111111~lllmll~I~1
3 5556 031 848674
FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
North Lochsa Face Landscape and Watershed Assessment
Lochsa Ranger District
Clearwater National Forest
Idaho County, Idaho
June 1999
I
I
I
Lead Agency:
USDA Forest Service
Responsible omcials:
James L. Caswell
Forest SupelVisor
Oearwater National Forest
12730 U.S. Highway 12
Orofino, ID 83544
Cynthia A. Lane
Lochsa District Ranger
Rt. 1, Box 398
Kooskia, ID 83539
For Further Information, Contact:
Kris Hazelbaker
Interdisciplinary Team Leader
Lochsa Ranger District
(208) 926-4275
Abstract: This Final Environmental Impact Stiltement documents the analysis of six alternatives, including a fIno
action" alternative, that were developed for the North Lochsa Face LtuuLscape and Watershed Assessment Also
included are four access options for the management of area roads and trails. The Notice of Intent to prepare this
document was published in the FeMral Register on August 9, 1996. Guided by the philosophy of ecosystem
management, the proposed action incluMs vegetlltive and aquatic management activities, plus, a recreation and access
management strategy all aimed at improving the ecological condition of the North Lochsa Face ecosystem and
incorporating the sociIJl values associlJted with this piece of ltmd. Alternative 3a, including Access Option 3, is the
preferred alternative. It has ~en adtkd to the original five al~rnatives and responds to public comment to include the
temporary roads proposed under Alternative 2 and eliminate the mixed-severity burns proposed in the Fish Creek
drainage. Also, Access Option 3 has been modified to maintain consistent interpretation of the 1993 Forest Plan
lawsuit settlement agreement
THE USDA (United States Department of Agriculture) prohibits discrimination in its
programs on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, religion, sex, disability,
political beliefs, and marital or familial status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all
programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program infonnation (braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact the
USDA Office of Communications at (202) 720-5881 (voice) or (202) 720-7808
(TOD). To file a complaint, write the Secretary of Agriculture, USDA, Washington,
DC 20250, or call (202) 720-7327 (voice) or (202) 720-1127 (TOD). USDA is an
equal employment opportunity employer.
1
SUMMARY
This Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) is intended to foster infonned decisionmaking and informed
public participation on proposed: (1) vegetative treatments, aimed at starting the process of bringing the North
Lochsa Face ecosystem back into its natural range of variability; (2) aquatic management, aimed at restoring and
rehabilitating area watersheds; and (3) recreation and access management strategy and economic considerations,
aimed at maintaining the social values associated with the area. The North Lochsa Face area includes the Pete
King Creek, CanyonlDeadman Creeks, FishlHungery Creeks, and Face drainages (remaining small drainages along
the northern face of the Lochsa River) in Idaho County, Idaho. It emphasizes the philosophy of ecosystem
management and is guided by the scientific framework developed by the Columbia River Basin Project, all within
the framework of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and its implementing regulations.
Changes Between Draft and Final
The following changes were made in response to public comments on the DEIS and further analysis:
~
Within the range of DEIS alternatives, a new alternative (Alternative 3a) has been developed that includes all
but one of the temporary roads described under Alternative 2 and proposes a new burning option for the Fish
and Hungery Creek drainages. Restoring the temporary roads was suggested by timber industry with the
support of several environmental groups. The burning option was in response to comments gathered at a
public hearing. This new alternative is described in detail in Chapter Two.
~
A field review of several areas proposed for regeneration harvest in the Mex Mountain area concluded that
treatment in this area was not needed at this time to improve ecological conditions.
~
The stands containing off-site trees to the east of Bimerick Creek are now included with the other stands
proposed for timber harvest. Should any of this area prove to be infeasible for timber harvest, prescribed fire
would be used to remove these trees.
~
A noxious weed proposal that consisted of manual and biological control, without the use of herbicides was
considered, but. later eliminated from detailed study due to the rationale explained in Chapter Two. The
original proposal has been modified to include an Integrated Pest Management approach to weed control.
~
Trail reconstnlction along Boundary Peak Trail 118, Fish Creek Trail 224, and Ant Hill Trail 225 has been
dropped from Access Option 3 in order to maintain consistent interpretation of the 1993 Forest Plan lawsuit
settlement agreement. Maintenance would still continue on Trails 224 and 225, where as, Trail 118 is
proposed to be abandoned.
~
As suggested by public comment, the monitoring plan that goes with Access Option 3 has been reworked to
include definitive trigger language, such as, monitoring tread in excess of the 24 inch standard, noting the
occurrence of dual wheel tracks, and measuring treadwear changes. The monitoring plan can be found in
AppendixA.
~
Discussions on Tribal Treaty Rights have been added to each chapter.
~
Added to the FEIS is Chapter Six which outlines public involvement obtained on this project, plus, lists all of
the public comments to the DEIS, followed by our response.
*
~
The Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation is located in Appendix H. It displays the possible effects of
proposed activities to endangered and threatened species known or expected to occur in the analysis area.
The original maps have been improved to show landmarks, labeled features (roads, trails, and streams), and
topographic contour lines. A I....andsat photo of the entire analysis has been added, as have photos in applicable
sections depicting proposed activities or uses on the landscape.
NoI1II LodIsa Faee E1S
SUlDmary
The Proposed Action 1
Many people believe forests that are left to nature never change. This is not true, especially in the interior
Columbia River Basin, which includes North Lochsa Face. A sudden wildfire, wind event, or disease and insect
infestation could change the appearance and productivity of this area for decades, without regard for public want or
need. Ecosystem management based on observing and replicating resilient natural processes, such as wildfire,
gives us a measure of control over natural systems, substantially reducing the risks posed by nature's indifference.
For us to implement the philosophy of ecosystem management, we need to know what people need and want from
the forest ecosystem, now and in the future, and how ecosystems work over long periods of time. Managed
ecosystems must be resilient and able to accommodate changes, so they can better meet changing human needs and
desires.
Past timber management practices and over 60 years of successful fire suppression efforts have caused portions of
the North Lochsa Face ecosystem to fall outside its nonnal range of variation. For the purpose of improving
ecological conditions and meeting social needs, the proposed action (described below) and several alternatives to it
were formulated by the interdisciplinary team. One should note that the proposed action was scoped publicly to
arrive at the other alternatives. The preferred alternative, Alternative 3a and Access Option 3, are described further
in this document. What follows are the activities that would be implemented over a five-year period under the
proposed action:
vegetatiye Map.gemept
Prescribed Fire • For the purposes of maintaining healthy ecosystems and reducing the risk of catastrophic
wildland fires, approximately 6,130 acres of prescribed fire (mixed-severity) are proposed mostly within the Fish
and Hungery Creek drainages. There is another 6,510 acres of potential understory burns proposed throughout the
analysis area. In an effort to balance suppression costs with resource values, a Forest Plan amendment has been
proposed to delete the wildfire acre limitations in certain management areas having a primary resource emphasis
other than timber (see Appendix C).
Timber Harvest • For the purposes of improving forest health and supplying timber for logging-dependent
communities, timber harvest is proposed on approximately 460 acres near Mex Mountain in the Fish Creek
drainage, 2,210 acres in the Canyon and Deadman Creek drainages, 2,610 acres in the Pete King drainage, and
3,740 acres in the Face drainages. The primary type of treatments proposed are regeneration harvests, commercial
thinnings, and salvage harvesting. Road activities proposed for access consist of 1.1 miles of road construction
along a ridge and approximately 12.9 miles of road reconstruction (curve widening, realignment, surfacing, and
installation of drainage structures). Another 4.6 miles of temporary roads (nine in number) would be constructed
for access and obliterated (returned to contour) after use. Approximately half of the acreage would be harvested
using a skyline system, with the remaining half split between helicopter and tractor logging.
Stand Density Management • For the purposes of reducing the number of trees per acre in overstocked stands and,
where desired, reducing the density of tolerant species in favor of sera! species, approximately 1,290 acres, mostly
within the Pete King Creek and Canyon Creek drainages, are proposed for precommercial thinning.
Restoring Native Species Composition • For the purposes of better site utilization and preventing the
contamination of the local gene pool, approximately 2,250 acres of off-site plantations within the Bimerick Creek
drainage are proposed for harvest and reforestation. These plantations consist mostly of off-site ponderosa pine
planted during the 1930s. The area west of Bimerick Creek is well suited for the use of a mechanical harvester and
log forwarder system. The area east of the creek will require helicopter logging. Should market conditions cause
this area to be unfeasible for timber harves~ prescribed fire would be used to remove the off-site species. Except
for those trees within the riparian buffers, all off-site species would be removed and replanted with tree species
suited for these sites.
Control or Noxious Weeds - For the purpose of (1) eradicating new invaders (a weed species previously not known to
occur within the project area); (2) reducing the extent and density of established noxious weeds; (3) implementing the
most economical, effective weed control methods for-the target weed; and (4) implementing an integrated management
ITbe "revised" proposed action described in the DEIS is the proposed action in this document.
Nortla Locllsa Face EIS
Ii
Sa• •ary
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
system using all appropriate available methods, an Integrated Pest Management approach to weed control is proposed
along roads and trails within the project area. The following management techniques would be considered on specific
sites and plant species:
Physical/Mechanical: Hand grubbing, mowing, tilling and burning are common practices. Treatment must take
place before seed production, and mowing or tilling will need to be repeated during the growing season.
Chemical: Herbicides are an effective and efficient tool for controlling noxious weeds and are an important method
of treatment when eradication is the management objective. It is critical to follow all label instructions and safety
precautions when using herbicides.
Biological: This is the deliberate introduction and establishment of natural enemies to reduce the target plants
competitive or reproductive capacities. Predatory insects are commonly released against noxious weeds.
AgUltks Map.,emegt
Watershed RestoratioD aDd RehabilitatioD • For the purpose of restoring impacted watersheds, approximately 64
miles of roads in Pete King, 23 miles in CanyonlDeadman, 2 miles in upper Fish Creek, and 6 miles of roads in the
river face drainages are proposed for some type of obliteration. Another 29 miles of roads in Pete King, 18 miles in
Canyon/Deadman, 5 miles in upper Fish Creek, and 7 miles of roads in the river face drainages are proposed for
long-term maintenance. This is the practice of retaining existing roads for future use without relying on frequent
road maintenance to keep the road open. The roads would be closed to motorized traffic and be placed in a
condition to assure they are self-maintaining, with stable drainage.
For the purpose of assuring floodplain/stream channel integrity, four existing sediment traps in the Pete King
drainage would be removed, with the sites restored to approximate natural channel cross-section conditions. Also,
fish structures, consisting of log or rock weirs, root wad placement, or cut bank stabilization measures, would be
placed in Pete King, Canyon, and Deadman Creeks to provide habitat for fish.
Planting Riparian Areas • For the purpose of restoring streamside vegetation to promote the re-establishment and
role of large wood in providing shade, channel stability, and fish habitat diversity, approximately 150 acres,
consisting of a strip 300 feet wide, 2 miles long on both sides of Pete King Creek, are proposed to be planted with
conifers and deciduous tree species. Approximately 450 acres, consisting of a similar strip along 6 miles of Fish
Creek, are proposed to be interplanted with fast growing deciduous trees (i.e. cottonwoods).
Social Valges
Recreation aDd Access Management Strategy • The purposes of this strategy are to continue to provide for
recreation use and associated access on National Forest roads and trails in the North Lochsa Face area while
protecting natural resource values and to maintain the mix of recreation opportunities near the existing condition
while improving the quality of the experiences for motorized and non-motorized users. Improvements in the
quality of recreational experiences on roads and trails would be accomplished primarily through: (1) better
maintenance of trail facilities; (2) relocation and/or reconstruction of problem trail stretches; (3) better road and
trail signing and information; (4) development of riding "loop" opportunities; and (5) management to provide
opportunities that fit a variety of user's expectations within the capability of the landscape.
The initial proposal (Access Option 2) stratified the landscape into three zones (A, B, and C) of motorized and nonmotorized recreational use. The delineation of the zones was based on social value considerations combined with
the suitability of the land to support different recreational experiences. Site-specific motorized and non-motorized
road and trail opportunities are described in Appendix A. What follows is a brief description of each zone:
Recreational Access MaDagement Zone A encompasses the Willow, Hungery and Fish Creek drainages.
Recreational and access opportunities emphasize the maintenance of a primitive to semi-primitive, nonmotorized setting. Access management supports the historic and wildlife values found in the area. The primary
emphasis for this zone is a non-motorized opportunity focused on a mainline trail system.
t
I
Nortla Locllsa Face E1S
iii
s.......ry
Recreatioaal Access Management Zone B encompasses the Deadman, Bimerick and portions of the Fish and
Lochsa Face drainages. This zone also includes the Lolo Motorway (Forest Road 5(0) corridor. Recreational
and access opportunities emphasize the maintenance of a semi-primitive, limited motorized setting. Access
management supports the high wildlife values during hunting season, and places an emphasis on retaining yearround accessibility by all motorized vehicles on the forest road system into the area.
Recreatioaal Access Management Zone C encompasses the Pete King, Canyon, Glade, Apgar, Rye Patch, and
portions of the Deadman and Lochsa Face drainages. This zone is the most roaded and accessible area in the
North Lochsa Face landscape. Recreational and access opportunities emphasize motorized experiences. Access
management supports the availability of motorized opportunity in addition to the high wildlife values during
hunting season. The primary emphasis is a motorized opportunity where motorized use is on designated roads
and trails. However, limited, non-motorized opportunities would still exist in both summer and fall use seasons.
CoDllDlUlity EcoDOmics • The local communities influenced by proposed activities in the North Lochsa Face area
are Lowell, Syringa, Kooskia, Stites, Kamiah, Grangeville, Pierce, Weippe, and Orofino. Although there has been
some economic diversification, most of these communities remain dependent on the harvest of timber for economic
survival. The economic benefit to local communities would be that derived from the implementation of the timber
harvest proposals.
Decisions To Be Made
The decisions to be made as a result of this analysis are:
1. Whether or not to select an action or mix of actions to improve the ecological condition of the North Lochsa
Face area and best meet the social values associated with this piece of land.
2. If an action is selected, what mitigation measures, management requirements, Forest Plan amendments, and
monitoring are needed to implement ecosystem management on the North Lochsa Face landscape?
The AtTected Environment
The North Lochsa Face analysis area covers approximately 128,000 acres of mostly forested, steep mountains on
the Lochsa Ranger District of the Clearwater National Forest, just north of the small communities of Lowell and
Syringa, Idaho. The Lochsa District boundary and the Lolo Motorway form the northeast and northern boundary of
the analysis area. The Pete King Creek drainage fonns the southwest boundary. U.S. Highway 12 and the Lochsa
River, a designated Wild and Scenic River, form the south/southeast boundary up to Fish Creek, and the remaining
boundary is the eastern watershed divide of Fish Creek.
Resource components of the environment that could be affected by proposed management activities include various
landforms, aquatics, wildlife, fish, vegetation, the Lochsa Research Natural Area, the North Lochsa Slope Roadless
Area, roads and trails, visual quality, heritage resources, community economics, treaty rights of the Nez Perce
Tribe, air quality, and natural processes such as fire. The existing conditions of these resources are described in
Chapter Three.
Issues
The issues addressed in this EIS were developed from the results of public involvement efforts with individuals,
public interest groups/organizations, industry, businesses, Nez Perce Tribe, city and county governments, and
Federal and State agencies. The comments received were stratified according to content. Mitigation measures,
design features, and alternatives to the proposed action were fonnulated to respond to them. The issues considered
throughout this analysis include impacts on water quality and fish habitat, threatened, endangered, and sensitive
wildlife species, elk habitat, land management, mature and late mature forests, sensitive plants, noxious weeds,
Lochsa Research Natural Area, North Lochsa Slope Roadless Area, visual quality (includes Wild and Scenic River
and Lolo Trail corridors), Nez Perce Tribe treaty rights (fishing, hunting, and gathering activities), heritage
resources, economics, air quality, motorized use vs. non-motorized use, recreation access opportunities, and bull
elk vulnerability.
North Lochs.
F.~
E1S
iv
SUUIlary
•II
•I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•I
•I
I
I
-•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
Vegetative agel Aquatic Management
Five alternatives to the proposed action, including no action, were given full consideration in this analysis and are
described in detail in Chapter Two. Briefly, they are as follows:
Alternative 1: This is the "no action" alternative. Management action taken by the Forest Service would be current
activities permitted by the Forest Plan and covered under other NEPA documents.
Alternative 2: This is the "proposed action" described above.
