Environmental Assessmenta123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic...Environmental Assessment...

United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service December 2011

For Information Contact: Judy Hallisey, District Ranger Cle Elum Ranger District

803 West 2nd Street Cle Elum, WA 98922

(509)-852-1100 E-mail Comments to:

[email protected]

Environmental Assessment

Walter Springs Project

Cle Elum Ranger District, Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest Kittitas County, Washington

Sections 14, 22-26, and 36, T. 18 N., R. 15 E., W.M.

mailto:[email protected]

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all

its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status,

parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all

programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape,

etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).

To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is

an equal opportunity provider and employer.

Environmental Assessment Walter Springs Project

i

Table of Contents

Chapter 1 - Purpose and Need

Introduction 1

Location and Setting 1

Regulatory Framework and Management Direction 3

Project Record 7

Purpose and Need for Action 8

Proposed Action 11

Decision Framework 13

Public Involvement and Consultation 14

Issues Raised During Scoping 14

Chapter 2 – Alternatives and Required Mitigations

Alternatives Considered and Then Eliminated from Detailed Study 20

Alternatives in Detail

No Action 20

Planned Actions Common to Both Action Alternatives 24

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) 24

Alternative 3 31

Required Mitigation and Design 34

Proposed Monitoring 41 Comparison of Alternatives 41

Detailed Maps 44

Chapter 3 – Environmental Consequences

Past, Present, and Foreseeable Future Actions Considered

for Possible Cumulative Effects 50

Effects Analyses

Soils 51

Water Resources 62

Forest Vegetation 89

Fire and Fuels 101

Air Quality 107

Botanical Species 111

Aquatic Species 119

Wildlife 140

Heritage Resources 180

Recreation 187

Scenic Values 192

Other Required Disclosures 202

Chapter 4 – Consultation and Coordination 204

Chapter 5– References 205

Appendices (Attached) Appendix A – Additional Tables Describing the Alternatives 210

Appendix B – Riparian Reserve Widths and Treatment Criteria 215

Appendix C – Prescriptions for Treatments in Riparian Reserves 217

Under Separate Cover (available upon request):

Appendix D – Additional Tables and Figures Supporting the Analyses


1

CHAPTER 1 – PURPOSE AND NEED

Introduction

The Forest Service has prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) in compliance with the

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other relevant Federal and State laws and

regulations. This EA discloses the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts

that would result from implementation of the Walter Springs Project on the Cle Elum Ranger

District of the Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest.

The EA is organized as follows:

Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need: This section includes background information about the

project, and describes the purpose of and need for action, and the agency’s proposal for

meeting purpose and need (alternative 2, the proposed action). It also describes how the

Forest Service informed other governments, other agencies, and the public about the

proposal, and how they responded. It lists issues raised during scoping, including

―unresolved conflicts‖ that are the basis for alternatives to the proposed action. For this

project, only one unresolved conflict emerged during scoping, therefore there is only one

alternative to the proposed action (alternative 3).

Chapter 2 – Alternatives and Required Mitigations: This section provides a more

detailed description of the proposed action (alternative 2) and alternative 3. It also

describes other alternatives considered but eliminated from detailed study, and lists

required mitigation measures for both action alternatives. It concludes with a table

displaying the differences between alternatives 2 and 3.

Chapter 3 - Environmental Consequences: This section describes the existing conditions

for each affected resource area, and environmental effects of the alternatives.

Chapter 4 - Agencies and Persons Consulted: This section documents other agencies

consulted during preparation of this EA, and lists the resource specialists involved in

preparation of the EA.

Chapter 5 - References

Appendices: Appendices provide additional detail to support various analyses and

findings within this EA. Appendices A, B, and C are attached to the EA. Other

appendices are included in a separate, stand-alone document.

Location and Setting

The Walter Springs Project Area is located approximately 9 miles south of the town of Cle

Elum in Kittitas County, Washington (Fig. 1, Vicinity Map). It encompasses 1,962 acres of

National Forest System Land located in the South Fork Manastash Creek subdrainage (Fig.1,

area shown in red). Elevations in the Project Area range from 4120 to 4840 feet. The legal

location of the Project Area is as follows:

Sections 14, 22-26, and 36, T. 18 N., R. 15 E., W.M.

The project planning area (2471 acres, Fig.1, area outlined in black) is bounded on

the east by the National Forest boundary, on the south in part by South Fork

#

Cle ElumI-90

FS Rd 3100

FS Rd 3300

Cle Elum Ranger District / National Forest BoundaryWalter Springs Planning AreaProposed Treatment AreaPrivate

1:200,000

0 5 Miles

±

Figure 1. Vicinity Map: Walter Springs Project


2

Manastash Creek, and on the west and north by unnamed subwatershed boundaries. The Project Area may be accessed from the north on Forest Service Roads (FS Rds) 3300 and 3111, and from the south via FS Rd 3100.

There is one private inholding (509 ac) within the project planning area. Private land would not be treated under any alternative, and is not included in Project Area acreage.


3

The Project Area is not in an Inventoried Roadless Area, Proposed Wilderness Area, or

Wilderness Study Area1. It does not encompass or adjoin any Wild and Scenic Rivers.

It is heavily roaded—the current density of open system roads is 3.6 miles per square

mile. If closed roads with breached berms, unclassified roads on private land, and

unauthorized (user-built) roads are included in the road density calculation, then the

road density figure rises to more than 5 miles per square mile.

