Native religious or cultural sites, and archaeological sites, or historic properties or areas

Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (U.S.C. 470 et seq.) requires Federal agencies take into account the effect of a project on any precontact or historic district, site, building, structure, or object that is included in or eligible for, inclusion in the National Register. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) also requires Federal agencies to afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and Tribal entities a reasonable opportunity to comment.


A Heritage Report and an Inventory Standards and Accounting Summary Form was prepared for this project by the Carson National Forest Archaeologist. It determined that there will be “no adverse effect” to heritage resources as a result of this project, so long as prescribed mitigation measures are followed. [PR #61]

In addition, the Federal government has trust responsibilities to tribes under a government-to-government relationship. Consultation with the tribes is completed to help ensure that these trust responsibilities are met. The intent of this consultation is to remain informed about tribal concerns. On January 22, a copy of the January SOPA, in which the project was first listed, was mailed to 31 tribal contacts representing 16 governmental entities in order to meet Tribal Consultation obligations under section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act [PR #48]. Copies of additional quarterly SOPAs have been mailed to tribal contacts every quarter since then. No comments have been received in response.

The mere presence of one or more of the above listed resource conditions does not preclude the use of a categorical exclusion. It is the existence of a cause-effect relationship between a proposed action and the potential effect on these resource conditions, and if such a relationship exists, the degree of the potential effect of a proposed action on these resource conditions that determines whether extraordinary circumstances exist. I find no extraordinary circumstances related to this decision that may result in a significant individual or cumulative environmental effect.

Findings Required by Other Laws This project is in conformance with the Land and Resource Management Plan for the Carson National Forest [PR #4], as required by the National Forest Management Act (16 U.S.C. §§ 1600-1614). Specifically, the Carson National Forest Plan outlines goals and objectives that will be met by this project:

Timber: Provide green and dead firewood and other forest products on a sustained yield basis… Protect the forest resources from destructive insects and diseases using integrated pest management (Timber - 1).

Also in accordance with the Land and Resource Management Plan for the Carson National Forest [PR #4], as required by the National Forest Management Act (16 U.S.C. §§ 1600-1614), an assessment has been compiled of general habitat requirements for eleven wildlife species identified as Management Indicator Species (MIS) [PR #60]. It was determined that project activities would not affect forest-wide habitat or population trends of any of the identified Management Indicator Species.

The activities associated with the 2015 Green Fuelwood Areas project will comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations including, but not limited to: the Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918; the Clean Water Act of 1948; the Clean Air Act of 1955; the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966; the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969; the Endangered Species Act of 1973; the Native American Grave and Repatriation Act of 1990; Executive Order 11988 (Floodplain Management); Executive Order 11990 (Protection of Wetlands); Executive Order 12898 (Environmental Justice); and Executive Order 13186 (Migratory Birds).

Decision It is my decision to approve the activities associated with the 2015 Green Fuelwood Areas project as described above. This decision is not subject to appeal.

The decision-making process for this project is documented in a project file and maintained on the Camino Real Ranger District.

Implementation Date

Administrative activities in support of thinning and fuelwood harvesting may begin immediatelyfollowing publication of this decision memo. Harvesting by valid permit holders may begin followingpreparation and marking of treatment units.

Prescribed burning associated with this project may begin following the productionof a PrescribedFireBurn Plan and following applicable permitting processes with other local, state, and national agencies.

Contact Person

For additional informationconcerningthis decision, contact Gabriel Romero, East Zone Silviculturalist,at P.O. Box 68, Penasco, NM 87553 or by calling 575-587-2255.