Alternative 3: This was the preferred alternative in the DEIS. It focuses on the same treatments as in the proposed
action, but emphasizes what can be done, in relation to timber harvest, if no new roads (system or temporary) are
constructed.
Alternative 3a: This is the new "preferred alternative" and is a modification of Alternative 3, as suggested through
public comment. Eight of the temporary roads originally proposed are included for logging access, and only
underburning, not stand replacement burning, is proposed in the Fish and Hungery Creek drainages.
Alternative 4: This alternative proposes no prescribed fire or timber harvest within the North Lochsa Slope
Roadless Area. It also shows what can be done, in relation to prescribed fire, using current Forest Plan suppression
strategies.
Alternative S: This alternative allows prescribed fire, but no timber harvest in the North Lochsa Slope Roadless
Area.
Socjal Values (AcceSS Options)
Three option alternatives to the proposed Recreation and Access Management Strategy were given full
consideration in this analysis and are described in detail in Chapter Two. Briefly, they are as follows:
Access Option 1: Existing road and trail restrictions, as described in the current Forest Access Guide, would
remain in effect.
Access Option 2: This is the Recreation and Access Management Strategy described under the proposed action.
Access Option 3: This is the "preferred alternative", in which road and trail restrictions would include comments
and suggestions generated from a collaborative learning effort.
Access Option 4: Existing road and trail restrictions would remain in effect with the addition of 1-month road
closures for the purpose of reducing bull elk vulnerability during the fall hunting season.
All alternatives are consistent with Forest Plan direction and are in compliance with the Stipulation of Dismissal
agreed to for the lawsuit between the Forest Service and the Sierra Oub, et a1. (signed September 13, 1993).
However, Alternatives 2, 3, 3a, and 5 require a Forest Plan amendment to achieve their prescribed fire objectives.
Nortla Loclasa Faee EIS
v
S. .mary
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAYfER ONE •• Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action
1
A. Introduction
1
B.~gementD~tioD
2
C. Desired CoDdltioDs
Stream Terraces
Breaklands
Colluvial Midslopes
Frost-Churned Uplands
Old Surfaces
Desired Aquatic Conditions Common to all LTAs
Desired Social Values Common to all LTAs
2
2
3
5
6
7
8
8
D. Summary ComparisoD or Existing aDd Desired Conditions
Vegetation
Aquatics
Social
10
10
10
10
E. Purpose and Need
Vegetative Management
Prescribed Fire
Timber Harvest
Stand Density Management
Control of Noxious Weeds
Aquatics Management
Watershed Restoration and Rehabilitation
Planting Riparian Areas
Social Values
Recreation and Access Management Strategy
Community Economics
11
11
11
11
12
12
14
14
14
14
14
15
F. Scope or the Analysis
16
G. Decisions to be Made
16
B. Anilability or Project Flies
16
CHAFfER TWO •• Alternatives Including the Proposed Action
17
A. Inte...... Scoping and Public Involvement
17
B. Identification or the Issues
Preliminary issues not identified by the public
Issues beyond the scope of the project decision
Issues Addressed by Forest Plan standards, guidelines, or law
Issues addressed by adopting mitigation measures or design standards
Issues addressed by measuring and comparing the effects between alternatives
Issues addressed by developing alternatives to the proposed action
17
Nortla Loclasa Face EIS
vii
17
18
19
21
23
24
c. Alternative Formulation
24
D. Alternatives Considered but EUmlDated from Detailed Study
E. Alternatives Considered In DetaU
Treatment Activities Common to all Action Alternatives
Stand Density Management
Control of Noxious Weeds
Watershed Restoration and Rehabilitation
Planting Riparian Areas
Mitigation Measures Common to all Action Alternatives
Monitoring
Altemative 1 (No Action)
Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)
Alternative 3
Altemative 3a (preferred Alternative)
Alternative 4
Alternative 5
26
27
27
27
28
28
29
30
32
33
35
37
39
41
43
43
F. Comparison orAlte.....tives
Comparison of the alternatives to the purpose
Comparison of the alternatives by issues
Comparison of Access Options by Issues
49
CHAPTER THREE •• Affected Environment
51
45
SI
A. Landtype Associations
Stream Terraces
Breaklands
Colluvial Midslopes
Frost Churned Uplands
Old Surfaces
51
51
52
53
53
53
B. Aquatic Conditions
Watersheds
Fish Creek
Pete King Creek
Canyon Creek
Deadman Creek
Bimerick Creek
Apgar, Glade, and Rye Patch Creeks
Lochsa River
Fisheries
Fisheries Habitat
Fish Creek
Pete King Creek
Canyon Creek
Deadman Creek
Bimerick Creek
Apgar, Glade, and Rye Patch Creeks
Nortll Loclasa F.~ EIS
54
54
55
56
56
57
57
58
60
61
61
63
64
65
66
67
viii
c. Biota
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•I
•
I
Thl'eatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Wildlife Species
Management Indicator Species
Elk Summer Range
Elk Winter Range
Vegetation
Age Oass Distributions
Stream Terraces
Brealdands
Colluvial Midslopes
Frost-Churned Uplands
Old SurfacesIRolling Hills
Dead Wood
Thl'eatened and Sensitive Plants
69
69
72
72
73
74
74
75
75
76
77
77
79
80
D. NODous Weeds
Weed Occurrence
Management Objectives
Ongoing Efforts
84
84
85
E. Loebsa Research Natural Area
86
F. North Lochsa Slope Roadless Area
Apparent Naturalness
Remoteness and Solitude
Special Features
Effect of Size and Shape on Wilderness Attributes
Manageability and Boundaries
86
85
87
87
87
87
87
G. Social Values
Recreational Opportunities
Recreational Values
Roads and Trails
Seasonal Use Patterns
Scenic Quality
American Indian Relations
Treaty Rights
Trust Responsibilities
Nez Perce Tribe
Heritage Resources
Lolo Trail System
Archaeological Sites
Community Economics
Local Zone of Influence
Community Stability
88
88
88
89
89
B. Fire aDd Air QuaUty
96
90
92
92
92
92
93
93
94
95
95
95
96
97
97
97
98
Legal Requirements
Airshed Characteristics
Historical Conditions
Existing Conditions
Sensitive Areas
Nortla Lodasa Face ElS
ix
CHAPTER FOUR •• Environmental Consequences
99
99
A. Aquatic Conditions
Watersheds
Fish and their Habitat
114
117
B. Biota
Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Wildlife Species
Management Indicator Species
Elk Habitat
Vegetation
Species Composition
Age Oass Distribution
Patch Size
Standing Dead and Woody Debris
Tree Density
Functions
Sensitive Plants
c. NoDous Weeds
117
120
122
124
124
124
127
128
128
129
129
133
133
135
136
136
Risks to Aquatic Resources
Risks to Wildlife
Risks to Plant Communities
Risks to Human Health
D. Lochsa Research Natural Area
139
E. North Lochsa Slope Roadless Area
Natural Integrity and Appearance
Remoteness and Solitude
Special Features
Size and Shape of Wildemess Attributes
Manageability and Boundaries
141
141
142
142
142
141
F. Social Values
Recreational Opportunities
Recreational Values
Road and Trail Opportunities
Seasonal Use Patterns
Bull Elk Vulnerability
Effects Associated with the Vegetative Treatments
Scenic Quality
Tribal Treaty Rights
Fishing
Hunting
Gathering Activities
Heritage Resources
Community Economics
Economic Effects
Estimated Economic Impacts
Predicted Stumpage and Present Net Value
~orth
Lochsa Face EIS
x
143
143
143
144
145
145
147
148
151
151
151
151
152
154
154
154
155
G. Fire Risk and Air QuaUty
157
160
H. Other Required Disclosures
CHAPTER FIVE •• List or Preparers
161
CHAPTER SIX •• Public Involvement
163
REFERENCES
INDEX
APPENDICES
A
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
Road and Trail Matrix and Monitoring Plan for Access Option 3
Stand Diagnosis
Site-Specific Forest Plan Amendment
North Lochsa Face Noxious Weed Table
Proposed Road Obliteration and Long-Term Maintenance
Summary of Habitat Type Groups and Forest Types by LTA
Structural Stage Crosswalk
Biological AssessmentlBiological Evaluation
WATBAL Description, BMPs, and PACFISH
Nortll Lodasa Faee EIS
xi
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
CHAPTER ONE
PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION
A. Introduction
In January 1995, a team of Forest and District specialists started the North Lochsa Face Landscape and Watershed
Assessment, which was a National Forest Management Act (NFMA) assessment that was to take a year to complete.
This was the second project on the Forest (White Sands was the first) using the new ecosystem management
philosophy, and getting such a large team to focus on this new science was difficult Progress was slow, and the team
was pushed to the limit in meeting ever-changing deadlines. It was May 1996, when the team completed the
assessmenL
The team was given two major objectives. The first was to prepare a scientific assessment of the ecological condition
of the North Lochsa Face area, focusing on structure, function, and composition. The second major objective was to
describe the social values associated with this piece of land, and integrate those values into future management of the
area. The assessment also provided an opportunity to modify interim PACFISH watershed guidelines. Copies of the
assessment are included in the project file.
From the assessment, a local interdisciplinary team (IDl) took over the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
phase of analyzing the North Lochsa Face area. This final environmental impact statement (EIS) documents the
analysis of the proposed actions that came out of the NEPA analysis. However, compared to some of the lengthy, very
technical documents produced by this agency, this document will attempt to be brief, easy to read, and non-technical,
while still providing enough information for the decision maker. Throughout the document there will be references
made to the project file, where technical data and supporting information are stored. So, let's begin with a brief
description of the area where actions are proposed.
The North Lochsa Face analysis area covers approximately 128,000 acres of mostly forested, steep mountains on the
Lochsa Ranger District of the ClealWater National Forest (CNF). It lies between Highway 12 and the Lolo Motorway
(Forest Road 500) just north of the small communities of Lowell and Syringa. Lewiston is 95 miles west of the area on
Highway 12; the Nez Perce Indian Reservation, headquartered in Lapwai, adjoins the Forest to the west; and Missoula
is 130 miles to the east. The Lochsa River, a designated Wild and Scenic River, rons alongside Highway 12. The
Lochsa District boundary and the Lolo Motorway fonn the north border of the analysis area. The Pete King Creek
drainage fonns the southwest boundary. Highway 12 and the Lochsa River form the south/southeast boundary up to
Fish Creek, and the remaining boundary is the eastern watershed divide of Fish Creek.
The area is relatively isolated and undeveloped. However, U.S. Highway 12, the only highway in central Idaho that
connects Washington and Montana, carries a great deal of traffic year-round; it is the primary route for trucks hauling
grain, logs and other products from Montana and the northern tier of states, as well as southern Canada, to the shipping
port of Lewiston. This route also provides the quickest crossing for passenger traffic from the Portland, Oregon, area to
points in the northern tier of states. Recreation traffic on this highway, especially in the summer, can be heavy.
Two small communities, Lowell and Syringa, lie at the southern tip of the analysis area. Both offer motels and a
service station for highway travelers and tourists. Within a 60 mile radius of the analysis area lie the towns of Kooskia,
Kamiah, Grangeville, Orofino, Pierce, Weippe, and Stites. All are primarily timber-dependent communities, whose
economies are directly affected by Forest Service management. The analysis area is within Idaho County, but any
activity in the analysis area could also affect those communities within adjacent Oeuwater and Lewis Counties. The
preceding maps show the location of the analysis area and its major watershed drainages.
Changes to Chapter One since the DEIS: Portions of the LTA desired conditions for vegetation and wildlife have
been modified; desired conditions common to all LTAs have been added for aquatics; the "gap condition" table has
been replaced with a summation; and restoring native species composition is now listed under timber hatvesL
h
Nortla lAc- Faft £IS
1
ClaaDter ODe
B. Management Direction
The North Lochsa Face analysis, like all other Forest analyses, is guided by the goals, objectives, standards, guidelines,
and management area direction of the Oearwater Forest Plan. Although consistent with Forest Plan direction, our basic
analysis process has been to detennine land capability using building blocks we call landtype associations (LTAs).
They are based on similarities in geomorphic process, geologic rock types, soil complexes, stream types, and vegetation
communities. It is possible that this process will set the groundwork for the Forest Plan revision, and that the current
management areas may be modified by applying the ecological concepts embodied in landtype associations.
A total of 15 LTAs (see attached map) have been identified for the North Lochsa Face area, and they are briefly
described in Chapter Three and in detail in the NFMA assessment (project file). Within each LTA are areas we call
"patebes". The size and shape of each patch are influenced by topographic features and natural disturbance events that
commonly occurred in the area. Such events include fire, insects and disease, floods, and high winds, with fire playing
a significant role in shaping and developing the vegetation within the analysis area. You will find the following terms
used throughout this document to describe the effects of fire disturbance on the dominant vegetation:
A stllnd-replllc~mmt fir~ or pateh-ktlull event causes most of the dominant above-ground vegetation (about 80%
or more of the dominant cover or biomass) to die.
An understory rue or pateh-nonkthal event results in most of the dominant vegetation surviving the fire.
A moderate fire or miud-~rityevent consists of individual fires alternating between low-intensity understory
fires and long-interval stand-replacing fires that produce two vegetation patterns. These patterns can look like a
fine-grained pattern of young and older trees or a mosaic pattern of alternating young and older vegetation patches
across the landscape.
C. Desired Conditions
Comparisons of existing conditions to desired conditions within each LTA and associated patches, directed the IDT to
propose treatments in those areas outside their nonnal range of variability. The following gives desired conditions for
vegetation, wildlife, and aquatic resources by landtype association group. The vegetation portion is organized to
discuss fire regimes and disturbances, patch sizes, forest types, stand densities, and dead wood. Stand densities are
measured with an index of relative density, called Stand Density Index (SOl). Maximum SDls range from 390 to 615,
depending on the tree species and the habitat type. Optimum growth occurs at between 35% and 65% of maximum
SOL A forest with a given density index could have many small trees, or fewer large trees. Either compositional mix
would have the same implications for growing conditions in the stand, and amount of competition between trees.
1. Stream Terraces (LTA lOA)
Vegetation and WlIdUfe: Unlike the other LTAs of North Lochsa Face, fire is not the major disturbance event,
with the average fire return interval being greater than 300 years. Major disturbances consist of windthrow and
floods. Water tables are normally high in this LTA, and flooding during runoff is common. The high water tables
and frequent flooding result in shallow root systems that also predispose trees to windthrow. This LTA is
typically found in canyon bottoms that are wide enough to minimize the influences of fire effects from the
adjoining lands.
This LTA typically supports the development of two distinct plant communities, those being large, long-lived
western redcedar forest and wet meadows. With either plant community, the most characteristic ecologic feature
is the long tenn stability of its climax vegetation. Abundant moisture promotes the decomposition of large dead
wood and precludes the rapid accumulation of large dead wood.
In the forested component, small trees are established following canopy opening events (windthrow or floods)
within the stand. Cedar typically dominates the mature and late-mature forest patches occupying 60-80% of the
landscape for this LTA. The wet meadows include a complex of herbaceous vegetation with spruce, subalpine fir
and other conifers occupying higher, drier land.
Nortll Lorha Fal¥ ElS
2
•I
•I
I
I
•
•I
•
•
•
•
-I
I
•I
•II
•II
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
--
Meadows generally develop in "frost pockets" where unusually cold air is trapped. Here, frost often occurs during
the summer growing season, killing or stunting young trees. The only trees that survive are frost resistant species,
such as spruce, lodgepole pine, and subalpine fir.
Although some sensitive plants and riparian dependent wildlife may inhabit this LTA, better habitat for these
species is found on the breakland LTAs. Lower Fish Creek and possibly lower Pete King Creek provide habitat
for harlequin ducks. Larger streams, such as mainstem Fish and Hungery Creeks, have moderate stream gradients
and dense shrubbery that are essential nesting and brood rearing for this species.
Management practices are intended to retain the stable characteristics of the plant communities by allowing only
minor timber salvage.
Aquatic Resources: Streams are characterized by gentle gradient, generally fish-bearing streams, providing
excellent fish-rearing habitat. This LTA, in association with most major tributaries from adjoining LTAs, contain
a majority of the steelbead and bull trout habitat in the area. Westslope cutthroat, are generally most abundant in
the higher reaches and smaller tributaries.
Sediment levels are within the natural range for these high energy streams. Windthrow and floods contribute to
large wood recruitment into these channels. Large organic debris functions to modify the hydrology of all but the
largest streams (lower Fish Creek). Streamside shade maintains water temperatures at the level desirable for fish
habitat.
The locations of roads and trails are minimal, and where they occur are designed to avoid adverse impacts to
meadows and stream terraces.