There is heavy year-round dispersed recreation in Manastash Creek watershed,

including camping, hiking, hunting, four-wheel drive motoring, motorcycle trail

riding, horseback riding, and snowmobiling. The Project Area encompasses 2.6 miles

of 4X4 jeep trail, but no single track motorized trail. It also encompasses 7.7 miles of

groomed snowmobile trail. All open system roads leading into and out of the Project

Area are groomed in winter.

Past and present management actions within and around the Project Area were

previously characterized in Taneum-Manastash Watershed Analysis (Cle Elum

Ranger District 1995). An updated list of management actions is presented at the

beginning of Chapter 3. There is a long history of timber harvest and domestic

livestock grazing within and around the Project Area. Though grazed by domestic

sheep, the Project Area is not classified as prime rangeland.

Regulatory Framework and Management Direction ___

Forest Planning

Under the National Forest Management Act (NFMA), all activities on National Forest System

Lands must be consistent with approved Forest Plans. In order to eliminate repetition and

focus on site-specific analysis, and consistent with 40 CFR 1502.20, this EA tiers to the Final

Environmental Impact Statement for the Wenatchee National Forest Land and Resource

Management Plan (USDA 1990, hereafter referred to as “Forest Plan 1990”), as amended

by the following documents:

Record of Decision for Amendments to Forest Service and Bureau of Land

Management Planning Documents within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl and

Standards and Guidelines for Management of Habitat for Late-Successional and

Old-Growth Forest Related Species within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl

(USDA and USDI 1994, hereafter referred to as ―1994 ROD‖). This decision

established the Northwest Forest Plan, and overlaid new land allocations (with a new

slate of standards and guidelines) on top of management areas from the 1990 Forest

Plan. It also adopted the Aquatic Conservation Strategy (ACS) as the principle

means of protecting and restoring aquatic ecosystems across watersheds.

Pacific Northwest Region Invasive Plant Program Preventing and Managing

Invasive Plants Record of Decision (USDA 2005). This decision added invasive

plant management direction to all Forest Plans in the Pacific Northwest Region. New

standards for invasive plant prevention and treatment are designed to protect human

health and the environment from the potential adverse effects of invasive plant

treatments involving herbicides.

1 Contiguous unroaded areas that are 5000 acres or more in size.


4

Land Allocations

The two Northwest Forest Plan land allocations that overly the Walter Springs Project Area

are Matrix and Riparian Reserve (Fig 2). The network of Riparian Reserves adjoining

streams, wetlands, ponds, lakes, and other unstable or potentially unstable areas is a key

component of the ACS (1994 ROD pp. 7). In Riparian Reserves, riparian dependent

resources receive primary emphasis, and activities may not retard attainment of nine ACS

objectives listed in the 1994 ROD (pp. B-11).

Matrix lands are managed for ecologically diverse conditions and for commercial (and

sustainable) yields of wood (1994 ROD pp. B-6). Treatments in Matrix must retain moderate

levels of ecologically valuable old-growth components (such as snags, logs, and large green

trees) with at least 15% percent green tree retention (1994 ROD pp. C-40 – C-42).

Under the 1990 Forest Plan, two management areas—General Forest (GF) and Scenic Travel

– Partial Retention (ST-2)—comprise the Walter Springs Project Area (Fig. 3). The EW-2

management prescription also applies to unmapped Riparian Management Areas (RMAs) for

Class I, II, and fish-bearing Class III streams, ponds, and wetlands. ST-2 areas are managed

to retain or enhance the viewing and recreation experiences along scenic travel routes (Forest

Service roads and trails). GF land is managed primarily for commodity production. In

RMAs, management decisions must favor riparian dependent resources.

Standards and guidelines from the Northwest Forest Plan supersede those of the 1990 Forest

Plan unless the Forest Plan is more restrictive, or provides a greater benefit to late

successional species (1994 ROD pp. A-2). Applicable standards and guidelines from both

plans are described in Chapter 3.

Watershed Analysis

Watershed analysis—a systematic procedure to characterize the aquatic, riparian, and

terrestrial features within a watershed-- is another key component of the ACS (1994 ROD

pp. 10). The Taneum-Manastash Watershed Analysis was completed in 1995 and is

incorporated by reference into this EA. Its key findings in regard to vegetation included a

high risk of ―cataclysmic fire‖, high degree of natural variability, and extensive alteration of

riparian vegetation (including loss of snags and logs) due to previous and ongoing human

activities (road construction, danger tree management, timber harvest, grazing, and

dispersed recreation). The analysis also characterized the Manastash subdrainage as being

hydrologically unique and vulnerable, and having upper reaches that are important for water

storage and release. Streams were characterized as being deficient in large wood--and in

some places—shade, and as exhibiting high levels of sedimentation associated with roads,

trails, off-road driving, timber harvest, grazing, and recreational use. Road management

was listed as the single most important remedial action for wildlife habitat.

Forest Service Directives

The following directives influenced design of the Walter Springs Project:

Interim Management Direction for Retention of Large and Old Trees in Dry and Mesic

Forest Restoration Projects, Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest, February 2010;

National Ecological Restoration and Resilience Direction (Forest Service Manual [FSM]

Interim Directive 2020.5, 08/30/2011).


5

Fig. 2. Walter Springs Project Area: land management allocations

under the Northwest Forest Plan, as established by the 1994 ROD.

Alternative 2 harvest areas are shown for reference.