Ja^aM V mcMn^ 'i'H- ^5Tamara S. Malone Date

Camino Real District Ranger

2015 Green Fuelwood Areas Project


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.

http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html

mailto:[email protected]


Appendix A – Project Record Index

Project Record Index for 2105 Green Fuelwood Areas Project

# Document Author Pages Date

1

The Abert Squirrel and its Dependence on Ponderosa Pine

James O. Keith, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, University of California

15 01/1965

2

Roost Tree Characteristics for Merriam's Turkey

Erwin L. Boeker and Virgil E. Scott, Wildlife Research Center

5 01/1969

3 Nests of the Tassel-Eared Squirrel R.C. Farentinos, The Johns Hopkins University, School of Hygiene and Public Health

5 11/1972

4

Carson National Forest Plan (by reference): Timber, Visual Quality, Ponderosa Pine under 40%, Wildlife & Fish Habitat

USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region 29

09/1986, as amended

10/1990

5

Record of Decision: Carson National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan Environmental Impact Statement

Sotero Muniz, Regional Forester; USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region

6 10/31/1986

6

Terrestrial Ecosystems Survey of the Carson National Forest

USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region 568 08/1987

7

Breeding Bird Assemblages in the Rio Grande Wild and Scenic River Recreation Area, New Mexico

Dale W. Stahlecker, Patricia L. Kennedy, Anne C. Cully, and Charles B. Kuykendall

13 12/1989

8

Decision Memo: Carson National Forest Plan Amendment #7

Leonard A. Lundquist, Forest Supervisor; USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region, Carson National Forest

2 09/14/1990

9

Management Recommendations for the Northern Goshawk in the Southwestern United States; General Technical Report RM-217

USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station and Southwestern Region

98 08/1992

10

Influence of Site Quality and Stand Density on Goshawk Habitat in Southwestern Forests

Richard L. Bassett, Douglas A. Boyce, Jr., M. Hildegard Reiser, Russell T. Graham, and Richard T. Reynolds

5 1994




11

Record of Decision for Amendment of Forest Plans: Arizona and New Mexico


12

National Audubon Society Field Guide to Mammals: North America

John O. Whitaker 942 1996

13

Forest Structure and Prey Abundance in Foraging Areas of Northern Goshawks

Paul Beier and Joseph E. Drennan, School of Forestry, Northern Arizona University

8 1997

14 Fire's Effects on Ecosystems Leonard F. Debano, Daniel G. Neary, and Peter F. Ffolliott 352 03/1998

15

Forest Stand Characteristics of Successful and Unsuccessful Merriam's Turkey Nest Sites in North-central Arizona

Brian F. Wakeling, Steven S. Rosenstock, and Harley G. Shaw, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Research Branch

8 06/1998

16 The Dictionary of Forestry John A. Helms (ed.) 210 1998

17

Forest Service Handbook 2509.18 - Soil Management Handbook; Region 3 Supplement No. 2509.18-99-1

USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region 10 10/20/1999

18

Factors Influencing Pair Territoriality in the Juniper Titmouse

Beth J. Christman, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Cornell University

10 05/2001

19

North American Elk: Ecology and Management

D.E. Toweill and J.W. Thomas (eds.) 1128 2002

20

The Wild Orchids of Arizona and New Mexico Ronald A. Coleman 272 2002

21

Tassel-eared Squirrel Population, Habitat Condition, and Dietary Relationships in North-central Arizona

Norris L. Dodd, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Research Branch; Jack S. States; Steven S. Rosenstock, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Research Branch

13 07/2003




22

The Abert's Squirrel (Sciurus aberti): A Technical Conservation Assessment

James O. Keith, Ph.D., Wildlife Ecologist; prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project

63 08/25/2003

23

Forest Structure and Prey Abundance in Winter Habitat of Northern Goshawks

Joseph E. Drennan and Paul Beier, School of Forestry, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ

9 2003

24

Abert's Squirrel (Sciurus aberti) Monitoring and Habitat Analysis on Carson National Forest, New Mexico, 2004

Jennifer K. Frey, Ph.D., Frey Biological Research, and Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences and Department of Biology, New Mexico State University; submitted to USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region, Carson National Forest

21 12/09/2004

25

A Review of Northern Goshawk Habitat Selection in the Home Range and Implications for Forest Management in the Western United States

D. Noah Greenwald, D. Coleman Crocker-Bedford, Len Broberg, Kieran F. Suckling, and Timothy Tibbitts

10 2005

26

Preliminary Thinning Guidelines for the Maintenance of Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystems

Doug Page, Bureau of Land Management, Southwest Utah Zone Forester

8 3/24/2006

27

Northern Goshawk Inventory and Monitoring Technical Guide, General Technical Report WO-71

Brian Woodbridge and Christina D. Hargis; USDA Forest Service, Washington Office; Ecosystem Management Coordination Staff; Watershed, Fish, Wildlife, Air, and Rare Plants Staff

84 07/2006




28

Abert's Squirrel (Sciurus aberti) Monitoring and Habitat Analysis on Carson National Forest, New Mexico, 2006

Jennifer K. Frey, Ph.D., Frey Biological Research; submitted to USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region, Carson National Forest

41 11/30/2006

29

Historical Range of Variation and State and Transition Modeling of Historic and Current Landscape Conditions for Potential Natural Vegetation Types of the Southwest

Heather Schussman and Edward Smith, Southwest Forest Assessment Project

75 2006

30

A Review and Evaluation of Factors Limiting Northern Goshawk Populations

Richard T. Reynolds, J. David Wiens, and Susan R. Salafsky 14 2006

31

Historical and Modern Disturbance Regimes of Piñon-Juniper Vegetation in the Western U.S.

William Romme et al. 16 05/2007

32

Spotted Bat (Euderma maculatum): A Technical Conservation Assessment

Robert J. Luce and Doug Keinath; prepared for USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project

52 10/31/2007

33

Birds of Conservation Concern 2008

USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management

93 12/2008

34

Proceedings of the 2007 National Silviculture Workshop: Implementing Northern Goshawk Habitat Management in Southwestern Forests: A Template for Restoring Fore-adapted Forest Ecosystems

James A. Youtz, Russell T. Graham, Richard T. Reynolds, and Jerry Simon

38 2008




35

Behavioral Responses of North American Elk to Recreational Activity

Leslie M. Naylor, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Oregon State University; Michael J. Wisdom, USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station; Robert G. Anthony, USGS Oregon Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit

11 2009

36

A Natural History Summary and Survey Protocol for the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher

Mark K. Sogge, U.S. Geological Survey; Darrell Ahlers, Bureau of Reclamation; and Susan J. Sferra, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

46 2010

37

Biological Assessment for Re-initiation of Consultation on the Continued Implementation of the Land and Resource Management Plans for the Eleven National Forests and National Grasslands of the Southwestern Region

USDA Forest Service 545 04/06/2011

38

Management Indicator Species Assessment

USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region, Carson National Forest

169 09/2011

39

National Best Management Practices for Water Quality Management on National Forest System Lands; Volume 1: National Core BMP Technical Guide

USDA Forest Service 177 04/2012

40

Mexican Spotted Owl Recovery Plan, First Revision (Strix occidentalis lucida)

Jay E. Nicholopoulos, Acting Regional Director; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southwest Region

414 09/05/2012

41

Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact: Travel Management on the Camino Real Ranger District, Carson National Forest

USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region 58 09/27/2013




42

Environmental Assessment for Travel Management on the Camino Real Ranger District of the Carson National Forest


43

Recovery Plan for the Black-footed Ferret (Mustela nigripes); Second Revision

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 6 157 11/08/2013

44

Regional Forester's Sensitive Species List

USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region 11 2013

45

New Mexico Wild Turkey Management Plan 2013-2018

New Mexico Department of Game and Fish 16 2013

46

2014-2016 State of New Mexico Clean Water Act §303(d)/§305(b) Integrated Report: Appendix A - Final List of Assessed Surface Waters

New Mexico Environment Department, Surface Water Quality Bureau

345 11/18/2014

47

Carson National Forest Schedule of Proposed Actions (SOPA)

USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region, Carson National Forest

11 01/01/2015

48

Cover letter to SOPA for Carson National Forest Tribal Contacts and mailing list

Audrey Kuykendall, Acting Forest Supervisor, USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region, Carson National Forest

5 01/22/2015

49

Proposed Action Scoping Letter, Project Maps, and Mailing List

Tamara S. Malone, District Ranger; USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region, Carson National Forest, Camino Real Ranger District