2. Breaklands (LTAs 2lA, 2IB, 2IC, 23A, 23B and 23C)
Vegetation and Wildlife: The historic presence of frequent fire disturbances on these LTAs limit the
development of dense, mature forest However, these LTAs do support the development of individual Douglasfir, ponderosa pine and western larch trees, which live beyond 150 years. Frequent fires also preclude significant
accumulation of large dead wood (standing and down). Large, old trees typically develop only on the southern
aspects.
These LTAs support most of the elk winter range within the North Lochsa Face area. Preferred browse species
are redstem ceanothus, scouler willow, mountain maple and seIVice berry. These species are adapted to the fire
disturbances associated with these LTAs and provide quality forage for approximately 20 years following fire.
In addition, these LTAs typically provide the best habitats for several sensitive species. These include the
flammulated owl, Coeur d'Alene salamander, bank monkeyflower, clustered lady's slipper, Constance's bittercress,
and Pacific dogwood.
LTAs 21A and 23A • These LTAs rarely go through stand replacement events and generally only in small
patches. The structure of the breaklands is uneven aged with old remnant trees, a mid-story canopy and
regeneration. As frequent fire passes through these LTAs, some small trees are killed, some new trees
become established, some mid-story trees are killed and occasional remnant trees die, and the cycle
continues as trees move into the next stage. The fire return interval is about 26 to 50 years for nonlethal to
mixed severity bums.
Forests typically appear with areas of large ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir, with more Douglas-fir and some
grand fir in the smaller size classes. The largest trees are 160 to 300 or more years old, over 21 inches in
diameter, and occupy 15 to 30 percent of the patch. Mature trees, 100 to 160 years old, occupy another 30 to
40 percent of the patch, and look much like the older trees. The remainder of the patch is a mixture of sizes
and ages of trees comprised of Douglas-fir, ponderosa pine, grand fir, and some western redcedar in moist
riparian areas. The SOl should range from 144 to 270 for a mixed ponderosa pine and Douglas-tir stand.
(
\
Nortla Lodasa Faft EIS
3
ClaapterOae
The accumulation of dead wood is relatively low, due to frequent fire, and averages 10 to 15 tons per acre,
mostly in material over six inches in diameter. There is little fluctuation in dead wood on site. Fires that
consume some of the dead material on the ground also kill a few more trees that begin the process of
breakdown and decomposition. Following disturbance, the minimum number of dead trees per acre to be
retained on the site for nutrient cycling and wildlife is expected to average 1 to 3 per acre over 21 inches in
diameter; and 5 to 10 trees, 9 to 21 inches in diameter.
Management practices are intended to mimic low intensity and mixed severity fire to 1) change the
composition, size, and number of smaller trees; and 2) reduce the accumulation of fuels and the potential for
these patches to support large, severe fires.
LTAs 21B and 23B • The fire return interval is approximately 50 to 100 years for mixed severity bums.
These bums create small openings where sera! species regenerate. Typical patch sizes average 10 to 30
acres, but may range up to a maximum of 200 acres bounded by topographic breaks or changes in moisture
regimes, such as ridges, riparian areas, seeps or hillside benches.
Forested patches are typically a mosaic of even and uneven-aged stands of Douglas-fir, western larch,
ponderosa pine, and grand fir, with scattered large, old trees of the same species, with the exception of grand
fir. Grand fir, along with western redcedar, can form pure stands in riparian areas and cooler aspects. The
SDI should range from 158 to 295 for a mixed species stand. Vegetation groups greater than 50 years old
often contain two or more age classes and at least two tree canopy levels. The overstory is primarily
composed of large Douglas-tir, western larch, and ponderosa pine, with an understory mainly of Douglas-fir
and grand fir as succession proceeds. Forested patches over 60 years old, are expected to comprise 40 to 70
percent of these LTAs.
Dead wood on this LTA varies a little more than that on the previous LTA. Standing dead wood is at its
highest level just after a disturbance, when a few large trees, and many small trees have been killed. As time
passes, many of those trees fall over, and contribute to the wood on the ground that is becoming a part of the
soil. Dead wood on the ground is at a low point immediately after a fire, because much of it is burned. The
accumulation of dead wood is moderate and averages 15 to 2S tons per acre. Following disturbance, whether
fire or harvest, the minimum number of dead trees per acre needed for nutrient cycling and wildlife habitat is
1 to 3 9ver 21 inches in diameter; and 5 to 10, 9 to 21 inches in diameter.
Management practices are intended to mimic mixed severity and patch-lethal fires by: 1) changing the
composition, size, and number of smaller trees; 2) reducing the accumulation of fuels; and 3) replacing the
patch at approximately historic disturbance intervals.
LTAs 21C aDd 23C • The fire return interval is approximately 75 to 150 years for lethal burns. Typical
patch sizes range from 200 to 500 acres and are bound on breaks in topography. Low intensity and mixedseverity fires are uncommon on these LTAs. Stand stocking levels are controlled by stem exclusion
processes, and SOls range from 155 to 289 for pure Douglas-fir stands.
Forested patches have closed canopies with most trees of the same size and age. They are generally moist
areas and are capable of supporting cedar. Douglas-fir is particularly susceptible to root rots and usually
does not live beyond 80 to 120 years. Competition between trees eventually leads to a shortage of moisture
or nutrients. When this happens, tree mortality from root rots and bark beetles can become epidemic within
patches. The rapid accumulation of standing and down dead wood under these conditions, eventually leads
to lethal fire. Because of the frequency and severity of fires here, late mature forest, with large trees,
occupies only 5 to 10 percent of the area. Forests over 60 years old, are expected to comprise 35 to 65
percent of these LTAs. The accumulation of dead wood is moderate over the fire interval and averages 20 to
30 tons per acre, mostly in larger material. Following disturbance, the minimum number of trees per acre to
be retained on the site for nutrient cycling and wildlife is expected to be an occasional large tree over 21
inches in diameter and 10 to 15 trees, 9 to 21 inches in diameter.
4
'I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Management practices are intended to mimic lethal fires by replacing the patch at approximately historic
disturbance intervals, or stem exclusion processes by thinning to appropriate stocking levels.
Aquatic Resources: These LTAs are characterized by steep gradient, generally small headwater and tributary
streams. Flushing sediment and periodic debris torrents are natural characteristics during run-off events on these
LTAs. Debris torrents from these LTAs contribute to large wood recruitment into downstream, fish bearing
streams.
Non-fish-bearing streams introduce cool water with low sediment loads into downstream fish-bearing streams.
Fish-bearing streams are shaded and cool, with little cobble embeddedness limiting fish habitat
3. Colluvial Midslopes (LTAs 61 and 63)
Vegetation and Wildlife: Topographically, these LTAs represent a transition between the gentle, old surfaces
and steep breaklands. They contain soil, water, and vegetation features found in both breaklands and old swfaces.
Soils are typically deeper than breaklands, but not as deep as on the old surfaces. Likewise, soil moisture during
the growing season is higher than on the breaklands, but DOt as high as the old surfaces. The land, water,
vegetation, and animal habitat features are variable throughout this landform.
The fire regime is one of mixed-severity tires on about a 75 to 150 year interval. Patch sizes are strongly
influenced by the fire on adjoining LTAs. Fires tend to be more frequent, mixed severity where adjoining
breaklands and less frequent, higher severity where adjoining old swfaces. Sizes are widely variable, ranging
from 10 to 200 acres.
A wide range of tree species grow well here. Species composition is a mixture of Douglas-fir, ponderosa pine,
and larch in young stands and grand fir and cedar are major components in older forests. However, the latemature forest is predominantly Douglas-fir and grand fir mixed with other large trees. Late-mature forest (over
160 years old) comprises 10 to 30 percent of these LTAs, and patches of mature forest occupy another 15 to 25
percent. The SDI should range from 170 to 315 for a mixed species stand.
As with breaklands, small trees are established between fire occurrences. With the wide range of conditions and
tree species, competition within and between tree species is quite variable. Mortality is most evident as younger
trees compete with aging Douglas-fir and grand fir. On cedar habitat types, Douglas-fir is particularly susceptible
to root rots and usually does not live past 80 to 120 years. Douglas-fir mortality from root rots and bark beetles
can become epidemic within patches.
The accumulation of standing and down dead wood under these conditions, leads to eventual mixed severity fire.
The frequency of these fires result in moderate amounts of dead wood, averaging 15 to 30 tons per acre.
Immediately after fires, there would be a high level of standing dead material, mostly in the smaller size classes,
but larger trees would also be killed in the higher fire severity portions. These trees would slowly fall over,
reducing the amount of standing dead material. As stem exclusion processes began "thinning" the forest, smaller
trees would succumb and the number of small diameter snags would increase. Occasional larger trees would die
due to disease and insects, or competition from a dense understory. Following disturbance, the minimum number
of trees per acre to be retained on the site for nutrient cycling and wildlife habitat is expected to be 1 to 5 large
trees, over 21 inches in diameter and 5 to 15 trees, 9 to 21 inches in diameter.
These LTAs are relatively unique in the North Lochsa Face area in that they do not appear to provide any known
unique or primary habitats for anyone species or group of species. Though these LTAs are unique in their
inherent variabilition of vegetation and ecological processes, they are none the less important to a wide range of
management indicator and threatened, endangered, or sensitive animals and plants.
Management practices are intended to retain this forest character which mimic the full range from low intensity to
lethal fires as well as natural thinning processes by: 1) limiting the accumulation of fuels; 2) changing the
composition, size, and number of smaller trees; and 3) replacing the patch at approximately historic disturbance
intervals.
Nortla LocIua Face EIS
5
ClaapterODe
Aquatle Resourees: This LTA has both fish-bearing and non-fish-bearing streams. They are transitional from
the "old surfaces" to the breaklands. Characteristics lie between the two. There are higher levels of sediment than
on breaklands, less than on old swfaces. They are less prone to debris torrents and landslides than the breaklands,
so are more stable than breaklands.
Cobble embeddedness in streams is within the average range for streams on this landform, about 35 percent on
belt series parent material, and 45 percent on batholith parent materials. Large organic debris is a key hydrologic
control, and is found in adequate numbers to provide that control.
Summer water temperatures are no higher than 13 degrees C., low enough to support spawning and rearing of
resident and anadromous salmonids.
4. Frost-Churned Uplands (LTAs 71B and 71C)
Vegetation aDd WUdDre: Occurring on gentle to moderately steep landforms at higher elevations, these LTAs
are cold areas with short growing seasons. Trees favored by these growing conditions include lodgepole pine,
subalpine fir, Engelmann spruce, western larch, high elevation Douglas-fir, mountain hemlock, and whitebark
pine. Trees greater than 21 inches in diameter are uncommon.
Historic fire disturbances on a 75 to 200 year interval, limited the amount of dense, mature forest beyond 200
years old. Harsh growing conditions retard forest growth and, thereby, slow the accumulation of fuels. Although
these LTAs are readily exposed to summer lightning, fires in all but the oldest patches are generally of low
intensity and do not spread. The amount of standing dead wood varies widely over time. Immediately following a
disturbance, there are many snags standing. These snags fall over in a relatively short time. The dead standing
trees recruited in the 30 to 75 years after a fire are fairly small. They are the result of natural thinning processes or
occasional insect or disease mortality.
Trees typically re-establish following mixed severity or lethal fires. Lodgepole pine between 80 and 110 years old
becomes readily susceptible to mountain pine beetle attack. When this occurs, tree mortality from insect attack
can become epidemic. The rapid accumulation of standing and down dead wood under these conditions, leads to
eventual lethal fire.
These LTAs typically provide the best habitats for the boreal owl, lynx, fisher and wolverine.
LTA 7lB • The fire return interval is approximately 75 to 150 years for lethal bums. Typical patch sizes
range from 100 to 500 acres and are bound on breaks in topography. Low intensity and mixed-severity
fires are uncommon.
Forested patches have a mixture of canopy closures, though most trees within a patch are of the same size
and age. The accumulation of dead wood, due to the frequency of mixed severity fire occurrence, and
difficult growing conditions is low and averages 10 to 2S tons per acre. Late mature forest, over 120 years
old, makes up only 5 to 10 percent of the LTA. Mature forest, 100 to 120 years old, makes up an additional
15 to 2S percent. 1be SOl for lodgepole pine should range from 183 to 341. For subalpine fir, the SOl
should range from 150 to 279.
Management practices are intended to mimic lethal fires by replacing the patch at approximately historic
disturbance intervals. This is the primary process that will allow whitebark pine to regenerate here.
Following disturbance, the minimum number of trees per acre to be retained on the site for nutrient cycling
and wildlife is expected to average 10 to 20 trees 9 to 21 inches in diameter.
LTA 71e • The fire return interval is approximately 100 to 200 years for patch lethal bums. Typical patch
sizes range from 500 to 1000 acres and are bound on breaks in topography. Low intensity and mixedseverity fires are uncommon.
Subalpine fir and Engelmann spruce are most common on moist sites. A tree unique to this LTA is the
mountain hemlock. Forested patches are even-aged, but of varying sizes, reflecting variation in species
growth rates. Relative SOls range from 163 to 303 for a mixed species stand.
6
CllaDtrr Oae
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
"I{II
The accumulation of dead wood, due to the frequency of mixed severity fire occurrence, is low to moderate
and averages 15 to 30 tons per acre. Late mature forest, over 120 years old, makes up only 5 to 10 percent
of the LTA. Mature forest, 100 to 120 years old, makes up an additional 15 to 2S percent.
Management practices are intended to mimic lethal fires by replacing the patch at approximately historic
disturbance intelVals. Following disturbance, the minimum number of trees per acre to be retained on the
site for nutrient cycling and wildlife is expected to average 10 to 25 trees, 9 to 21 inches in diameter, with
an occasional tree over 21 inches.
Aquatic Resources: These LTAs are characterized by steep gradient, generally small headwater and tributary
streams. Instream sediment levels are low. Most streams are not fish-bearing, the exception may be upper Fish
Creek.
5. Old Surfaces (LTAs 8lA, 81B, 83A and 84A)
Vegetadon and Wildlife: Characterized by large patches of mature forest, these LTAs have a fire return interval
of approximately 150 to 300 years for lethal bums. Typical patch sizes are large and can exceed 1000 acres.
Large dead wood accumulates on these moist, cool sites, but the moisture limits tire risk, except in the driest of
times.
Trees are established following both fire occurrences and canopy opening events (windthrow or isolated tree
mortality). Cedar and .grand fir typically dominate mature and late-mature forest patches. Douglas-fir, western
larch, western white pine, lodgepole pine, Engelmann spruce, cedar, and grand fir seed into openings. The
Douglas-fir is relatively short-lived due to root rot and bark beetle attacks. The other species are longer lived, and
will persist into the mature and late-mature forests.
These LTAs typically provide the best summer habitat for elk, due to easy access to water, lush forage, gentle
terrain and dense cover. Lynx and fisher typically den here.
In addition, these LTAs typically provide the best habitats for several sensitive plant species. These include deer
fern, Dasynotus, evergreen kittentail and Oregon bluebell.
LTAs 8lA, 83A and 84A • The fire regime here is one of very infrequent, lethal fires on a 150 to 300 year
interval. In addition, non-lethal underbuming occurred in small isolated patches on a 50 to 150 year intelVal.
This type of fire also characterized the edges of the more severe bums, and riparian areas.
These LTAs typically support extensive patches of large cedar and grand fir that live beyond 160 to 300
years of age. Western white pine, though on the edge of its range, is more common here than on other
LTAs. The late-mature forest is predominantly these three species. Patches of trees older than 160 years are
expected to dominate 20 to 40 percent of these LTAs, and patches of mature forest, 100 to 160 years old, are
expected to occupy another 20 to 35 percenL The SDI range from 183 to 340 for a mixed species stand.
The accumulation of dead wood is moderate and averages 20 to 40 tons per acre. Following a lethal fire,
there would be very high· numbers of standing dead trees. These would be in all size classes. Over time, the
grand fir snags would decay and fall over. Cedar and white pine snags would stand longer. As the stand
regrew, and trees began to compete with each other for growing space. Some of the smaller trees would die
and provide small snags. After about 80 years, disease levels would begin increasing, and some of these
older trees would die in small clumps. For the next 80 to 120 years, this would continue to be the pattern.
Dead wood on the ground would be at its lowest level after a fire, gradually increasing to the 20 to 40 tons
per acre level.