6

Fig. 3. Forest Plan management allocations within the Walter Springs

planning Area (Wenatchee LRMP 1990). Alternative 2 harvest areas

are shown for reference.


7

The interim large tree direction requires retention of existing old trees in dry forest restoration

projects, unless a landscape level evaluation of forest condition has been completed to inform

development of harvest prescriptions. It lists minimum large tree retention objectives, by

forest type. The Walter Springs Project was already in the final stages of planning when this

direction was issued, but planned harvest and burning prescriptions were modified to conform

to this direction, by emphasizing retention of existing old trees and meeting or exceeding

minimum large tree objectives. A landscape level evaluation of forest condition has not been

completed for this watershed.

The Ecological Restoration and Resilience Direction requires managers to ―re-establish and

retain the ecological resilience of National Forest System Lands, through restoration

projects.‖ A healthy resilient landscape has a greater capacity to survive natural disturbances

and large-scale threats to sustainability (FSM 2020.2 pp. 8).

Other Federal Laws, Regulations, and Executive Orders

Resource-specific federal laws, regulations, policies, and Forest Plan direction are described

in Chapter 3, by affected resource area.

Other Supporting Analyses

Two roads analyses were considered during development of this project, as follows:

Okanogan and Wenatchee National Forest Roads Analysis (March 2004): This sub-

basin level road analysis process addressed Maintenance Level 3, 4, and 5 roads. The

objective was to review road status and road conditions, and identify a road system that

was safe and responsive to public needs and desires, affordable and efficiently managed

with minimal effects on other resource, and in balance with available funding for

maintenance and repairs. This interdisciplinary process considered the effects of roads

on biological, physical, and social resources, and assigned each road a priority for

keeping and maintaining or improving that road.

Road Analysis for the Walter Springs Project (Cle Elum RD 2010). This interdisciplinary

process expanded the 2004 roads analysis to include management level 1 and 2 (ML1 and

ML2) roads in the Walter Springs Project Area. Each road was assigned a management

recommendation (Project Record).

Both efforts were internal review processes that did not result in decisions about roads.

In the final year of planning for this project, consideration was also given to dramatically

declining budgets for road management, and an overarching need to reduce road maintenance

workloads. Minimum roads analysis has not been completed for this watershed.

Project Record

The Walter Springs Project Record includes Specialist Reports pertaining to Soils,

Hydrology, Silviculture (Forest Vegetation), Fire and Fuels, Botany, Aquatic Species,

Wildlife, Cultural Resources, Recreation, and Scenery. This EA incorporates by reference

the entire Project Record (40 CFR 1502.21), including all Specialist Reports and other

technical documentation used to support the analysis and conclusions in this EA. The

Project Record is located at the Cle Elum Ranger Station in Cle Elum, Washington.


8

Chapter 3 summarizes the various Specialist Reports, providing enough site-specific

information to demonstrate a reasoned consideration of the environmental impacts associated

with each alternative and how these impacts can be mitigated, without repeating detailed

analysis and background information available elsewhere in the Project Record.

Purpose and Need for Action

Ecological resilience is defined as ―the ability of an ecological system to absorb disturbance

while retaining the same basic structure and ways of functioning‖ (FSM Interim Directive

2020.5). Ecosystem functions include such processes as energy flow, nutrient cycling and

retention, soil development and retention, predation and herbivory and natural disturbances

such as wind, fire, and floods. All of these functions contribute to and sustain the

composition and structure of an ecosystem (FSM 2020.2).

Ecological resilience in the Walter Springs Project Area has been reduced in the following

ways:

Decades of fire suppression have altered stand and landscape level fuel conditions and

tree structure. Shade tolerant grand fir trees have become established in many

historically open stands on the slope above Manastash Creek, and in places, these grand

fir trees now form a dense intermediate forest layer that competes with older ―legacy‖

trees (Douglas-fir, western larch, and ponderosa pine) for water and nutrients. They also

provide a fuel ladder that can carry fire into the crowns of dominant older trees. Large

old trees which persisted for centuries under a regime of frequent low intensity ground

fires are now at risk of being injured and/or killed by crown fire.

Western larch is a fire dependent shade intolerant species. Mature larch is fading and

dying out of the overstory in many dense stands within Manastash watershed, mostly as a

function of age and dwarf mistletoe disease. In some stands, deepening shade and the

buildup of down wood, litter, and duff resulting from fire exclusion are preventing

regeneration of fire-adapted western larch and ponderosa pine trees. With dominant old

trees now at risk to crown fire and with conditions underneath these trees unsuitable for

seed germination, there is potential to lose the most genetically fit seed sources for future

stand regeneration following disturbance—the fire adapted species that persisted here for

centuries, prior to the era of fire suppression.

Regeneration of these long lived fire adapted species is critical to the restoration of dry

cool forest types that occur in the Eastern Cascade of Washington (Agee and Wright

2004).

Aspen is declining in this Project Area, due to advanced age and prolonged absence of

wildfire. Only a few small (<5 ac) patches persist, all located at the base of the south-

facing slope above South Fork Manastash Creek. All of these aspen patches are

comprised of 80-year-old-plus trees with many conks and cankers (indications of decay).

In all mapped clones (patches of genetically identical aspen), shade-tolerant grand fir

trees will soon overtop the surrounding aspen trees. The few aspen seedlings that grow

around the edges of these clones are heavily browsed by deer, elk, and domestic sheep

and are unlikely to grow to maturity. Therefore there is no aspen regeneration to replace

declining older trees.