10 03/03/2015

50

Notice of Scoping Email and Email List

Dan O'Toole, East Zone NEPA Coordinator; USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region, Carson National Forest

3 03/04/2015

51 Scoping Comment Email Mark Schuetz, Chairman, Acequia Madre de la Otra Banda

1 03/09/2015

52 Returned Mail United States Postal Service 1 03/09/2015-03/11/2015




53

Consideration of Public Scoping Comments


2 04/21/2015

54

Ardilla Sanitation Harvest Unit Vegetation Report

Gabriel M. Romero, East Zone Silviculturalist; USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region, Carson National Forest

11 06/11/2015

55

La Leña Green Fuelwood Unit Vegetation Report


11 06/11/2015

56

Ojito Personal-use Partnership Block Vegetation Report


12 06/11/2015

57

Sarco Personal-use Partnership Block Vegetation Report


11 06/17/2015

58

List of Threatened and Endangered Species, Consultation Code: 02ENNM00-2015-SLI-0417

USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, New Mexico Ecological Services Field Office

9 07/08/2015

59

Biological Assessment & Biological Evaluation (BA/BE)

Jennifer L. Gatlin, District Wildlife Biologist; USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region, Carson National Forest, Camino Real Ranger District

18 07/23/2015

60

Management Indicator Species and Migratory Bird Report

Jennifer L. Gatlin, District Wildlife Biologist; USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region, Carson National Forest, Camino Real Ranger District

24 07/23/2015




61

Inventory Standards and Accounting (IS&A) Report

Skip Miller, Forest Archaeologist; USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region, Carson National Forest

4 08/06/2015

62

2015 Green Fuelwood Areas, Ardilla Sanitation Harvest Unit: Watershed Report

Greg Miller, Forest Soil Scientist/Watershed Program Manager; USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region, Carson National Forest

12 08/21/2015

63

2015 Green Fuelwood Areas, Sarco/La Leña/Ojito Green Fuelwood Harvest Units: Watershed Report

Greg Miller, Forest Soil Scientist/Watershed Program Manager; USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region, Carson National Forest

22 08/31/2015

64 Decision Memo


26 09/04/2015

65

Letter of Decision Memo Availability and Mailing List


2 09/04/2015

66

Email Notice of Decision Memo Availability and Email List

Dan O'Toole, East Zone NEPA Coordinator; USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region, Carson National Forest

2 09/08/2015


Appendix B – Best Management Practices

Fire-2. Use of Prescribed Fire

Objective: Avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects of prescribed fire and associated activities on soil, water quality, and riparian resources that may result from excessive soil disturbance, as well as inputs of ash, sediment, nutrients, and debris.

Explanation: Prescribed fire, while a useful tool to achieve resource management objectives, can affect watershed condition by consuming vegetation, dead woody debris, humus, and duff; removing protective ground cover; contributing to creation of water-repellent soil conditions; damaging physical and biological soil quality from excessive heat; and releasing nutrients and metals to runoff into nearby streams. A prescribed fire may burn at a range of intensities, leaving a mosaic of burn severities within the fire perimeter. Actions to control and contain the prescribed fire, such as fireline construction, can also adversely affect watershed condition by creating a ground disturbance.

A Prescribed Fire Burn Plan guides the management of a prescribed fire. This plan contains the technical specifications for managing the fire and protecting other resources. Fire managers review these plans before fire ignition, briefing field crewmembers on practices and locations prescribed to avoid or minimize adverse effects to soil, water quality, and riparian resources.

Practices: Develop site-specific BMP prescriptions for the following practices, as appropriate or when required, using State BMPs, Forest Service regional guidance, land management plan direction, BMP monitoring information, and professional judgment.

• Conduct the prescribed fire in such a manner as to achieve the burn objectives outlined in the Prescribed Fire Plan (see BMP Fire-1 [Wildland Fire Management Planning]).

• Locate access and staging areas near the project site but outside of Aquatic Management Zones (AMZs), wetlands, and sensitive soil areas.

o Keep staging areas as small as possible while allowing for safe and efficient operations. o Store fuel for ignition devices in areas away from surface water bodies and wetlands.