Management practices are intended to mimic lethal fires and natural thinning processes by: 1) changing the
composition, size, and number of smaller trees; 2) replacing the patch at approximately historic disturbance
intervals; and 3) maintaining historic patch sizes of about 1000 acres. Following disturbance, the minimum
number of dead trees to be retained on the site for nutrient cycling and wildlife habitat is expected to be 2 to
4 per acre, over 21 inches in diameter, and 6 to 10 trees, 9 to 21 inches in diameter.
Nortll Lodasa Faee EIS
7
ClaapterOae
LTA 8iB • The tire regime on this LTA is one of extremely infrequent (over 300 years), lethal tires. There
are occasional non-lethal, low-severity fires, but high moisture conditions contribute to rapid decay of dead
wood, and limit fire effects between the stand-replacing events.
These LTAs typically support the development patches of mixed conifers that live beyond 160 years, with
grand fir, Douglas-fir, spruce, and larch being the most common. Permanent alder glades occupy
approximately 15 percent of this L T A, and patches of trees older than 160 years are expected to dominate 20
to 40 percent Patches of mature fore~ 100 to 160 years old, are expected to occupy another 20 to 35
percent 1be SDI range from 140 to 260, including the 15 percent of the area that is in alder glades.
The accumulation of dead wood is moderate and averages 15 to 30 tons per acre, much in an advanced state
of decay. Standing wood dynamics are similar to those on the 81A, 83A, and 84A landtype associations.
Following disturbance, the minimum number of trees per acre to be retained on the site for nutrient cycling
and wildlife is expected to be 2 to 4 dead trees, over 21 inches in diameter and 6 to 10 trees, 9 to 21 inches in
diameter.
Management practices are intended to mimic lethal fires and natural thinning processes by: 1) changing the
composition, size, and number of smaller trees; 2) replacing the patch at approximately historic disturbance
intervals; and 3) maintaining historic patch sizes.
Aquatic Resourees: These LTAs are characterized by gentle gradient, generally small headwater and tributary
streams. These are fish-bearing streams, providing very important rearing and spawning habitat Westslope
cutthroat trout occur in most streams large enough to support fish.
Streams have naturally high levels of· instream sediment, leaving a smaller "window" of additional sediment
production without adversely affecting fish habitat.
Summer water temperatures are DO higher than 13 degrees C., low enough to support spawning and rearing of
resident and anadromous salmonids.
6. Desired Aquatic Conditions Common to all LTAs.
Roads and trails are designed and maintained to the highest standard.
Aquatic systems are not negatively affected by human induced management actions. Instead, any effects from
management activities will improve or maintain aquatic systems and their associated riparian areas, including
improvements of instream large wood, sediment, peak flows, and temperature.
Improvements in aquatic habitat are reflected by and increase in indicator species populations. In most of the
streams within the analysis area, cutthroat trout and steelhead are considered indicator species.
7. Desired Sodal Values Common to all LTAs
Social values, including recreational opportunities, visual quality, treaty rights of the Nez Perce Tribe, heritage
resources, and community economics, transcend all LTA boundaries. The following identifies desired conditions
for each of these across the landscape.
Recreational Opportunities: Within the Highway 12 corridor, abundant opportunities exist for individuals and
families to experience highly developed campgrounds and picnic areas.
Outside the Highway 12 corridor, abundant opportunities exist for individuals and families to recreate, fish, hunt,
gather firewood and berries, camp without fees, and experience independence and self-reliability.
Norllt
I~"" F~
EIS
8
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Within the landscape, opportunities exist for both individuals and families to choose between recreating in a
motorized or non-motorized setting. Motorized recreation is emphasized primarily in the Pete King Creek
drainage, and to a lesser degree in the Canyon and Deadman Creek drainages, and non-motorized recreation is
emphasized primarily in the northern portion of the landscape, including the Hungery, Willow, and Fish Creek
drainages.
Large, established dispersed base camps with occasional primitive improvements are found along the Lola
Motorway, a major historic and scenic ridgetop route.
End of road camps are maintained as important access points for people using the interior portions of the
landscape.
End of road and dispersed camping areas are maintained by users to meet a "Leave No Trace" standard.
Trails provide primary access corridors, linking the roaded fringe to the roadless areas, and are well maintained to
provide resource protection and user safety.
There exists a mix of motorized and non-motorized trail opportunities that are consistent with resource protection
goals for soils, fish, and wildlife.
Trails offer a range of challenge for non-motorized and motorized users.
Trail users primarily use designated routes for their travel and avoid pioneering new trail surfaces that could
damage the resource.
Winter sport opportunities exist for motorized and non-motorized snow travel in areas appropriate for their use.
..
-..
-..
..
•..
..
1
\
Road and trail users practice "Tread Lightly" and "Leave No Trace" techniques.
Visual Quality: Views into the streams and of the riparian vegetation on the adjacent stream terraces are the
visual focal points for most visitors.
Meadow areas 'provide wildlife viewing opportunities.
Views from the highway and within the landscape exhibit the full range of succession from open brushfields to
closed canopy coniferous forest.
Natural vistas are important, especially along the Lolo Trail.
Treaty Rights
or
the Nez Perce Tribe: The restoration of ecological processes, including the restoration of
aquatic and riparian habitats, maintain or enhance the abundance and distribution of plants and animals important
to the Tribe, especially in those places with social and traditional significance.
Heritage Resources: The numerous pre-European settlement sites along the river corridor are protected. The
historic, overlapping trail corridors of the Lewis and Clark, Nee-Mee-Poo, Buffalo, and Bird-Truax Trails are
maintained to hold their historic and cultural significance, while providing primitive to semi-primitive nonmotorized visitor experiences. Other heritage resources of historic value are given full protection.
The historic Lola Motorway continues to provide a semi-primitive, motorized experience, and interpretive sites
are developed as time and funding allow.
Community Economics: Traditional lifestyles are preserved within the local communities, with proposed timber
harvest activities producing direct or indirect economic effects that maintain or minimally increase current
employment and/or income levels. Although, there are some conversion opportunities from timber dependent
economies to economies supported by growing tourism and recreational opportunities. There is a high level of
community pride and a strong sense of association between communities.
J
Nortla Lodasa Face ElS
9
CIa.pler Olle
D. Summary Comparison of Existing and Desired Conditions
When one compares existing conditions to the desired conditions described above, differences or condition gaps
become apparent The DEIS contained a "condition gap" table by major drainage. What follows is a summation of that
table broken down by vegetative, aquatic, and social conditions:
1. Vegetation
Except for in the Canyon and Deadman Creek drainages, the younger age-classes are above the desired range of
distribution within most of the North Lochsa Face area. The older age classes are above their desired range of
distribution within the Canyon and Deadman Creek drainages, but are very limited elsewhere.
Shade tolerant species have become a dominant forest type, especially on the breaklands, to the exclusion of seral
species, which is an unnatural condition due to fire exclusion.
Tree stocking levels are high due to the exclusion of fire.
Off-site tree species in the Bimerick area are rapidly declining.
Noxious weeds are spreading along roads, trails, and in disturbed areas.
2. Aquatics
Stream temperatures in all major drainages are higher than State water quality standards, and large organic debris
is low in some areas.
Stream sediment and cobble embeddedness in all major drainages are higher than desired.
•
•
•
•II
•
•
•
•'.
-•
•
...
Much of the riparian zones along Pete King Creek and Fish Creek have not reforested following the large
wildfires during the early part of the century.
3. Social'
User pioneered trails are beginning to access primitive, non-motorized areas.
There are limited motorized loop opportunities during the summer for trailbike riding.
Most trails are in varying need of clearing, tread stabilization and/or relocation, and installation of drainage
structures.
There is limited opportunity for motorized handicapped hunting.
Large group camping sites along open roads are limited, as are sma]] group dispersed campsites available via
OHV access.
-NortJa LocIIsa Face £IS
•
•
E. Purpose and Need
After assessing the ecological condition of the North Lochsa Face area, our first objective of the NFMA assessment, we
developed management proposals aimed at starting the move from an existing condition to a desired condition.
Proposed actions were formulated using the best scientific knowledge at the time and were free of social and economic
screens. Since then, we have had the opportunity to reassess some of the data, incorporate public input, and conduct
extensive field reviews of the proposals. This has resulted in several revisions and the elimination of some actions from
further consideration. (The rationale for elimination is explained in Chapter Two.) The purpose and need for each
action are grouped by vegetative management, aquatics management, and social values, and are based upon the analysis
documented in the NFMA assessmenL The following describes each proposed action, followed by its purpose and
Deed. All actions are proposed to be implemented over the next five years.
1. Vegetative Management
Prescribed Fire:
Approximately 6,130 acres of prescribed fire (mixed-severity) are proposed within the
FishIHungery Creeks and Face drainages. Also being proposed are approximately 6,510 acres of potential
understory burns throughout the analysis area. Should lightning strikes occur in desirable areas, prescribed
natural fire may be considered after completion of a fire management plan. In an effort to balance
suppression costs with resource values, a Forest Plan amendment has been proposed to delete the wildfire
acre limitations in certain management areas having a primary resource emphasis other than timber.
Purpose: To use prescribed fire to maintain healthy ecosystems; and to reduce the risk of catastrophic wildland
fires.
Need: Historically, the breaklands have had low to moderately severe fires every 26 to SO years. Frequent fires
maintained a very diverse structure and composition, keeping stands open and allowing Douglas-fir, western larch,
and to a lesser extent ponderosa pine to dominate a stand and regenerate. Over 60 years of fire suppression have
caused the seral species to become less dominant in the overstory and replaced by uniform stands of trees with
dense understories of western redcedar, grand fir, subalpine fir, and Douglas-fir. Under these conditions, the risk
of a large catastrophic fire occurring in the breaklands is high. This risk is highest in Rye Patch Creek, lower
Canyon Creek, Apgar Creek, and Glade Creek. Understory bums will help perpetuate the types of stand
composition and structure that naturally occurred when fire was an active ecological process on the landscape.
Timber Harvest:
Proposed timber harvest consists of approximately 460 acres near Mex Mountain in the
Fish Creek drainage, 2,210 acres in the Canyon and Deadman Creek drainages, 2,610 acres in the Pete King
drainage, and 3,740 acres in the Face drainages (includes approximately 2,250 acres of off-site plantations within
the Bimerick Creek drainage). The primary type of treatments proposed are regeneration harvests, commercial
thinnings, clearcutting of the off-site trees, and salvage harvesting. Local seed sources would be used to replant
the Bimerick sites with genetically adapted seral species.
Road activities proposed for access consist of 1.1 miles of permanent road construction along a ridge and
approxiinately 12.9 miles of road reconstruction (curve widening, realignment, surfacing, and installation of
drainage structures). Nine temporary roads (approx. 0.5 mile each) would be constructed for access and
obliterated (returned to contour) after use. About 25% of the total area proposed for harvest would require
helicopter yarding. The remaining area would be logged along existing road systems using conventional systems
(skyline and tractor yarding).
Purpose: To reduce stand densities, change species composition, and achieve age class/size distribution and
structure patterns to desired levels; to reduce the risk of wildfire; to reduce bum intensities on the breaklands; to
better utilize these sites by replacing off-site tree species with appropriate stock; and to prevent the contamination
of the local gene pool, which could affect the species ability to adapt and thrive; and to salvage dead, dying, and
high risk trees; and to improve Forest health.
No"" Lodasa Face £IS
11
Need: Many years of fire suppression have allowed a majority of the timbered stands to have basal areas higher
than the normal range of variability. Increased stand densities and changes in species composition, combined with
the drought conditions of recent years, have stressed the trees, making them more susceptible to attack by bark
beetles, root rots, and other pests. As the incidence of insects and disease has increased, higher fuel loads have
resulted, increasing the risk of higher intensity fires. Timber harvest can be used to reduce the stand densities on
the breaklands, which would allow more favorable conditions for proposed prescribed burning.
After the 1934 fire, the Bimerick Creek drainage and Boundary Peak areas were planted with ponderosa pine,
Douglas-fir, and spruce by the Civilian Conservation Corps. Not only were some of the trees planted in unnatural
sites, the trees seedlings came from distant sources, including the Bitterroot, Cabinet, Chelan, and Deschutes
National Forests. Recent research has shown that these species are genetically adapted to specific elevations and
geographic areas. This stock was not matched to the planting sites with those criteria. As a result, these trees
exhibit poor form and are slower growing than those from local seed sources. Also, they are now falling victim to
diseases (particularly Diplodia blight) that would normally not affect trees of this age. Root rots, blights, needle
casts, and insect infestations have all been noted. As these trees contribute to the gene pool, they put future
generations at risk for increased levels of insects and diseases.
Many stands along open roads are experiencing declining growth rates resulting from age, insects, disease, and
overcrowding. Approximately 23 miles of open roads within this analysis area have dead and dying stands along
them, plus, recent aerial swveys have detected insect and disease damage in much of the analysis area. These
stands need to be salvaged or regenerated to improve productivity, reduce attack by insects and disease, and utilize
volumes usually lost to mortality.
Stand Density Management: Approximately 1,290 acres of stands having more than 1,000 trees per acre,
less than 7" diameter breast height, are proposed to be thinned back to 400-500 trees per acre, using chainsaws as
a method of treatment. These stands are mostly within the Pete King Creek and Canyon Creek drainages.
Purpose: To reduce the number of trees per acre in overstocked stands; and where desired, to reduce the density
of tolerant species in favor of the seral species.
Need: High stocking levels, especially on the drier LTAs, have lead to limited availability of water and nutrients
for individual trees, predisposing them to insect and disease problems and increased fire risk. Existing shadetolerant species are more sensitive to water deficits, whereas, moderately stocked stands having a high percentage
of seral species are more resilient when faced with water deficits, insects, diseases, or fire.
Control of Noxious Weeds: Noxious weeds are those plants that have been designated by federal, state, or
county officials as such. In Weeds o/the West by Whitson et al.(1992) a weed is defined as, " A plant that
interferes with management objectives for a given area of land at a given point in time." The Idaho Noxious
Weed Law defines a "noxious weed" as any exotic plant species that is established or that may be introduced in
the State which may render land unsuitable for agriculture, forestry, livestock, wildlife, or other beneficial uses
and is further designated as either a State-wide or County-wide noxious weed (Idaho Code 24 chapter 22).
Primary concerns are generally expressed as losses in commodity yield or interferences of land use. However,
impacts of these invasive non-native plants to ecosystem function and health are becoming increasingly important.
In March of 1995, the Clearwater Basin Weed Coordinating Committee was fonned. This Committee is a multiagency working group, whose purpose is to develop consistent management objectives for weed species known to
occur within the Clearwater River Basin and develop preventative measures for reducing the threat of invasion by
new non-native plant species. The role of the Clearwater National Forest, as an active participant, is to follow
through with weed management as agreed upon by the Committee within constraints set by federal policies.
It is proposed to implement weed management objectives as designated by the Clearwater Basin Weed
Coordinating Committee through the use of an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) approach to weed control
within the project area. Under an IPM approach, all control methods are available. The following management
techniques will be considered on specific sites and plant species:
Nortla Locbsa Face EIS
12
•
•
•
•
PhysicaJIMecbaDical: Hand grubbing, mowing, tilling and burning are common practices. Treatment must
take place before seed production, and mowing or tilling will need to be repeated during the growing season.
Chemical: Herbicides are an effective and efficient tool for controlling noxious weeds and are an important
method of treatment when eradication is the management objective. It is critical to follow all label
instructions and safety precautions when using herbicides.
Biological: This is the deliberate introduction and establishment of natural enemies to reduce the target
plants competitive or reproductive capacities. Predatory insects are commonly released against noxious
weeds. Pathogens are increasingly used as are sheep and goats depending on the specific weed species.
Biological control is a slow process, often requiring ten to twenty years to be effective. Its purpose is not
eradication but a reduction in weed density and rates of spread.
Purpose: To eradicate new invaders (a weed species previously not known to occur within the project area); to
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
..
reduce the extent and density of established noxious weeds; to implement the most economical, effective weed
control methods for the target weed; and to implement an integrated management system using all appropriate
available methods.
Need: Invasive nonnative plants are rapidly establishing on arid and semiarid grasslands, roadsides, recreational
sites and semiarid wildlands within the Columbia Basin. According to the recent scientific assessment of the
Interior Columbia Basin, invading weeds can alter ecosystem processes, including productivity, decomposition,
hydrology, nutrient cycling, and natural disturbance patterns such as frequency and intensity of wildfires (Quigley
and Arbelbide 1997). Changes in these processes can result in displacement of native plant species, impacting
wildlife, recreation, and scenic values. The spread of weeds can be primarily attributed to human activities: roads
and trails act as transportation corridors; the use of contaminated livestock feed; contaminated seed sources used
in revegetation practices; and ineffective revegetation practices on disturbed lands. Wildlife and birds also
contribute to the spread of non-native plants.