From a landscape perspective, the prolonged absence of wildfire has also increased the

amount and continuity of surface and ladder fuels from stand to stand and in places, from

slope to slope. More specifically, there is less distinction between stands on dry


9

southerly slopes, and stands growing on mesic north slopes and valley bottoms

(Watershed Analysis pp. 30). Because the historic vegetative mosaic here was

structurally diverse, fires historically burned at mixed intensities. Today’s landscape is at

risk to uncharacteristically large-scale disturbances from insects, disease, and/or high

intensity (stand-replacing) fire, due to the increased density of trees, and increased

continuity of surface and aerial fuels from stand to stand.

In places, previous reforestation practices have created unsustainable stand conditions.

Dense monoculture plantations of young ponderosa pine—some of it grown from seed

sources poorly suited to the area—occur here. These ―off-site‖ ponderosa pine trees are

growing poorly, and their stressed condition makes them highly vulnerable to insect and

disease attack, as well as fire.

Noxious weeds (primarily meadow knapweed and Canada thistle) have become widely

established along roads and on previously disturbed sites throughout the Project Area.

The risk of weed spread with any new disturbance is high. In places, weeds are

outcompeting desirable native vegetation. Invasive plants have low forage value for

wildlife, and at high densities, can affect rates of wildfire spread (Erickson and White

2007 pp. 2).

Off-road motor vehicle use associated with unauthorized roads and with long-term

dispersed camping along FS Rd 3111-115 is causing detrimental soil disturbance

(compaction and rutting) and loss of vegetation in meadows and Riparian Reserves.

Some unauthorized roads are being extended every year, creating more ―brown-out‖

(bare areas), more disruption of surface and groundwater flows, and increased risk of

noxious weed establishment and spread.

There is currently no security habitat for wildlife2 in the Walter Springs Project Area due

to high densities of open roads, 4X4 trails, ―user-built‖ (unauthorized) roads, and closed

Forest Service System roads that are being used, due to ineffective barricades. The area

is used by mule deer, elk, and their associated predators, but habitat effectiveness is low

here because of the high level of motorized disturbance. As a result, animals are being

displaced from potentially suitable habitats, disrupting the predation and herbivory

processes that are part of a healthy forest ecosystem (FSM 2020.5).

Desired Conditions

The desired landscape condition here is a mosaic of structurally diverse forest cover types

and ages reflecting variable topography and a propensity to burn at mixed fire intensities

(Watershed Analysis pp. 13-15, and 20). A structurally diverse landscape is less likely to

incur severe, large-scale disturbances and is therefore more ecologically resilient. Historic

conditions provide a proven model for sustainable and diverse forest conditions in the Walter

Springs Project Area, and also for the most effective ways to provide the required old growth

components in Matrix, as specified by the Northwest Forest Plan.

Open forest dominated by large old ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, and western larch trees

would be the predominant feature on dry south slopes, with stringers of dense forest

providing shade over perennial and intermittent streams draining into South Fork Manastash

Creek. Patches of denser forest would also persist around and within scattered patches of

talus. Trees in upland forest would occur singly, in clumps with interwoven crowns and

occasionally in small, dense patches. Single legacy trees and unthinned patches with legacy

trees would be surrounded by gaps that protect them from fire.

areas free from motorized disturbance 2


10

Stand structure would vary on mesic/moist north slopes and valley bottoms, and would

include some larger patches of dense, multi-layered old forest dominated by Douglas-fir and

grand fir, mid-seral forest dominated by western larch and Douglas-fir trees, and young forest

in both dense and open condition, with variably spaced young trees.

Aspen would comprise a discontinuous band on slopes adjacent to South Fork Manastash

Creek—at least some of it young and thriving. Aspen, shrub-dominated swales, riparian

forest, and meadows would contribute greatly to overall vegetative diversity in the Project

Area. Meadows would support native grasses, forbs, and shrubs, with no evidence of

compaction or rutting and brown-out due to unauthorized motorized travel, free of invasive

species. These areas would provide high quality forage for deer, elk, and domestic sheep.

Snags, logs, and other decayed wood habitat structure (trees with mistletoe brooms, dead

and/or broken tops, and other defects) would occur throughout the Project Area, in a range of

size and decay classes and in highly variable amounts. Snag and log densities would be

highest in riparian reserves and in dense stands on mesic north slopes and valley bottoms, and

lowest in dry upland areas and in stands adjacent to open roads (the latter due to ongoing

danger tree management and firewood collection). Snags and logs in advanced stages of

decay would reach their highest densities in riparian reserves and on shaded north slopes and

valley bottoms (natural fire refugia). Some dense patches of snags would also occur in

recently burned stands. A high percentage of the snags and logs in open stands would be

large (>20 inches in diameter at breast height). In upland forest, snags would occur singly, in

clumps, and within complex unthinned patches surrounded by open forest and/or gaps.

Purpose and Need for Action

Based on the differences between existing and desired conditions described above, and on

current management direction and guidance for the area, there is a need for greater structural

diversity within and between stands in the Walter Springs Project Area, including more open

forest areas dominated by large old trees (forest structure likely to burn at low intensity).

There is also a need for a broad mix of forest age classes here, including young stands

comprised of trees that are well adapted to each unique growing site, and dense old stands.