• Conduct prescribed fires to minimize the residence time on the soil while meeting the burn objectives. o Manage fire intensity to maintain target levels of soil temperature, duff, and residual vegetative

cover within the limits and at locations described in the prescribed fire plan.

• Construct fireline to the minimum size and standard necessary to contain the prescribed fire and to meet overall project objectives.

o Locate and construct fireline in a manner that minimizes erosion and runoff from directly entering waterbodies by considering site slope and soil conditions, and by using and maintaining suitable water and erosion control measures.

o Consider alternatives to ground-disturbing fireline construction such as using wet lines, rock outcrops, or other suitable features for firelines.

o Establish permanent fireline with suitable water and erosion control measures in areas where prescribed fire treatments are used on a recurring basis.

o Rehabilitate or otherwise stabilize fireline in areas that pose a risk to water quality.

• Alter prescribed fire prescriptions and control actions in the AMZs as needed to maintain ecosystem structure, function, and processes and onsite and downstream water quality.


o Avoid building firelines in or around riparian areas, wetlands, marshes, bogs, fens, or other sensitive water-dependent sites unless needed to protect life, property, or wetlands.

o Construct any essential fireline in the AMZ in a manner that minimizes the amount of area and soil disturbed.

o Keep high-intensity fire out of the AMZ unless suitable measures are used to avoid or minimize adverse effects to water quality.

o Avoid or minimize complete removal of the organic layer when burning in riparian areas or wetlands to maintain soil productivity, infiltration capacity, and nutrient retention.

• Conduct prescribed fire treatments, including pile burning and jackpot burning, for slash disposal in a manner that encourages efficient burning to minimize soil impacts while achieving treatment objectives.

o Pile and burn only the slash that is necessary to be disposed of to achieve treatment objectives. o Locate slash piles in areas where the potential for soil effects is lessened (meadows, rock

outcrops, etc.) and that do not interfere with natural drainage patterns. o Remove wood products such as firewood or fence posts before piling and burning to reduce the

amount of slash to be burned. o Avoid burning large stumps and sections of logs in slash piles to reduce the amount of time that

the pile burns. o Avoid burning when conditions will cause the fire to burn too hot and damage soil conditions.

• Evaluate the completed burn to identify sites that may need stabilization treatments or monitoring to minimize soil and site productivity loss and deterioration of water quality both on and off the site.

o Provide for rapid revegetation of all denuded areas through natural processes supplemented by artificial revegetation where necessary.

o Use suitable measures to promote water retention and infiltration or to augment soil cover where necessary.

o Consider long-term management of the site and nearby areas to promote project success.


Veg-8. Mechanical Site Treatment (use for fuelwood harvest practices)

Objective: Avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects to soil, water quality, and riparian resources by controlling the introduction of sediment, nutrients, chemical, or other pollutants to waterbodies during mechanical harvest of fuelwood.

Explanation: Mechanical treatments are used to remove or reduce the amount of live and dead vegetation on a site to meet management objectives, such as site preparation for reforestation, fuel treatments to reduce fire hazards, wildlife habitat improvement, recreation access, utility corridor maintenance, and other activities that require removing vegetation from specified areas on a periodic and repeated basis.

Practices: Develop site-specific BMP prescriptions for the following practices, as appropriate or when required, using State BMPs, Forest Service regional guidance, land management plan direction, BMP monitoring information, and professional judgment.

• Evaluate multiple site factors, including soil conditions, slope, topography, and weather, to avoid or minimize unacceptable impacts to soil while achieving treatment objectives.

o Use land management plan direction, or other local guidance, to establish residual ground cover requirements and soil disturbance limits suitable to the site to minimize erosion.

• Use applicable practices of BMP Veg-2 (Erosion Prevention and Control) to minimize and control erosion.

o Conduct mechanical activities when soil conditions are such that unacceptable soil disturbance, compaction, displacement, and erosion would be avoided or minimized.

2015 Green Fuelwood Areas Projecta123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic... · by the...

Documents

Transcript of 2015 Green Fuelwood Areas Projecta123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic... · by the...