On this Forest, travel-ways (roads and trails) are the main seed depositories and transportation corridors for
invasive/non-native plant species. Given the nature of use of the travel-ways within the analysis area, it would be
safe to assume that all roads and trails hav~ at least one invasive/non native weed species established on them.
Surveys conducted along U.S. Highway 12 documented Spotted knapweed (CentlJurea maculosa) present
continually from Kooskia to Lolo Pass, with scattered patches of Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), Meadow
hawkweed (Hieracium pretense), Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius), Common cropina (Crupina vulgaris),
StJohnswort (Hypericum perforatum), Dalmation toadflax (LinariIJ genistifoliIJ ssp. dalmatica), Field bindweed
(Convolvulus arvensis), and Scotch thistle (Onopordum acanthium). It should be noted that the Idaho Department
of Transportation currently manages noxious weeds along the Highway 12 corridor. Also documented were two
potential invaders, Sulfur cinquefoil (potentilla recta) and Perennial peavine (Lathyrus lati/olius). Sulfur
cinquefoil is the only species present that is known to persist under a forested canopy. It is not yet a listed
Noxious Weed species in Idaho, but is considered a serious threat to big game winter range habitaL
In 1995, FS Road 101 was surveyed from U.S. Highway 12 to Mex Mountain. This survey revealed Spotted
knapweed present almost continually on both sides of the road as well as scattered infestations of Dalmation
toadflax, Canada thistle, Perennial peavine, SL Johnswort and Orange hawkweed (Hieracium aurantilJcum).
Roads 417, 514, 455 and 418 were also traveled during this survey. Spotted Knapweed, Orange Hawkweed and
Canada thistle were found on these roads.
Nortla Lodasa Faee EIS
13
C"pterOae
2. Aquatics Management
Watershed Restoration and Rehabilitation: Of all the watersheds within the analysis area, Pete King
has had the greatest amount of mass wasting. Approximately 64 miles of roads in Pete King, 23 miles in
CanyonlDeadman, 2 mile in upper Fish Creek, and 6 miles of roads in the river face drainages are proposed for
some type of obliteration. Another 29 miles of roads in Pete King, 18 miles in Canyon/Deadman, 5 miles in upper
Fish Creek, and 7 miles of roads in the river face drainages are proposed for long-term maintenance.
For the purpose of assuring floodplain/stream channel integrity, four existing sediment traps in the Pete King
drainage would be removed, with the sites restored to approximate natural channel cross-section conditions.
Also, fish structures, consisting of log or rock weirs, root wad placement, or cut bank stabilization measures,
would be placed in Pete King, Canyon, and Deadman Creeks to provide habitat for fish.
Purpose: To promote restoration of impacted watersheds by reducing the risk of sediment entering live streams,
and by encouraging the natural flushing of instream sediments.
Need: The analysis area is composed of relatively managed watersheds, with the exceptions of PisbIHungery
Creeks and some of the face watersheds. Mass wasting, such as debris torrents associated with channels, increased
substantially after the large fire in 1934. Large landslide events, mostly related to roads, occurred in the 1970s,
1987, and 1996. The 1996 event was due to higher than normal rainfall and saturated soils. (Further information
can be obtained by referencing the Assessment of 1995-96 Floods and Landslides on the Clearwater Natio1Ul1
Forest, Part 1 Landslide Assessment, December 1997.) These events have affected fish habitat productivity.
Except for FisbIHungery Creeks, the major drainages are all above desired conditions for sediment and are in need
of restoration and rehabilitation.
Planting Riparian Areas: Approximately 450 acres, consisting of a strip 300 feet wide, 6 miles long on
both sides of Fish Creek, are proposed to be interplanted with fast growing deciduous trees (i.e. cottonwoods).
Approximately 150 acres, consisting of a similar strip along 2 miles of Pete King Creek, are proposed to be fullplanted with cedar, grand fir, white pine, and deciduous tree species.
Purpose: To restore streamside vegetation to promote the re-establishment and role of large wood in providing
shade, channel stability, and fish habitat diversity.
Need: The stream terraces within the Pete King and Fish Creek drainages would typically have a high percentage
of large mature trees. However, only remnants remain due to the 1934 fire that overran these areas. With shade
being limited, stream temperatures in both Pete King Creek and Fish Creek are currently above water quality
standards. The re-establishment of shade providing trees is needed to reduce stream temperatures to desired
levels.
3. Social Values
Our second objective of the NFMA assessment was to describe the social values associated with North Lochsa
Pace and integrate them into its management. In doing so, we have developed a recreation and access
management strategy and have proposed timber harvest opportunities aimed at supporting the economic base of
local communities.
Recreation and Access Management Strategy:
This strategy was the first proposal to come out of the
NFMA assessment. It takes a look at road and trail access on a landscape level. Our assessment incorporated
many of the social goals and observations documented in the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management
Project (ICBEMP). Using social interviews, we identified that many recreational users of the Lolo Trail corridor
and its adjacent landscape have a "growing appreciation of intangible spiritual, cultural, and individual meanings"
associated with this landscape. By understanding the importance of this appreciation, the assessment attempted to
manage for "places with definable values" as stated in the ICBEMP.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
No"" Loc" F~ EIS
14
Claapler Oae
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Improvements in the quality of recreational experiences on mads and trails would be accomplished primarily through:
(1) better maintenance of trail facilities; (2) relocation and/or reconstruction of problem trail stretches; (3) better road
and trail signing and information; (4) development of riding "loop" opportunities; and (5) management to provide
opportunities that fit a variety of user's expectations within the capability of the landscape.
The proposal stratifies the landscape into three zones (A, B, and C) of motorized and non-motorized recreational use.
The delineation of the zones is based on social value considerations combined with the suitability of the land to
support different recreational experiences. Site-specific motorized and non-motorized road and trail opportunities
are described under Access Option 2 in Appendix A. What follows is a brief description of each zone:
Recreational Access ManagemeDt ZoDe A encompasses the Willow, Hungery and Fish Creek drainages.
Recreational and access opportunities emphasize the maintenance of a primitive to semi-primitive, nonmotorized setting. Access management supports the historic and wildlife values found in the area. The
primary emphasis for this zone is a non-motorized opportunity focused on a mainline trail system. Existing
motorized use of trails would no longer be allowed within this zone.
Recreational Acc:ess Management Zone B encompasses the Deadman, Bimerick and portions of the Fish
and Lochsa Face drainages. This zone also includes the Lolo Motorway (Forest Road 500) corridor.
Recreational and access opportunities emphasize the maintenance of a semi-primitive, limited motorized
setting. Access management improves big-game security during hunting season, and places an emphasis on
retaining year-round accessibility by all motorized vehicles on the forest road system into the area.
Recreational Acc:ess ManagemeDt Zone C encompasses the Pete King, Canyon, Glade, Apgar, Rye Patch,
and portions of the Deadman and Lochsa Face drainages. This zone is the most lOaded and accessible area
in the North Lochsa Face landscape. Recreational and access opportunities emphasize motorized
experiences. Access management supports the availability of motorized opportunity in addition to
improving big-game security during hunting season. The primary emphasis is a motorized opportunity
where motorized use is on designated roads and trails. However, limited, non-motorized opportunities
would still exist in both summer and fall use seasons.
Purpose: To continue to provide for recreation use and associated access on National Forest roads and trails in
the North Loc~sa Face area while protecting natural resource values associated with landforms, habitat, wildlife
and fish species; and to maintain the mix of recreation opportunities near the existing condition while improving
the quality of the experiences for motorized and non-motorized users.
Need: Many roads and trails in the area were not designed to accommodate the increasing recreational traffic.
There is a need to continue providing recreation opportunities which involve a mix of motorized and nonmotorized use (hiking, stock, trailbike, OHV, and winter sport use, including snow machines and cross-country
skiing). Loop routes also need to be emphasized along with access to popular end-of-road camps and dispersed
campsites.
Community Economics:
The local communities influenced by proposed activities in the North Lochsa Face
area are Lowell, Syringa, Kooskia, Stites, Kamiah, Grangeville, Pierce, Weippe, and Orofino. Although there has
been some economic diversification due to expanding recreational opportunities, most of these communities
remain dependent on the harvest of timber for economic survival. The economic benefit to local communities
would be that derived from the implementation of the timber harvest proposals.
Purpose: To provide a supply of timber for logging-dependent communities.
Need: Historically, logging has been the primary means of support and a way of life for local community
residents. Most communities were hit hard by the timber shortages of the 1980s, and there has been some
movement towards economic diversification. However, logging still plays a significant role in the area, and the
timber harvest proposed under vegetative management would benefit those people who work in the mills and
wood products industry.
No.... LoeIaJa Face £IS
15
C"pterOae
•
I
F. Scope of the Analysis
The physical bounds of this analysis are the North Lochsa Face analysis area, although, the geographical extent of
some resource boundaries (i.e. certain wildlife home range sizes) extend beyond the analysis area. The Council on
Environmental Quality regulation implementing NEPA requires that Federal agencies consider three types of
actions to determine the scope of an EIS (40 CFR 1508.25).
1. CoDDected Actions are those actions that are closely related. Actions are connected if they automatically
trigger other actions which may require NEPA analysis; if they cannot or will not proceed unless other actions are
taken previously or simultaneously; and if they are interdependent parts of a larger action and depend on the larger
action for justification. The proposed vegetative, aquatic, and social actions are not connected actions, since they
are not dependent upon each other or interdependent parts of a larger action.
2. Cumaladve Actions include past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions that may have cumulative
significant impacts when considered along with the proposed action. A cumulative effects analysis was conducted
for the resources, ecosystems, and human communities of concern that could be affected by the proposed action or
altemative actions. The analysis considered geographic boundaries of the effects; time frames (determining how
far into the future to analyze cumulative effects); and past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions.
Cumulative effects are summarized in O1apter Four.
3. Similar Actions are those which, when viewed with other reasonably foreseeable proposed actions, have
similarities that provide a basis for evaluating their environmental consequences together, but are not necessarily
connected. The proposed vegetative, aquatic, and social actions could be considered similar actions due to their
common timing and geography.
In the context of administrative scope, this analysis: (a) is limited to the vegetative, aquatic, and social proposed
actions; (b) is not a general management plan for the North Lochsa Face area; and (c) is the final site specific NEPA
documentation, and not a programmatic analysis.
G. Decisions to be Made
The Responsible' Officials for this EIS are the Forest Supervisor and the District Ranger. The Forest Supervisor will
make a decision concerning vegetative and aquatic management, and the District Ranger will decide the recreation and
access management strategy. Each decision will be documented in a separate Record of Decision. Their decisions are:
1. Whether or not to select an action or mix of actions to improve the ecological condition of the North Lochsa
Face area and best meet the social values associated with this piece of land. If implementation of an action
altemative is deferred, no other decisions are necessary.
2. If an action is selected, what mitigation measures, management requirements, Forest Plan amendments, and
monitoring are needed to implement ecosystem management on the North Lochsa Face landscape?
H. Availability of Project Files
An important consideration in preparation of this EIS has been the reduction of paperwork as specified in 40 CFR
1500.4. In general, the objective is to furnish enough site-specific information to demonstrate a reasoned consideration
of the environmental impacts of the alternatives and how these impacts can be mitigated. More detailed information is
in the project file in the District planning records and is available for public inspection.
The reader may want to refer to the Clearwater Forest Plan and EIS. This Final EIS is "tiered" to the Forest Plan EIS
and Record of Decision, as encouraged in 40 CFR 1502.20. Copies of the Forest Plan, Forest Plan EIS, and Record of
Decision are available at libraries in the Clearwater National Forest locale and at the Forest Supervisor and Ranger
District offices.
Nortla I.AM!.... Faee £IS
16
I
CHAPTER TWO
ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING THE PROPOSED ACTION
This chapter gets to the "heart" of the analysis and contains (A) internal scoping and public involvement; (B)
identification of the issues; (C) a discussion of alternative formulation; (0) a listing of the alternatives eliminated from
detailed study; (E) a discussion of the proposed action and each alternative considered in detail; and (F) a comparison of
the alternatives as they relate to the purpose and issues.
As defined in 40 CFR 1502.14 and 1502.16, Chapters Two and Four of an EIS are closely related. While most of the
comparisons are done in Chapter Two, both chapters display the environmental impacts of each alternative. In order to
avoid repetition in this document, the environmental impacts of the alternatives and mitigation of these impacts are
summarized and compared in this chapter. Discussions of the scientific and analytic basis for the comparison and the
mitigation are found in Chapter Four.
Chan,ss to ChapUT Two sines the DEIS: In response to public comments, Alternative 3a has been developed that
includes eight of the temporary roads and associated harvest units listed under Alternative 2, plus, drops all of the
prescribed bums, except for underburning, in the Fish Creek drainage. Trail reconstruction along Boundary Peak Trail
118, Fish Creek Trail 224, and Ant Hill Trail 225 has been dropped from Access Option 3 in order to maintain
consistent interpretation of the 1993 Forest Plan lawsuit settlement agreement.
A. Internal Scoping and Public Involvement
The NEPA scoping process (40 CPR 1501.7) was used to find out what might be bothering you (issues) about proposed
management of this area and to identify the significant issues related to the proposed action. Because of the potential
for significant environmental effects, an EIS has been prepared [36 CFR 1502.3 and 36 CFR 1508.27(bX4)].
~
~
•
•III
•
~
.-
The scoping process was conducted in two parts: 1) recreation and access management strategy and 2) vegetative and
aquatic management proposals. A public involvement plan, consisting of mailings, focus interviews, one-on-one
discussions, public meetings, field trips, open house meeting, and a public hearing, was used to invite public
participation and collect comments. Two content analyses were conducted to analyze public comments. A
chronological listing of events can be found in Chapter Six.
B. Identification of the Issues
Prior to public seoping, preliminary issues were identified by the interdisciplinary team (IDT). These issues have now
been combined with those identified through the content analysis of public comments. Where needed, public comments
have been included in "quotes" to further define the issue. In narrowing the scope of this analysis, the issues have been
sorted into the following classes:
Preliminary issues got jdePtiDed by the pubUc as aD issue
Proposed use of Herbicides •• An integrated pest management approach to weed control has been included with each
action alternative. Control methods proposed include physical/mechanical (hand grubbing, mowing, tilling, and
burning), biological (predatory insects, pathogens, sheep, and goats), and chemical (the ground application of
herbicides). Mitigation measures, later described in this chapter, have been proposed to minimized the health risks
associated with the use of herbicides.
Old Growth - In regards to traditional old growth as defined in the Forest Plan, proposed treatments include
underburning and commercial thinning. With the intent of maintaining the stand as old growth for a longer period of
time, underburning is designed to reduce stocking of small understory trees, promoting a healthier stand that is more
resistant to stand replacing fire. Commercial thinning (includes stocking control) has a similar objective, in which
prescriptions will be designed to maintain multiple canopy levels while lowering overall stocking levels to maintain the
stand as a healthy, viable old growth stand for a longer period of time.
Nortia LoeIIsa Face ElS
17
Discussion and assessment of traditional old growth fails to acknowledge the variety of late succession forest that is
expressed within the range of natural variation. Critical to forest ecosystem management is recognition that forest plant
succession is process dependant and ranges from very young trees (stand initiation stage) to old trees (mature and late
mature forest stage) across the landscape. For individual LTAs, the expression of late succession varies, depending on
the disturbance regime for the LTA. For example, on frost-churned uplands, old forest may represent trees 100 to 150
years old, and on an old surface LTA, old forest may represent trees exceeding 250 years old.
Forest ecosystem management within North Lochsa Face is based on forest succession stages, including those of old
forest, which should be present and represented within the natural range of variation for each LTA. Provisions to
manage the forest to achieve the desired vegetative conditions by LTA will assure these components of the forest
landscape and their associated processes will be maintained. Also, many sensitive species rely on habitats comprised
largely of mature and late mature foresL Assuring the presence of these succession stages within the range of natural
variation, expressed differently based on LTA, will promote habitats necessary to promote healthy, viable populations
of plant and animal species.
Elk Winter RanKe - Management practices necessary to achieve elk winter range needs may be limited by scale (too
little, too localized) or practice (lack of dry-season fire) to promote quality, well distributed browse forage.
Approximately 28 percent (35,900 acres) of the analysis area is considered elk winter range. Winter forage is provided
by certain sera! shrub species. Ecologically, these preferred browse species developed in, and are adapted to both
mixed severity and patch-lethal, dry-season fire regimes. Browse production following these fires declines significantly
after 20 years.