In South Fork Manastash Creek and its tributaries there is a need for cooler peak summer

water temperatures, therefore the Riparian Reserves here—particularly the inner gorges—

need dense ground cover and dense overstory vegetation. There is a need for reduced soil

disturbance along streams and in meadows, and for meadows that are fully vegetated with

native grasses, forbs, and shrubs, and devoid of weeds. There is a need for reduced

motorized disturbance to deer, elk, and wide-ranging carnivores in spring, summer, and fall.

Based on these needs, objectives for this project are as follows:

o In drier stands, reduce tree densities and surface and ladder fuel accumulations, and

restore historic species composition;

o Retain as many old trees as possible (i.e., trees established before the era of fire

suppression, regardless of their size). Old trees would be removed only for safety

and/or operational reasons;

o Retain large trees as indicated in Draft Interim Management Direction for Large and

Old Trees in Dry and Mesic Forest Restoration Projects, Okanogan-Wenatchee

National Forest, February 2010;

o Create open canopies and burned seed beds conducive to natural regeneration of

western larch and ponderosa pine (Fiedler and Lloyd 1992);

o Convert dense, poorly-growing ponderosa pine plantations to an appropriate mix of

species, with trees that are well adapted to these sites;


11

o Regenerate decadent and declining aspen stands;

o Retain a mix of forest age classes across the Project Area, including some early, mid,

and late-successional forest areas. Also, retain a mix of open and dense forest

structure, consistent with aspect and historic stand structure;

o Retain all existing shade over perennial and intermittent streams;

o Provide for commercial removal of wood products;

o Re-introduce fire in an area long deprived of fire. Design burn plans to minimize

injury and mortality of large old trees, to preserve some dense forest stands on the

landscape, and to protect riparian features and functions.

o Reduce motorized disturbance to wildlife in and around treated stands, particularly in

areas where proposed thinning and burning will expose large expanses to views from

roads;

o Improve wildlife habitat effectiveness by obliterating unauthorized user-built roads,

and restoring effective closures on roads with failed berms and vandalized gates;

decompact soils and re-establish desirable vegetation on all restored sites.

o Control invasive plants in and around treatment areas and roads, and other areas

targeted for restoration.

Proposed Action

To meet purpose and need and move the Project Area towards the desired future condition,

the Forest Service proposes silvicultural treatments (harvest and prescribed burning) totaling

1654 acres (Fig. 4, Proposed Action). Treatments would include commercial timber harvest

(619 ac), precommercial thinning (17 ac), and natural fuels underburning outside of harvest

areas (1018 acres). After logging, all commercial harvest areas north of FS Rd 3100 would

be underburned along with the adjacent natural fuels areas, resulting in a more or less

contiguous ―first entry‖ burn totaling 1600 acres. A follow-up maintenance burn would be

implemented 5 to 10 years after the first entry burn.

During the first entry burn, an aspen regeneration area (29 ac) would be targeted for high

intensity burning, to kill the declining aspen overstory and stimulate new growth from roots.

After burning, a temporary elk-proof fence would be erected around at least part of the aspen

regeneration area to prevent grazing by deer, elk, and domestic sheep for 10-15 years. This

area would be excluded from follow-up maintenance burning.

Harvest activity would include commercial thinning (308 acres), long-term shelterwood

harvest (302 acres), and seed tree harvest (9 ac). Both ground-based and skyline logging

systems would be utilized, depending on slope and soil conditions (details in Chapter 2).

Winter logging would be required on most of the ground-based harvest acreage to prevent

detrimental soil disturbance, reduce risk of weed spread, and retain more understory

vegetation and logs to discourage off-road/off-trail motorized travel in treated stands.

Outside of Riparian Reserves, silvicultural objectives for all treatment areas would include

retaining a high percentage of the existing old and large trees, and maintaining or creating

more structural diversity within stands—a mix of single trees, clumps of trees whose crowns

intertwine, unthinned / unburned patches with snags and logs, and gaps. Within Riparian

Reserves, treatments would be designed to maintain all existing shade over water and a

higher average canopy closure throughout the Reserve, high densities of snags and logs, and a

high level of ground cover, particularly within inner gorge areas.

To facilitate timber harvest, six temporary roads totaling 1.4 miles would be required. All but

0.1 miles would be located on old skidtrails or old logging roads that would require little or

!9

!9

3100000

Sou t h F or k Ma n

a st a sh C r

T18N R15E

2422

27

23

26

Rider'sCamp

ManastashCamp

3104000

311111153111 11 1

3100000

3111131

3111117

3111000

25

1415 13

4W 311.1

36

3111000

3111129

C1B2

B1

X2

X1Q1

Lost Lake

«M

«Q

«X

«S

«T«N

«Y

«J

«H

«V

«I

«U

«G

«O

«B«C

«K«R

«F

1350

4W311

4W307

1386.1

1386

1350.2

4W307.1 1350.1

Walter Springs Planning Area

Alt 2 harvest area

Alt 2 natural fuels underburn

Aspen restoration area

Green Tree Retention Area

Proposed temporary road

NF System Roads and TrailsOpen road (maintenance level 3)

Open road (maintenance level 2)

Closed road (maintenance level 1)

FS Trail

National Forest Boundary

Private ownership

Unauthorized road

!9 campground

1:30,0000 1 Miles

±


12

no reconstruction. Temporary roads would be blocked, scarified, and seeded following harvest, as part of the timber sale contract.

Fig. 4. Proposed Action for the Walter Springs Project.