Incorporating ecosystem management principles and practices into forest management implies that elk winter range
needs could be achieved for retention and distribution of forage and browse. Desired vegetation conditions on elk
winter range indicates that 20 to 30 percent of the landscape should be in shrub dominated stages (i.e., non-forested or
tree seedling/sapling succession stages). Currently, less than 3,650 acres or 10% of the area's winter range is in this
condition (i.e., younger than 20 years).
Issges beyogd the scope or the project decisiop
Blocliversity - nus also includes the comments related to landscape management, ecosystem management, and forest
health. "Biodiversity should be the primary goal... The whole Lochsa drainage should ideally be considered...
concerned that the Forest Service is going to use forest health as an excuse for clearcuts."
As already stated above, managing the forest to achieve the desired vegetative conditions by LTA will assure the
maintenance of forest landscape components and their associated processes. Ecosystem management is the principal
behind this entire analysis, with biodiversity being a goal. Maintaining structures, functions, and compositions is the
key to maintaining overall diversity in natural systems.
Wlld aDd Sceaic Riven SuitablHtylFJigibility - "Complete the Wild and Scenic suitability studies for Fish and then
Hungery Creeks in this process... and designate them as National Wildland Scenic River areas."
All of the alternatives being considered are designed to protect the outstanding resource values that are used to evaluate
wild and scenic rivers. Rivers eligibility was addressed in the Forest Plan, and portions of Fish Creek and Hungery
Creek were identified as eligible candidates to the Rivers System. Suitability studies were initiated in 1993 and will be
continued as funding becomes available.
Wilderness DesignatioD - "Designate North Lochsa Slope wilderness, of 121,000 acres."
Only Congress can designate wilderness. The Forest Plan Lawsuit Settlement covers the proposed wilderness in the
FishlHungery Creeks area. We are not proposing any activities that would preclude this area from future wilderness
designation.
Nortll LoeIIsa Face E1S
18
CJaapkrTwo
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
TraU RestrictioD Standards maximum.
ATV trails should be regulated by a 57" maximum tread width instead of a 50"
The 50" maximum tread width identifies the difference between heavier vehicles designed for off-road use Geeps and
quad-runners) and lighter off-road vehicles (all-terrain vehicles and 4-wheelers). The standard identifying this
maximum tread width is found in the Clearwater National Forest Access Guide and SupelVisor Order.
Visual quaUty objecdves (vQO) - "Too much of the area has "maximum modification" VQOs. Reduce that."
Approximately half of the North Lochsa Face analysis area was designated by the Forest Plan to have the VQO of
maximum modification. Of the remainder, 54,000 acres are designated as retention, 2,500 acres as partial retention, and
4,500 acres as modification. Any change to these designations would require a change in the Forest Plan. Although a
large portion of the analysis area is designated as maximum modification, the activities proposed have been designed to
mimic natural processes and patterns on the landscape, and therefore should exceed Forest Plan VQOs.
Community Stability - "The impact on local communities, their economics, customs, traditions and cultures should be
the first consideration of any action."
Taken in context from the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project, there are two goals for the
management of the North Lochsa Face ecosystem: 1) restore and maintain long-term ecosystem health and integrity;
and 2) support, within the capacity of the land, the economic and/or social needs of people, cultures, and communities
by providing sustainable and predictable levels of products and selVices. The effects of each alternative on community
economics is discussed in Chapter Four.
Questions Data Used - "Optimum stream conditions are not representing natural condition. It is possible that a higher
cobble embeddedness occurs naturally."
We are discovering new information and relationships as we look at landscapes with an ecosystem approach. Old
analytical models are being revised based on new findings. This Forest has one of the largest stream databases in the
western United States. This data is being stratified by landform, geologic substrates, channel types, and discharge class.
Forest professionals (hydrologists, fish biologists, soil scientists, and silviculturists) have identified whether the data
information has coII?e from natural or managed watersheds.
Forest PlaD Standards aDd GuldeliDes (GeDeral) •• "Discard the minimal standards for the neglected resources (fish,
wildlife, water quality and forest fragmentation) and replace them with optimal standards."
We are directed to adhere to Forest Plan standards and guidelines or propose Forest Plan amendments in meeting
management objectives. There is nothing that precludes us from managing to an optimal standard. Changes to these
standards and guidelines will be addressed in the Forest Plan revision, currently underway.
Issues addressed by Forest Plan _clards aM lIlicIeUges or by law
Visual QuaUty -- "Visuals need to be respected!" Other public comments urge us to maintain the wild character of this
region.
The proposed vegetative management activities are designed to emulate historic fire patterns. These activities are
designed to return the existing vegetation to a condition that is historically consistent with the vegetative composition
prior to extensive fire control. While this may deviate from the continuous forest canopy that exists today, it is
consistent with the natural appearing forest that existed historically in this area. Also, given that a minimum of 25% of
the existing canopy will be retained, these activities should meet or exceed designated VQOs for the analysis area.
Water Quality -- "The Forest Service must carefully consider the cumulative effects of its proposed management
activities on the water quality and fishery resources of the North Lochsa Face area."
Forest Plan management direction for most of the North Lochsa Face watersheds is to manage for no less than the "high
fish" standard. For most of Fish Creek and Hungery Creek the standard is "no effect". In addition to Forest Plan
Nortil LoeIIsa Face E1S
19
C. .pterTwo
management direction, we used the WAmAL computer model, stream surveys, monitoring, and professional
judgement to measure the effects of each alternative, including cumulative effects. The analysis process used to
evaluate cumulative effects is described in O1apter Four.
AIr QuaUty - There has been much concern over the smoke generated during prescribed burning.
In complying with the Oean Air Act, the Forest Service follows the Northern Smoke Management Memorandum
agreement that regulates the smoke produced by prescribed burning and requires all operations to adhere to strict smoke
management guidelines during the fall bmning period. In addition to regulatory restrictions, the Lochsa District
restricts burning activities when local air dispersion conditions warranL Use of prescribed burning for fuel reductions
wil1limit the duration and amount of smoke produced from future wildfires.
Heritale Resources -This includes comments about the Lolo Trail System. "The secluded camps of Lewis and Oark
need to remain secluded... opposed to hauling logs on the Lolo Motorway (Road 5(0)."
There are no proposals to haul logs on the Lolo MotolWay with this project or at this time. We will be following
direction in the memorandum of understanding with the State Historic Protection Office and will follow standard
avoidance procedures. The initial heritage resource survey and report provides information relating to the affected
environment and the consequences of the proposed alternatives. Considering the known and potential cultural
properties in the area, no foreseeable direct or cumulative effects are anticipated, nor are mitigation measures deemed
necessary. AIl alternatives are consistent with Forest Plan direction for cultural resources.
Tribal Treaty Rights - The 1855 Treaty with the Nez Perce Tribe states that they have "the right of taking fish at all
usual and accustomed places in common with citizens of the Territory; and of erecting temporary buildings for curing,
together with the privilege of hunting, gathering roots and berries, and pasturing their horses and cattle upon open and
unclaimed land." Lands applicable to these rights include the Oearwater National ForesL
This issue is connected to the other fish and wildlife issues described in this chapter. Mitigation measures and project
design features aimed at minimizing impacts to fish, wildlife, and plants should have the same impact on tribal treaty
rights. The right to pasture their horses and cattle is not at issue, since there are few lands suitable for this use in the
analysis area.
Wild aDd Scenic River Corriclor - "What about proposed treatments in the Wild and Scenic River corridor?"
Maintaining a healthy forest is within the intent of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act Proposed treatments would mimic
natural disturbances, with large trees remaining on the site. There would be no roads constructed across the scenic
landscape.
Locbsa Researdl Natural Area (RNA) -- "We favor no timber cutting within the RNA."
There is a Regional committee that oversees the management of the Lochsa RNA. Timber harvest is not allowed in the
RNA. However, prescribed burning is allowed within the RNA, since the intent behind the establishment of the RNA is
to allow natural processes to shape this area.
Monitoring •• "A monitoring plan which incorporates existing in-stream conditions and monitors impacts to water
quality and fish habitat in affected watersheds will be a requirement for this projecL"
The Forest currently monitors water temperature, sediment discharge, and fish populations and will continue to do so
during this project and beyond. Best Management Practices audits will measure the application and effectiveness of
mitigation measures.
Legal Requirements •• "We will consider any thinning activities in the Fish and Hungery Creek drainages as a
violation of the Clearwater Forest Plan lawsuit settlement agreement." This issue also relates to the comments that
maintenance, relocation, or reconstruction of trail corridors using motorized equipment, or allowing motorized use on
trail corridors located in lands addressed by proposed wilderness legislation violates the settlement agreement.
20
ClaaDler Two
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•I
I
I
•I
In the agreement between the Forest Service and the Wilderness Society and Sierra Qub et al., as documented in the
September 13, 1993, Forest Plan Lawsuit Settlement, the Forest Service agreed not to approve any timber sale or road
construction project decisions within the area covered by proposed wilderness legislation (HR 1570), and that such
lands will be managed according to Forest Plan standards and guidelines for recommended wilderness (Management
Area B2). In accordance with this settlement, proposed timber management (including commercial thinning) and road
construction in most of the Fish Creek drainage and all of the Hungery Creek drainage have been dropped from further
consideration.
As for trails, no new trail corridors are being planned for construction in the entire Lochsa Face landscape. The
settlement agreement does not address either use of motorized equipment for trail maintenance, or existing motorized
use on trail corridors. Numerous wilderness areas have had motorized use within their boundaries prior to
congressional designation. All actions proposed for this area of the North Lochsa Face landscape are consistent with B2
Management Area direction as stated in the Forest Plan. This management area direction contains goals specific to the
reconstruction and maintenance of mainline, secondary, and way trails. However, the Forest Plan makes no mention of
either motorized or non-motorized use either prior to or after reconstruction.
The Draft Interim Guidelines for OHV Management (CNF, 1995), cites for Management Area B2, one 1993 example
where a trail was closed to motorized use after reconstruction. Access Options 2 and 3 are consistent with this example.
For example, Access Option 2 has the Fish Creek Trail 224 proposed for reconstruction but closed to motorized use;
and Access Option 3 does not propose reconstruction of this trail.
Wildllre Habitat (General) -- "Those species that have been "losers" should be given extra consideration and helped
through the projecL"
Our management activities are focused on the habitat needs of wildlife, including threatened, endangered, proposed, and
sensitive species, and will be maintained or restored within their natural range of variation. Managing within the
natural range will maintain habitat for so called "losers".
Reforestation -- "Many south-facing slopes are nonstocked. That may mean regeneration in other areas may be
difficul 1."
South-facing slopes that are non-stocked had multiple catastrophic wildfires that removed the seed source and changed
the physical structuie of the soil. Such sites are acknowledged as landtypes with regeneration limitations. Regeneration
within five years has a success rate of over 90 percent on all of our managed sites, including south-facing slopes that
didn't bum.
Future Generations -- "We must consider that by not disturbing these areas, they can be left for the future."
By managing within the natural range of variability, we are maintaining ecosystem processes and representations of
natural communities across the landscape. Ignoring ecological problems identified in the NFMA Assessment will not
insure protection for future generations. The no action alternative will consider the effects of no management activities.
Endanlered Species (General) - "We are concerned about potential impacts on the gray wolf, the grizzly bear, the
bull trout, and the wild steelhead, which is likely to be listed as endangered in the next year."
As required by the Endangered Species Act, we looked at the specific habitat needs for these and other threatened,
endangered, proposed, and sensitive species. We also consulted with other regulatory agencies, as required by law.
Our Biological Evaluation and Biological Assessment (BElBA) and their letters of concurrence are located in Appendix
J.
Issues addressed by adopting mitigation measures
or design standards commop to ,II al1ergatives
Economic Feasibility -- This relates to the feasibility of treatments in remote, unaccessible areas, plus, the lower value
and size of the tree species proposed for harvest. "Include cedar to enhance value of sale. Helicopter flight distance of
1 mile or less enhance feasibility. Large treabnent areas are more cost effective for harvest, burning, and planting."
Nortla Lodasa Face EIS
21
Claapkr1'wo
The computer model Timber Sale Planning and Analysis System (TSPAS) and a helicopter feasibility model
(HEUPACE) was used to evaluate the economic feasibility of timber harvest and provide a present net worth of all
activities proposed under each alternative. All alternatives show a positive present net worth. The burning of logging
slash is funded by collection charged to the associated timber sale. The size and type of burn will determine the
collection amounL
CleareuttiDl -- "Much land in the surrounding region is dedicated to old clearcuts, and this is a frightening thing for
us."
The majority of the treatments being proposed do not include clearcutting. Only the off-site trees outside of the default
PACFISH riparian buffers within the Bimerick Creek drainage are proposed for removal using this method of harvest
These trees are now prematurely falling victim to root rots, blights, needle casts, and insect infestations. To prevent
these trees from contaminating the local gene pool, which could affect the species ability to adapt and thrive, complete
removal of these trees and the replanting of adapted stock are necessary.
Proposed regeneration harvests are designed to mimic mixed severity and lethal fire events, resulting in natural
appearing areas having a mosaic of large trees and shrobs retained within them. Depending on topography, soils, and
vegetation, varying amounts of trees would be removed with each regeneration harvest. Up to 50% of the trees would
be removed on the steep breaklands; about 65% on the colluvial midslopes; and an average of 75% on the gentle,
rolling, old surfaces. Further detail of this and other proposed harvest treatments is included in the sample stand
diagnoses located in Appendix B.
r_ber ProductioD
vs. RecreatioD use - "We favor no use of the Wild and Scenic River corridor for helicopter
landings."
For those alternatives that propose management activities within the river corridor, design features (i.e. locating, where
possible, helicopter landings out of view, timing of use to avoid heavy visitor periods, and rehabilitating the site after
use to minimize visual impacts) have been incorporated to reduce possible conflicts with other users of the corridor.
Safety - This includes comments about the danger of helicopter operations. "Helicopter logging would increase
congestion on Highway 12, making this highway unsafe."
Safe helicopter operations have been conducted along other State and federal highways having traffic volumes greater
than Highway 12. As part of mitigation for all alternatives involving helicopter operations along the highway,
coordination efforts will be made with the State Highway Department of Transportation, and the posting of warning
signs and/or flagmen will occur, where necessary.
Road ConstruetioD/Rec:onstructioD -- "We favor no new roads. Propose one time entries, treat all areas, build low
standard roads, and obliterate."
The standard of road will be appropriate for the type of use and characteristics of the site. Alternative 2 proposes the
construction of one system road (1.1 miles in length), reconstruction of Roads 453, 481, 483, and 5545 (12.9 miles total
length), and the construction of nine temporary roads (4.6 miles total length) that are to be obliterated (returned to
contour) after use. Alternatives 3 and 3a propose the use of existing roads and the same miles of reconstruction, except
that Alternative 3a includes all but one of the temporary roads described under Alternative 2. Alternatives 4 and 5
propose 1.5 miles of reconstruction (Road 453) and the construction of eight temporary roads (4.4 miles total length).
Fish Habitat -- "Any activities proposed in Pete King, Canyon, or Deadman should focus on restoration of fish/water
quality elements. The focus in Fish Creek should be on preservation of existing fish/water quality." Also, allowing
motorized trail use on the Fish Creek Trail (224) may cause erosion and adverse effects to the high quality steelhead
fishery.
Part of the purpose of this project is watershed restoration and rehabilitation and includes proposed road obliteration,
riparian rehabilitation and planting, and the removal of stream sediment. Having proposed management activities
follow PACFISH guidelines will minimize any reversal in current watershed recovery trends. Also, the cumulative
effects of management actions have been evaluated by resource for each alternative and access option. Specific
mitigation measures, where needed, will be implemented to address any effects.
Nortit Locltsa
F~
EIS
22
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
BuD Elk VulDerabiUty - Comments here range from supporting year-round, non-motorized recreation in critical elk
habitat across the landscape or specific to the Fish Creek drainage, to supporting no motorized closures to protect elk or
elk habitaL
The cumulative effects of management actions have been evaluated by resource for each alternative and access option.
The effects analysis addresses the social values regarding recreational access and opportunity tempered by the
capability of the landscapes natural resources, including elk habitat. In regard to the specific issue of closing the Fish
Creek drainage to motorized use, Access Option 2 closes the eastern two-thirds of the drainage to motorized use during
the critical fall hunting season. The western third of the drainage would be managed as non-motorized, except for the
Lolo Motorway, Frenchman Butte and Boundary Peak roads that have been historically open year-round to all
motorized vehicles.