13

In addition, two closed Forest Service System Roads (3111-129 and 3111-131) totaling 0.4

miles, and one decommissioned road (near Stand J) totaling 0.4 miles in length, would be

reopened and used for timber sale access. The two closed roads currently receive

unauthorized use, with users driving around a failed gate. An effective closure (berm or gate)

would be restored following timber harvest. The decommissioned road used for harvest

access would be obliterated following harvest, and blocked with a more effective barricade

than exists now.

To mitigate the effects of thinning on wildlife, the proposed action also includes obliteration

of five unauthorized roads totaling 0.9 miles, and installation of more effective barricades on

four other ―closed‖ roads (also totaling 0.9 miles). None of these roads are needed for timber

sale access; therefore, these planned obliterations and closures would be undertaken

independent of the timber sale contract.

To further reduce motorized disturbance to wildlife (specifically, deer, elk and wide-ranging

carnivores) and to improve overall wildlife habitat effectiveness, an action is proposed that

would change the road’s management status. Approximately 1.7 miles of FS Road 3111-117

would be physically closed below Stand N, and its road maintenance level (ML) changed

from ML2 (suitable for high clearance vehicles) to ML1 (closed to vehicular use). The

closed section of road would be placed in a self-maintaining condition. A new gate or berm

would be installed at the point of closure.

The wet meadow between stands Q and S would be barricaded to prevent off-road motorized

travel, and restored by decompacting soils, treating weeds, and replanting barren areas with

native grasses and forbs. A heavily-used dispersed campsite on the meadow’s edge would be

relocated into adjacent trees, and the existing user-built access road would be shortened, so

that access to the dispersed campsite is on foot. Off-road travel would be curbed by placing

boulders at the meadow’s edge along FS Rd 3111-115 and along the shortened access road to

the campsite.

Connected Actions

Connected actions would include danger tree management along roads that would be used for

timber haul (approximately 19 miles), spot treatments with approved herbicides to prevent

and control invasive species on up to 200 acres per year for the life of the project plus 5

years, snow-plowing on all haul routes to facilitate timber harvest, and a two-year suspension

of sheep-grazing on the 1600-acre prescribed burn area, after the first entry prescribed burn.

The entire Project Area is located in the Manastash Sheep Allotment.

The proposed action and all required mitigations and design criteria needed to ensure Forest

Plan compliance, are described in greater detail in Chapter 2 of this EA.

Decision Framework

The Forest Supervisor for the Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest will make the following

decisions based on the interdisciplinary analysis documented in this EA:

Whether to select the Proposed Action (as written or modified), or an alternative to

the Proposed Action (as written or modified);

What mitigation measures will be implemented with this project;

What monitoring efforts will be implemented with this project.


14

Public Involvement and Consultation

The project has been listed on the Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest Schedule of

Proposed Actions since April 13, 2007. Letters describing the proposed action were mailed

on October 4, 2007 to tribal governments of the Yakama Indian Nation and the Confederated

Tribes of the Colville Indian Reservation, and to Kittitas County Commissioners. There was

no response from either tribal government or the county.

Letters were mailed to the general public and to other state and federal agencies (the Cle

Elum Ranger District mailing list) on December 26, 2007. We received comments from 6

individuals and/or organizations as a result of these scoping efforts.

The State Historic Preservation Office reviewed cultural reports and concurred with Forest

Service findings relating to this project on June 14, 2010. With planned mitigations, the

project will not affect heritage resources.

Pursuant to the Endangered Species Act, the District met with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service (FWS) on May 6, 2010, for level I review of the draft Biological Assessment for the

Walter Springs Project. Informal and formal section 7 consultation with FWS was initiated

in June 2010. FWS concurred with Forest Service findings that proposed actions ―may affect

but would not likely adversely affect‖ both gray wolf and grizzly bear (Letter of Concurrence

dated June 16, 2010), and that the proposed action ―may adversely affect‖ the northern

spotted owl. In a Biological Opinion dated August 9, 2010, FWS concluded that the

Proposed Action would not likely jeopardize the continued existence of the northern spotted

owl.

In its Biological Opinion, FWS also made a number of recommendations regarding the

project, including monitoring needs.

The project will not affect anadromous fish, and consultation with the National Marine

Fisheries Service was not required. Nevertheless, information about the project was shared

with that agency, and no concerns were raised.

Issues

A list of issues was developed from public comments and from internal review of the

Proposed Action by the interdisciplinary team. Issues were divided into two categories:

those which can be addressed or resolved by incorporating design criteria, required standards

and guidelines, best management practices and/or other mitigations into the proposed action

(―non-significant issues‖, listed in Table 1), and those that can only be addressed by

developing an alternative to the proposed action (―unresolved conflicts‖).

Non-significant issues also include those which are outside the scope of the Proposed Action;

already decided by law, regulation, the Forest Plan, or other higher level decisions; irrelevant

to the decision being made; and/or conjectural and not supported by scientific or factual

evidence.

The only unresolved conflict that emerged from scoping concerned potential effects of

proposed treatments on the northern spotted owl, as follows:

Proposed thinning and burning in dense forest habitat would remove Nesting-Roosting-

Foraging (“NRF”) habitat for the northern spotted owl (a species listed as threatened

under the Endangered Species Act). The habitat that would be removed is located

within the potential home range area of an unoccupied spotted owl site – last used for


15

nesting in 1989, and now occupied by barred owls. Because most of the available owl

habitat around this site remains intact, there is potential for spotted owls to reoccupy

this site if and when barred owls vacate the site. Removal of NRF habitat may preclude

future spotted owl reoccupancy of the site.

In response to this issue, alternative 3 was developed. Like the proposed action it would treat

to restore open conditions on dry, south-facing slopes, but would exclude most of the dense

forest areas that provide NRF habitat for spotted owls, from treatments. In this Project Area,

the majority (though not all) of the existing dense forest/owl habitat is located on north-facing

slopes and shaded valley bottoms. The unit of measure that would be used to address this

issue would be the acres of NRF habitat removed under both action alternatives.

Chapter 2 provides a more detailed description of the Proposed Action, as well as Alternative

3. It also lists required design criteria and mitigations for both alternatives, and a table

comparing the actions that each entails, and their environmental consequences. Detailed,

side-by-side maps of the two alternatives are located at the end of Chapter 2.

Appendix A provides additional details about the two action alternatives, in

tabular format.


16

Table 1. Analysis of non-significant issues raised during scoping for the Walter Springs Project, with rationale for classifying them as non-significant, and units

of measure for tracking them throughout this document.

Issue Statement Rationale for Non-significance Unit of Measure

1. Smoke caused by burning activities has a potential to impact

the Ellensburg area. This may lead to narrow burn windows,

and delays in burning. Delays may increase fire risk from

untreated slash.

Burn plan would specify practices that effectively reduce

likelihood of smoke accumulation in Ellensburg. Planned

whole-tree yarding would limit logging slash, and thus help

minimize the amount of smoke produced.

tons of smoke

produced’

2. Commercial logging has the potential to elevate fire risk, by

adding logging slash to fuel loads, and by opening up the forest

canopy and exposing both surface and aerial fuels to sun and

wind. Treated stands dry out faster, and are more likely to

ignite and burn.

Planned whole-tree yarding would effectively limit logging

slash, reducing the intensity of follow-up burns and natural fires.

Harvest prescriptions would emphasize retention of old trees that

prior to the era of fire suppression persisted and thrived under

open forest conditions with frequent low intensity fires. Even

though the rate of fire spread may increase in treated stands (due

to drying of fast-burning fuels), fire intensity and fire severity

would be reduced. The risk of uncharacteristic fire would be

reduced.

rate of fire spread, fire

severity

3. Noxious weeds already exist in some stands being considered

for treatment, and along most roads in the Project Area.

Disturbance from burning and logging would open the stand

and prepare the soil for invasive plant encroachment; it may

also stimulate germination of noxious weed seed already in the

soil.

Project would implement standards and guidelines from NWFP

Invasives ROD (2005) to reduce risk of noxious weed spread,

with pre- and post-treatment of problem weed areas, washing

and inspection of equipment, etc (BMPs).

consistency with

amended Forest Plan

Standards and

Guidelines (Invasives

ROD (2005).

4. Proposed burning may adversely rare plant populations

Surveys for rare plants and a Biological Evaluation for any rare

and sensitive plants found must be completed prior to any

decision. Treatments would be modified to protect known

populations.

# rare plant

populations detected

and protected during

treatments

5. Proposed timber harvest may result in detrimental soil

disturbance due to soil compaction, decreased site productivity,

Best management practices (such as equipment exclusions,

seasonal operating restrictions, and prompt restoration of

decommissioned roads) would be implemented to reduce impacts

% of watershed with

detrimental soil


17

and accelerated erosion. to sensitive soils and the risk of erosion. Mechanical treatments

and burns would be designed to avoid highly sensitive soils,

and/or to limit the intensity of treatments on these soils.

disturbance

6. Proposed thinning and burning may remove overstory

canopy along perennial streams, reducing shade and elevating

water temperatures. This may, in turn, reduce the quality of

fish habitat.

Would mitigate by adjusting unit boundaries and/or silvicultural

prescriptions to maintain shade over water, and to minimize

disturbance of ground cover and vegetation within inner gorge

areas.

riparian acres within

harvest areas.

7. Proposed thinning and burning may reduce the percentages

of mature forest in areas with high cumulative effects from

previous harvest and roads. Additional removal of cover may

affect peak and baseflow discharge of streams. Altered peak

and baseflow may degrade channel conditions and reduce

quality of fish habitat.

Generally, treatments involving thinning and underburning of

predominantly open ponderosa pine stands do not measurably

increase peakflow discharges. BMPs to protect baseflows would

exclude groundwater discharge areas from treatments. Riparian

harvest and burning prescriptions would limit removal of

overstory canopy, to prevent changes in baseflows.

% of vegetative cover

in watershed

8. Logging practices may reduce effective ground cover and

increase surface soil erosion. This may result in increased

sediment delivery to streams, and reduced water quality.

BMPs for protecting soils, water quality, and inner gorge areas

would exclude equipment in sensitive soil types and inner gorge

areas. Riparian reserve prescriptions would ensure high retention

of effective ground cover within the Reserves. Planned

restoration of skidtrails, temporary roads, and landings would

include decompaction, seeding, and placement of wood to reduce

erosion.

% of treatment area

with detrimental soil

disturbance.

9. Roads needed to implement proposed treatments (including

both system and unauthorized routes) affect hydrologic

processes, including flow regimes, water quality and stream

channel conditions.