Motorized Use vs. NOD· Motorized Use •• Comments to the proposed action that came out of the NFMA Assessment
(Access Option 2) ranged from supporting additional non-motorized opportunities across the landscape, especially in
the Fish Creek drainage, to supporting different or no motorized closures and a range of easy to challenging motorized
trailbike riding opportunities.
Recreational access opportunities have been evaluated in combination with an analysis of other resources for each
alternative. Specific to Fish Creek, the proposed action essentially provides for a non-motorized recreational
opportunity, and Access Option 3 provides for limited motorized recreational opportunities, in which these
opportunities are a continuation of existing low motorized use levels.
Motorized trailbike riding opportunities are primarily determined throughout the landscape by the existing topography
which is predominately steep and rugged. Due to this and the effects on soil stability, a full range of easy to challenging
riding opportunities may not be possible.
SoU S-.bility -- "We favor no timber cutting on unstable or erosive Iandtypes."
Management activities, including timber harvest, are proposed to mimic natural processes. Activities proposed on
landtypes with soil stability hazards have been designed to minimize the risk of landslides and erosion.
Natural Processes.·· "What affect does our management activity have on forest ecosystem renewal processes in
comparison to natural renewal processes? The area is suffering from the effects of fire suppression. Gradually
removing fire suppression will allow the area to recover. I don't think the Forest Service should work to avoid
catastrophic changes."
Ecosystem management is aimed at operating within the natural range of variability, not the extremes. We have
identified natural fire regimes and the size of natural disturbances (patches) that our proposed activities will mimic.
The proposed prescribed fire program to be developed along with a Forest Plan amendment regulating maximum
wildfire acreage should gradually allow natural fire regimes to dominate the area.
IssueS addressed by m"sprlg, aDd comgarinl
the e"eels betweeD alternatives
LaDd should be Managed
"Treat areas in need. Our public lands should be managed for productivity and
sustainability."
For the purpose of improving the area's ecological condition and its social values, the IDT has formulated a range of
alternatives that include prescribed burning, timber harvest, stand density management, riparian planting, control of
noxious weeds, watershed restoration and rehabilitation, and recreation and access management strategies.
Water Cumulative Effects - "Can we enhance elk forage without doing damage to watersheds and other resources?"
The cumulative effects of management activities proposed, past, and foreseeable have been evaluated by resource for
each alternative.
Nortla Loelasa Face £IS
CIa..... Two
I
Reereatloaal Aeeess Opportunities - There is a need to provide haDdicapped hunting opportunities and additional
OHV trails.
Specific road and trail motorized handicapped hunting opportunities are proposed in Access Options 2 and 3.
Numerous OHV opportunities on both roads and trails exist in all access options. Steep and rugged topography limits
the constnJction of new OHV trails, and currently no funding is available for the construction of new trail tread. Funds
may be available for the reconstruction of existing trail treads.
I
I
I
Issues 'ddR5Rd by develgplgc ,Itcrpatives to the proposed , . g
Roadless Areas - Comments related to this issue ranged from: "Stay out of all roadless places!" to "An aggressive
program of prescnDed burning is far more appropriate in the Fish and Hungery Creek drainages than timber harvesting."
I
Adhering to the agreement contained in the Forest Plan Lawsuit Settlement will preclude any proposed timber sale
and/or road construction activities in the HR 1570 portion of the Fish and Hungery Creek drainages, which is part of the
basis behind Alternative 2 (proposed action) and Alternatives 3 and 3a. The "no action" altemative and Alternative 4
address those comments opposed to any activity in the roadless areas. Altemative 5 proposes allowing only prescribed
burning in the roadless areas.
TransportatioD PlaDDIDI -- "Key is an adequate access plan to accomplish the patch treatments. One of your
alternatives should be based on
DO
new road construction at all."
We developed three action alternatives around this issue. Alternative 2 proposes treatments with one addition to the
existing road system, plus the construction of nine temporary roads; Alternative 3 proposes treatments using "only" the
existing road system; and Altemative 3a uses the existing road system, plus the construction of eight temporary roads.
Prescribed Fire VI. Commercial Timber -- "There should be no irretrievable loss of commercial timber due to
prescribed or natural fire until the fate of the wilderness proposal is resolved."
Our analysis has identified almost 11,760 acres that are in need of a patch-lethal event, using either timber harvest or
prescribed fire, of mixed severity, as a management tool. Alternatives 2, 3, and 5 propose prescribed burning on about
6,130 acres, som~ of which contains timber of commercial size and value within the FishlHungery Creek and Face
drainages. Timber harvest is not possible in these areas due to: (1) the Forest Plan lawsuit settlement agreement; (2)
being on land classified in the Forest Plan as unsuitable for timber production; (3) being unaccessible even to helicopter
logging; or (4) combinations of the above. Aside from the "no action" alternative, no commercial timber would be
burned under Altemative 4, which proposes "no" activities within the North Lochsa Slope Roadless Area, and
prescribed burning under Alternative 3a would be limited to four areas along the Lochsa River breaks (930 acres) that
are not feasible for timber harvest and contain little to no commercial timber.
c.
Altemative Formulation
In the assessment for the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project, it states: "In the last century, major
changes have occurred in vegetation patterns, fish and wildlife distributions, processes of terrestrial and aquatic
ecosystems, and human communities in the assessment area" (which includes the North Lochsa Face area). As
discussed in Chapter One, years of successful tire suppression efforts and timber management activities have caused
portions of the North Lochsa Face ecosystem to be outside the nonnal range of variability. Prior to human influences,
natural events (fire, insects and disease, floods, and high winds) contributed in shaping and developing the North
Lochsa Face area, with fire playing a significant role. In order to restore and maintain long-tenn ecosystem health and
integrity, treatments are needed to start the move from the existing to desired conditions. Proposed vegetadve
treatmeDts would mimic natural fire events, as follows:
1. Non-lethal fires - propose low intensity prescribed tire or limited timber harvest, such as, precommercial
thinning, understory removal, individual tree selection, and/or salvage harvests.
24
I
III
•
•I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
2. Mixed severity fires - propose low to high intensity prescribed fire, commercial thinning, salvage harvest.,
and/or small regeneration harvests.
3. Lethal, stand replacing fires - propose higher intensity (not cataclysmic) prescribed fire and/or regeneration
harvests. Depending on the LTA, we envision the regeneration harvests leaving a quarter to half of the trees on
the site.
Vegetative treatment locations and intensities were formulated by comparing existing and desired conditions of
"patches" within each LTA. Keying in on comparisons of desired and existing age class distributions, we identified the
number of acres to treat with "patch-lethal" treatments in order to bring the age class distribution within the desired
range. In deciding how many acres to schedule for "patch-lethal" treatment, the IDT choose the midpoint of the desired
range. The midpoint was chosen for the following reasons:
1.
The midpoint gave more flexibility to manage age class distribution across the landscape.
2. The midpoint allowed flexibility to stay within the range. If older age classes were managed at the low end of
the range, natural events could result in a long term deficit. Managing older classes at the upper end of the range
could result in a shortage of the younger successional stages.
3.
Natural processes will be ongoing; another point in favor of managing near the midpoint.
4.
This allows the area a better chance to absorb natural disturbance events, should they occur.
Also formulated were four access options for the management of roads and trails within the analysis area. Access
Option 1 is the existing management scenario or "no action" option. It is equivalent to the Forest's current Access Guide
which was formulated in accord with the Forest Plan.
Access Option 2 is the proposed action derived from the NFMA Assessment. The lOT stratified the North Lochsa Face
landscape into three zones (A, B and C) of non-motorized, limited motorized, and motorized recreational use. The
delineation of the zones was based on social value considerations combined with the suitability of the land to support
different recreational experiences.
Access Option 3 is an alternative to the proposed action, stratified by major stream drainage. It was fonnulated to
address the compromise needed between those desiring motorized access on all North Lochsa Face roads and trails and
those desiring a non-motorized recreational opportunity throughout the landscape. A collaborative effort was used to
identify "common ground", and then this knowledge was used by the IDT to formulate this option. Since the DEIS, trail
reconstruction along Boundary Peak Trail 118, Fish Creek Trail 224, and Ant Hill Trail 225 has been dropped from this
option in order to maintain consistent interpretation of the 1993 Forest Plan lawsuit settlement agreement.
Access Option 4 was formulated to address the issue regarding bull elk vulnerability during the fall rifle hunting season.
From 1991 through 1995, a cooperative study between the Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, and the
Idaho Department of Fish and Game was conducted on parts of the North Lochsa Face area and adjacent areas to study
the effect of road closures on elk vulnerability. In areas of the Pete King, Canyon, and Deadman Creek drainages, road
closures were implemented for a one-month period (10/1 to 1113). This access option combines the road closures from
this study with the existing situation (Access Option 1), and it provides the opportunity to evaluate additional road
closures during the fall hunting season using the findings from the study.
Public input gained from letters, meetings, field visits, and a public hearing was also used in the formulation of
alternatives. The formulation of Alternative 3a was a direct result of public input, as were changes to the monitoring
plan that goes with Access Option 3. Also, a visit with Regional specialists and scientists at the Intennountain Research
Center generated support for our methodology, and their suggestions were key in the revision of vegetative proposals.
This is the District's first attempt at implementing ecosystem management at such a large scale, and the IDT has
struggled with each step of the process. Everything we did was based upon firm science, and monitoring will be key in
detennining the effectiveness of the treatments and the process used to formulate them.
Nortil LodIsa Fue ElS
2S
D. Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study
Review of legal constraints and field verification of some of the proposed treatment sites caused the lOT to re-evaluate
treatment proposals. This resulted in eliminating from further consideration portions of the vegetative proposals
(described in Chapter One). Vegetative proposals that will not be considered in the remaining alternatives are:
TImber Hanes' Ia FisblHupsery Creek Dniga,cs • This activity is not feasible at this time due to the agreement
between the Forest SelVice and the Wilderness Society and Sierra Oub et al., as documented in the September 13, 1993,
Forest Plan Lawsuit Settlement. In that settlement, the Forest Setvice agreed not to approve any timber sale or road
construction project decisions within the area covered by proposed wilderness legislation (HR 1570), and that such
lands will be managed according to Forest Plan standards and guidelines for recommended wilderness (Management
Area B2). Since most of the Fish Creek drainage and all of the Hungery Creek drainage are contained in this area, and
until the Forest Plan revision becomes effective, it is not feasible to pursue a timber halVest proposal. Timber harvest
will be considered near Mex Mountain in the southwest quarter of the Fish Creek drainage, which is outside of the
proposed wilderness boundary (HR 1570).
StaDd Pepsin Mapa,e.ept within the Flsh!llypRenIF.q; DraIn'les • Approximately 3,500 acres of stands having
more than 1,000 trees per acre, less than 7" diameter breast height (dbh), were originally proposed to be thinned back to
400-500 trees per acre, using chainsaws or natural prescribed tire as methods of treatment. Another estimated 710 acres
of overstocked stands were proposed to have their tolerant species (grand fir, cedar, subalpine fir, and mountain
hemlock) thinned back to increase the percentage of sera! species (Douglas-fir, ponderosa pine, white pine, larch, and
lodgepole pine) left in the stand. All of these stands are without reasonable access, and further screening based on
economic feasibility of using chainsaws have eliminated them from further consideration. Also, the window of
opportunity needed for prescribed fire is too narrow in making this a feasible method of treatment.
Reforestatiop of ShrgbQelcls • It was originally proposed to treat approximately 5,300 acres of shrubfields having no
or low tree stocking, mostly within the Fish, Hungery, Deadman, Bimerick, and Glade Creek drainages. Currently, a
mechanical slash buster is being used on about 600 acres of shrubfields in the Middle Butte area. As the brush is cut
back, the prepared sites are being planted with seral tree species. At this time, it is proposed to monitor the
effectiveness of this treatment and research that of other treatments, such as, slashing followed by a light burn,
underplanting followed by release, and possible ground applications of herbicides. Following this monitoring and
research effort, some or all of the 5,300 acres of shrobfields may be proposed for these types of treatments, and a
separate analysis will be conducted at that time.
PbysiqllMCCbaglqlagd Biologiql Control
or
Noxious Weeds without Herbicides • Identified noxious weed sites
along roads and trails would be treated using either physical, mechanical, or biological control methods, or
combinations of each.
Solely battling the spread of noxious weeds within the project area by biological control agents (bioca) and mechanical
means would be a long and slow process. Currently, not all weeds known to occur within the project area have bioca's
cleared for release. Under this proposal, those weeds without available bioca's would continue to spread. Mechanical
controls including handgrubbing, mowing, and cultivation are labor intensive and somewhat ineffective at the scale of
entire watersheds. Treatments would be necessary for many consecutive years; current rates of spread and the long seed
viability displayed by these non-native invaders would likely prove mechanical controls futile throughout the project
area.
E. Alternatives Considered in Detail
The IDT has considered six alternatives, including a "no action" alternative, that provide a reasonable range of
alternatives [40 CFR 1502.14(a)]. Included with each alternative is one of four access options. All alternatives are
consistent with Forest Plan direction [16 U.S.C. 1604 and 36 CFR 219.10(e)] and are in compliance with the Stipulation
of Dismissal agreed to for the lawsuit between the Forest Service and the Sierra Club, et al (signed September 13,
1993). However, Alternatives 2, 3, 3a, and 5 require a Forest Plan amendment to achieve their prescribed fire
objectives.
Nortla Loclas. Face EIS
26
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Before getting into the altemative descriptions, let us talk about size or openings. Prior to tire suppression efforts, the
natural fire events that influenced the North Lochsa Face ecosystem ranged from spot fires less than one acre in size to
large stand replacement tires 1000+ acres in size. Although we are not proposing to recreate 1000+ acre catastrophic
events, the IDT considered the effects of past management and concluded that in many cases smaller openings have had
detrimental effects, including: 1) fragmentation of large patches of mature or late mature forest; 2) creating openings
that did not meet scenic quality objectives, because they did not match form, texture, or scale of natural disturbances;
and 3) the small scale treatments did not allow the effective return of fire to the landscape or effectively lessen the risk
of wildfire. Proposed treatment units were designed to fit desired patch sizes and to maintain manageable boundaries
for burning and logging systems. A range of possible opening sizes is included in each alternative description, with the
high range representing a worst case scenario. As per Forest Plan direction and the Northern Regional Guide, Forest
SupelVisor approval was obtained on all proposed openings between 40 and 60 acres, and Regional Forester approval
was obtained on proposed openings over 60 acres.
The next two subsections describe treatment activities, mitigation meaSures, and monitoring common to action
Alternatives 2, 3, 3a, 4, and 5. They are followed by Table 2.1 which gives a breakdown of the activities proposed
under each altemative and is followed by a narrative description and map of each altemative. Since the maps are based
on large-scale maps maintained in the project file, they may not be totally accurate in all respects because of reductions
in scale and imperfections in reproduction. It should also be 1IOt«l thal tM size ofproposed IlUJlUlgeIMnl lTelltlMnl
areas disp"']ed on tM IlUJpS and describBtl funhsr in this cMpter represent gross acreage and IIUJ] be reduced or
~ daring.!"ld "']011I, with tM implemenllldon ofriptlritJn buffers andfetlSible"nil boundtuiBs.
1. Treatment Activities Common to all Action Altematives
For the purpose of improving forest health and restoring certain components of the North Lochsa Face ecosystem,
the following treatment activities would be implemented with each action alternative:
Stand Depsity Manlgement • Overstocked stands, having trees of non-commercial size, are proposed to be
thinned back to about 400-500 trees per acre, using chainsaws as the method of treatment These stands are
mostly located in the roaded portions of the Pete King Creek and Canyon Creek drainages. Some of these stands
will have their shade tolerant species (grand fir, cedar, subalpine fir, and mountain hemlock) thinned back to
increase the desired percentage of seral species (Douglas-fir, ponderosa pine, white pine, larch, and lodgepole
pine) left in the stand.
Cogtrol or Noxioys Weeds· For the purpose of eradicating new invaders (a weed species previously not known
to occur within the project area) and reducing the extent and density of established noxious weeds, an Integrated
Pest Management approach to weed control is proposed along area roads and trails, which act as seed depositories
and transportation conidors for these non-native plant species. The following management techniques would be
considered on specific sites and plant species (see Appendix D for detailed locations of weed species and proposed
treatments):
Pbysical/Mechanleal: Treatment, consisting of hand grubbing, mowing, tilling, or burning, would take
place before seed production, with mowing or tilling being repeated during the growing season.