BMPs for hydrology and water quality protection during road

construction and decommissioning would provide adequate

mitigation.

miles of road In

riparian, #stream

crossings

10. Proposed tree removal and underburning along trails and

roads would remove vegetation and down wood that now

discourages or prevents off-road/trail OHV travel. Skidtrails

that cross or connect to system roads and trails may also

encourage “pioneering” from these routes, and once tracks are

established, others users follow. These user-built trails often

result in soil erosion and increased sediment delivery to

Measures to reduce the likelihood of off-road/ off-trail use would

include recognition of high risk areas, adjusting skidtrail

locations so they are not visible from existing system trails and

roads, adjusting marking prescriptions along roads and trails to

retain more trees and logs, retaining roughness or native

vegetation on skidtrails, retaining more understory vegetation by

winter logging, and adjusting lighting strategies to strategically

Miles of system trail

within treatment areas;

acres of winter

logging.


18

streams, and reduced water quality. They also increase

motorized disturbance to wildlife, reduce the amount and

quality of herbaceous forage, and contribute to the spread of

invasive plants across treated stands.

retain more tree and down wood cover in high risk areas.

12. Proposed tree removal and underburning along 4WD trails

may reduce desirable characteristics of these trails and the

quality of the trail-riding experience.

Project would be designed to retain more trees along trails and

roads and to maintain the sinuous character of trail corridors;

miles of trail within

treatment areas;

13. Constructed firelines that intersect roads and trails look

like trails, and may encourage illegal OHV use.

Burn plan would limit fire intensity or exclude fire from areas of

concern to leave more vegetation. It would also include

provisions for strategically place wood and barriers (native

materials) during mop-up to camouflage constructed fire lines

near roads and trails. Firelines would not be tied into roads, until

immediately preceding burns.

# constructed firelines

that anchor to roads

14. Snow-plowing (associated with winter logging) would take

place on groomed snowmobile routes, displacing winter users

or reducing winter recreational use.

Timber sale contract provisions would require partial retention of

snow cover for snowmobilers on sides of plowed roads, and

would restrict winter logging and snowplowing during periods of

heavy recreational use (weekends). These measures have been

effective on other parts of the District.

miles of road used for

timber haul, in winter

15. The project may close popular Forest Service 4WD trails

that are voluntarily maintained by 4WD enthusiasts

Although the project would close 1.7 miles of open system road

below Stand N, reclose several system roads with failed berms,

and obliterate several unauthorized roads, it would not

permanently close any Forest Service System trails. Brief

temporary closures, however, may be implemented during

harvest and burning operations.

actions affecting

system trails.

16. Logging and burning activity may physically damage sites

eligible or potentially eligible for inclusion on the National

Register of Historic Places.

By law, all eligible and potentially eligible sites must be

protected from damage. Marking guides, unit boundaries, and

burn plans would be designed to buffer eligible sites from

physical disturbance, or to limit intensity of disturbance.

# eligible sites

protected

17. Proposed logging and burning operations may impede

sheep and herder access to foraging areas and approved

bedding grounds on the Taneum-Manastash allotment. There is

little or no opportunity to divert grazing to other locations or

allotments. May pose an economic hardship to the permittee.

Would mitigate by informing the permittee during annual pre-

turnout meetings where and when harvest and burning activities

may be occurring, and by adjusting the annual routing plan to

minimize conflicts.

percent of allotment

that would be

temporarily

unavailable to the

permittee.


19

18. For vegetation to recover after underburning, may need to

exclude treated areas from grazing for at least 1 year. May

pose an economic hardship to the permittee.

Would mitigate by giving permittee advance notice (at least one

year) that grazing activities would be suspended for at least two

years following treatments.

portion of allotment

that would be

temporarily

unavailable to the

permittee.

19. Appropriate funds for restoration and fuels reduction work

are limited and commercial removal of wood would help

finance accomplishment of restoration objectives. Planned

mitigations, however, may also reduce the net value of the sale,

and make it less attractive to buyers. If it does not sell, these

restoration needs would not be met.

The project would use the most efficient harvest system and least

cost slash disposal method, given all resource constraints.

ac of commercial

harvest, by logging

system, and operating

season.

20. Proposed thinning and burning would increase the amount

and quality of herbaceous forage for deer and elk, but in some

areas would also expose previously unseen areas to view from

roads. Distance to cover would increase for deer and elk using

treated stands, increasing their vulnerability to motorized

disturbance.

Project would effectively mitigate for increased vulnerability of

elk and deer to disturbance by closing both unauthorized and

system roads. Retention of denser cover in Riparian Reserves

and complex patches in upland treatment areas will also reduce

vulnerability of deer and elk.

Distance from

motorized routes

21. Proposed aspen regeneration would create highly

preferred forage (tender new aspen growth) for elk, deer, and

domestic sheep. Aspen regeneration efforts may fail if grazing

cannot be excluded until seedlings reach at least sapling size.

Would mitigate this concern by erecting elk-proof fence around

regenerating aspen patches, and maintaining this fence for at

least 10 years following treatments.

ac enclosed by elk

fence

22. Proposed construction and use of temporary roads, and

temporary use of closed roads may reduce security habitat and

increase motorized disturbance to elk and other wildlife.

Animals may be displaced from areas they now use.

Project would be designed to reduce effects from temporary

roads, by retaining patches of cover in treated stands and dense

cover within Riparian Reserves and by obliterating temporary

roads and reclosing system roads after treatments using the

timber sale contract (ensures timely closure). BMPs for effective

road closure would also be implemented, including dense use of

native materials to barricade road segments behind reconstructed

berms.

change in total road

miles and in

motorized road and

trail density (short-

and long-term).

Environmental Assessmenta123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic...Environmental Assessment...

Documents

Transcript of Environmental Assessmenta123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic...Environmental Assessment...