Chemleal: Herbicides considered under chemical control scenarios include Clopyralid (fRANSLINE) and
Dicamba (VETERAN lOG). Herbicides would treat those species addressed by the Oearwater Basin Weed
Coordinating Committee as having an eradication objective and where infestation levels warrant an
eradication objective. Within the entire project area, herbicides would treat a maximum of 453 acres (16
sites) which represents 0.035 percent of the 128,000 acre project area. Some of these sites, denoted in the
treatment table, would include the distribution of biological control agents or mechanical control measures
outside of roadsides and areas, where proximity to water sources (streams and/or high water tables) make
herbicide applications inappropriate. Revegetation efforts would follow, and follow-up treatments would
occur based upon monitoring of application effectiveness. It is anticipated that two consecutive years of
herbicide application would be needed, as revegetation with desired species reduces the likelihood of
reinfestation within these sites.
NortJa LocJasa Face EIS
27
Cupter1'wo
Biol0glcai: Biological control is a slow process, often requiring ten to twenty years to be effective, and is
the deliberate introduction and establishment of natural enemies to reduce the target plants competitive or
reproductive capacities. Its purpose is not eradication but a reduction in weed density and rates of spread to
an acceptable level. Predatory insects are commonly released against noxious weeds, and the biocontrol
agentLarinus minutus would be released at several sites to control spotted knapweed and Canada thistle.
Other biocontrol agents would be released, as they become available.
The method(s) of choice for particular infestations will be dependent upon weed species, infestation size, land use
patterns and location. All areas of herbicide application will be followed by an aggressive revegetation effort.
Selected seed mixes will consider filling soil horizon niches that will reduce the risk of subsequent reinvasion.
These mixes will consider early, shallow rooted species; mid-season species with moderately deep roots; and lateseason species with deeply rooted species. Considerations of disturbance regimes, species availability, and
species performance (site habitat characteristics, germination requirements, growth rates and competition between
species interactions) will also be included in revegetation plans.
W,tcnhcd Restoration ,gel RcbahQltaUop • For the purpose of reducing the risk of sediment entering live
streams and encouraging the natural flushing of instream sediments, approximately 94 miles l of roads, no longer
needed for management, are proposed for obliteration. This would involve the use of heavy equipment
(excavators and dozers) to remove culverts, improve drainage, reduce road fills, and scarify compacted surfaces to
promote revegetation. Priority of treatment will be driven by: 1) high risk of landslide or debris torrent; 2)
proximity to fish bearing streams; and 3) chronic sediment sources. The results of removing these roads from the
system should decrease erosion and instream sediment deposition; 2) promote the natural sediment cleaning
processes; and 3) improve the rate of spring flow recovery to more natural conditions.
Another 59 miles of roads that are not expected to be needed for timber access in the next 20 or more years are
proposed for long-term maintenance. This is the practice of retaining existing roads for future use without relying
on frequent road maintenance to keep the road open. The roads would be closed to motorized traffic and be
placed in a condition to assure they are self-maintaining, with stable drainage. This practice mayor may not
include removal of culverts and ditches. Encroaching vegetation would not be removed. This practice should: 1)
reduce road maintenance costs; 2) provide for future access; and 3) minimize erosion. A table in Appendix E
identifies the roads by major drainage to be obliterated or placed in long-term maintenance.
There are four sediment traps in the Pete King watershed that were installed in the mid-1980s for the purpose
of trapping some of the bedload sediment (primarily sand) coursing through the streams. These traps have
been cleaned annually. For the purpose of assuring floodplain/stream channel integrity, these sediment traps
would be removed, with the sites restored to approximate natural channel cross-section conditions. Also, fish
structures, consisting of log or rock weirs, root wad placement, or cut bank stabilization measures, would be
placed in Pete King, Canyon, and Deadman Creeks to provide habitat for fish.
PIIgdg. Rjpariag
ARiS • For the purpose of restoring streamside vegetation to promote the re-establishment
and role or large wood in providing shade, channel stability, and fish habitat diversity, a strip 300 feet wide, 6
miles long on both sides of Fish Creek, is proposed to be inter-planted with cottonwoods. A similar strip along 2
miles of Pete King Creek is proposed to be planted with conifers and deciduous tree species.
1 Of the 94 miles of roads proposed for obliteration.. 25.7 miles have been obliterated in 1996-99. These were roads given a high priority of
treatment. using available funds.. and analyzed in separate NEPA documents.
Nortla Loc:hsa Faee EIS
28
C...... Two
•
•I
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
2. Measures Common to all Action Altematives
The following mitigation measures would be implemented with each action alternative:
a. The area is covered by PACFISH. No timber harvest will occur within 300 feet of fish-bearing streams,
150 feet of non-fish bearing perennial streams, or 100 feet of non-fish-bearing intermittent streams.
b. Two helicopter landings are located within the riparian habitat conservation areas (RHCAs) of fish
bearing streams. A helicopter log landing at an existing bench, within the riparian area of lower Pete King
Creek, would be located over ISO feet from Pete King Creek and over SO feet from Nut Creek. These
buffers are to be protected via sediment filter cloth to filter mobilized sediment prior to reaching the streams.
No riparian trees and/or shrubs are to be removed at this site. Other measures to minimize impacts include
restricting use to dry periods and complete restoration (revegetated with grass) after use. The second
helicopter landing is located along the Lochsa River at an existing flat upstream of Deadman Creek. Like
the Pete King site, sediment filter cloth is to be used to retain any sediment from moving into the Lochsa
River. No riparian vegetation is to be removed. After use, the site will be stabilized via gravel and used as a
river rafting portal.
c. Retain a minimum of two to four snags per acre over 21 " in diameter (including at least 1.5 snags per
acre greater than 28" dbh) in all h8lVest units. Safety concerns and terrain will dictate the number of snags
remaining. Blind leads, benches and/or in the interior of the unit are likely sites for retaining patches.
d. Retain a minimum of 5 to 10 live trees (>50' tall and 9-21+" dbh) per acre in all harvest units, except in
the Bimerick Meadows area where all off-site trees outside of the riparian areas are to be removed. The
silvicultural prescription accounts for 10% loss of reserve trees due to logging damage and 20% loss due to
prescribed tire.
e. Ignition points for prescribed tire are to be located outside the RHCAs. Prescribed:tire is to be
completed with multiple entries to gradually reduce the fuel loading at the sites. Timing of the bums will be
based on fuel moisture to achieve the objectives and avoid impacts to the riparian areas. Size of the burn
strips will be varied to control the intensity of the fire. As an additional mitigation measure, prescribed fire,
especially with mixed severity burns, will be implemented on a conservative basis to permit an evaluation of
a few burn areas prior to full- implementation. Modifications of subsequent bums will be conducted if
damage to riparian area functions are apparent
f.
Removal of the sediment traps is to be completed between July 15 and August 15 to avoid the
spawninglincubation/early rearing for steelhead trout during June and early July and to avoid any potential
bull trout spawning in late August through September.
g. To insure temporary road obliteration (Alternatives 2, 38, 4, and 5) after use, include special provisions
C(T)6.603 and C(T)6.4 in applicable timber sale contracts.
h. To lessen the disturbance to elk and other big-game, restrict motorized summer recreation within
traditional high use elk summer ranges (upper Fish and Hungery Creeks).
i.
To provide elk security areas, restrict motorized use on most secondary roads during hunting season.
j.
To achieve browse production and utilization on elk winter range, develop and employ dry-season
prescribed fire.
k.
Where thinning is done to promote tree growth, keep existing big-game trails clear of slash.
1.
In the Lochsa RNA, where sensitive plants are located, burning prescriptions are to be developed in
coordination with a Botanist to protect the plant populations.
m. For identified heritage resource sites and for those that may be identified during a field review by the
archeologis~ the standard avoidance procedure of no cutting of trees within the larger of one tree length or
30 meters of a site is to be incorporated into the tree marking guides.
NortJa LodIsa Faee ElS
29
CIa.pterTwo
n. All areas of herbicide application will be administered by a pesticide applicator licensed by the State of
Idaho and all label restrictions will be adhered to (i.e. recommended applications, precautions, and safety
equipment).
o. Where vegetation management activities temporarily disrupt recreation use of a road or trail, the access
option will be implemented upon completion of the activity, and road or trail surfaces and trailheads will be
maintained or reconstructed to the necessary recreational standard.
p. Outside of high use periods (i.e. fall hunting season), log hauling on Roads 483, 481, and SS45
(Frenchman Butte to Bimerick Meadows and Van Camp) will be restricted to Monday through Friday. For
safety reasons, these roads will be closed to the public during hauling operations. During the fall hunting
season (10/1 - 1113), log hauling will not be allowed on these roads.
q. For the purpose of minimizing conflicts with summer recreationists, helicopter logging within the river
conidor will be restricted to Monday through Friday (no flying on weekends) from Memorial Day through
Labor Day. There are no restrictions outside of this conidor.
r. For safety reasons, complete coordination with the Idaho Department of Transportation will be made in
regards to timber harvest and prescribed burning activities adjacent to U.S. Highway 12, which may include
the posting of warning signs and flagmen during operations.
s. Because road obliteration is a ground disturbing activity, several mitigation measures would be taken to
prevent damaging levels of sediment from entering streams, such as: (1) placing removable sediment traps
below work areas to trap fines during road obliteration work; (2) when working instream, remove all fill
aroUDd pipes prior to bypass and pipe removal (where this is not possible, use noneroding diversion); (3)
revegetating scarified and disturbed soils with grasses for short-term erosion protection and with shrubs and
trees for long-term soil stability; (4) utilizing erosion control mats on stream channel slopes and slides; (5)
mulching with native materials, where available, or using weed-free straw to ensure coverage of exposed
soils; (6) dissipating energy in the newly constructed stream channels using log or rock weirs; (7) armoring
channel banks and dissipating energy with large rock whenever possible; and (8) coordinating obliteration
activities around spawning times and locations.
3. Monitoring
The following monitoring would continue on the Forest and/or District:
a. Ten percent of all units on the Forest are monitored for compliance with the rules and regulations of the
Idaho Forest Practices Act
b. Annually, at least one completed timber sale project is monitored by the District and Forest to determine
if: (1) requirements of the EA or EIS and decision document were implemented correctly; and (2)
desired/predicted results and effects occurred. These results are retained in the District files and used for
future reference. Of particular interest are successful application of planned vegetative management
practices (including roading practices) in or near sensitive areas, erosion control, and access management
c. For timber sales, the requirements of the timber sale contract, which reflect the requirements described
in the Record of Decision and the FEIS, will be monitored by certified sale administrators.
d. All eight major watersheds within the project area that flow into the Lochsa River are currently being
monitored for summer water temperatures. These streams and a number of tributaries will be monitored for
water temperatures. Substrate monitoring is currently ongoing and will continue in the Pete King Creek,
Canyon Creek, and Deadman Creek drainages. Ongoing fish population monitoring projects will continue in
the Pete King Creek, Canyon Creek, Deadman Creek, and Fish Creek (including Hungery Creek) drainages.
Stream channel and habitat conditions were surveyed in 1991 and 1997 in the Pete King Creek and Canyon
Creek drainages; these will be repeated in 2002. Follow up swveys are planned in the Deadman Creek
(1999) and Fish Creek (2000) drainages.
e.
A monitoring plan that is a part of Access Option 3 is located in Appendix A.
Nortla Locllsa Faee EIS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
.
Ta ble 2.1 AItemative Summary over a 5•Y ear PIaanini eriod
Stand
Alt
1
2
Mamt
Riparian
PlantiDa
Noxious
Weeds
Watershed
Restoradon &
RehabUitation
Current
6OOac6
Current
Program'
Restoration
projectsS
1
Integrated
Restoration
projects
2
Prescribed
Fire
Timber
Density
Harvest
Current
Program3
Current
Program4
6,130 ac
mixed-severity
and 6,510 ac
underburns
Five
timber
sales
totaling
8,980 ac
79MMBF
Five
timber
sales
totaling
7,870 ac
72MMBF
Five
timber
sales
totaling
8,280 ac
75MMBF
Five
timber
sales
totaling
5,190 ac
50MMBF
Five
timber
sales
totaling
5,190 ac
50MMBF
3
6,130 ac
mixed-severity
and 6,510 ac
underburns
3a
930ac
mixed-severity
and 6,900 ac
underbums
4
1,040 acof
underbums
5
6,130 ac
mixed-severity
and 6,510 ac
underburns
ProgramS
1,290 ac
600ac
plan along
roads and
trails
Access
Optioa2
1,290 ac
600ac
Integrated
plan along
roads and
trails
Restoration
projects
3
1,290 ac
600ac
Integrated
plan along
roads and
trails
Restoration
projects
3
1,290 ac
600ac
Integrated
plan along
roads and
trails
Restoration
projects
2
1,290 ac
600ac
Integrated
plan along
roads and
trails
Restoration
projects
4
2 Included with each alterDative, for the purpose of effedS analysis, is one of the following four access options covering the management of area
roads and trails:
Aeeeu Op'" 1 proposes "no cbange" from the Forest's QlrreDt Access Guide.
Aeeeu Optioa 2 is the proposed adioa, stratified by zones, derived from the NFMA AssessmeaL
Aeeeu Optio.3 is a modification of the proposed action, stratified by major stream drainages. and includes commeo1S aod suggestions
generated from a collaborative learning effort.
Access Optio. 4 is Access Optioo 1 plus the road closures enacted during the recent bull elk vulaerability study.
3 This includes the bamiDg of slash as pan of the aureot timber sale progtam.
4 This consis~ of several timber salvage sales. separate of this analysis. averagiog an estimated 2 million board feet (MMBF) per year.
5 Without North Lochsa Face. precommercial thioniog averages 35 acres per year as pan of the regular silviculture program of work.
6 Ripariao plaotiog would also be proposed iD the Pete King aod Fish Creek drainages, but documeoted under a different analysis.
, Ongoiog. low level, biological cootrol agent distributioo would cootioue as agen~ become available as part of ao overall Forest program.
S Restoration projec1S would consist of about 94 miles of road obliteration, puttiog about 59 miles of roads into 10Dg-term maintenance, removing
four instream sediment traps, and installing fISh strudUre5. The same proposal under the "00 action" alteroative would be doaImented uoder a
different analysis.
31
C.plerTwo
ALTERNATIVE 1 (No Action)
Ecosystems change on their own even without human influences. Fire is the primary agent of change within the North
Lochsa Face ecosystem. 1be"no action" alternative means management action taken by the Forest Service would be
current activities permitted by the Forest Plan and covered under other NEPA documents. Although this alternative
provides a baseline for comparing the environmental consequences of the other alternatives to the existing condition (36
CFR 1502.14), it is potentially an appropriate management option that could be selected by the Responsible Official.
The following activities would continue under this alternative, with each being covered by a NEPA analysis separate
from this one:
The District 5-year timber sale program, without North Lochsa Face, would consist of several sales of varying size, with
the purpose of meeting resource needs and providing products and customer selVice to our public. A majority of these
sales are planned in the Pete King, Canyon, and Deadman Creek drainages, in areas having few issues. 1be primary
objective of these sales is to salvage an estimated 2 MMBF/year of dead, dying, and blown down timber from the
existing road system.
Within the analysis area, precommercial thinning would average approximately 35 acres per year as part of the regular
program. Ongoing treatments are for the purpose of preventing stand stagnation and increasing growth on the leave
trees. This also improves stand resilience to future insect and/or disease attacks.
Ongoing, low level, biological control agent distribution for noxious weed control would continue as agents become
available as part of an overall Forest program. Biological control agents attained by Forest personnel have been cleared
for release by the Animal and Plant Health Inspection SelVice, Agriculture Research Service, US Department of
Agriculture, US Department of the Interior, Environmental Protection Agency, National Plant Board, and Weed Society
of America.
For the purpose of reducing the risk of sediment entering live streams and reducing accumulations of instream
sediments, approximately 94 miles of roads, no longer needed for management, would be obliterated, as funding
becomes available. During 1996-99, road obliteration has been completed on 25.7 miles of this total. Another 59 miles
of roads that are not expected to be needed for timber access in the next 20 or more years would be placed in a condition
to assure they are self-maintaining, with stable drainage, and closed to motorized traffic. This is the practice of longterm mainten~, in which existing roads are retained for future use without having to rely on frequent road
maintenance to keep the road open. A table in Appendix E identifies the roads by major drainage proposed for
obliteration or long-term maintenance.
For the purpose of assuring floodplain/stream channel integrity, four existing sediment traps in the Pete King drainage
would be removed, with the sites restored to approximate natural channel cross-section coIXIitions.
For the purpose of restoring streamside vegetation to promote the re-establishment and role or large wood in providing
shade, channel stability, and fish habitat diversity, a strip 300 feet wide, 6 miles long on both sides of Fish Creek, would
be inter-planted with cottonwoods. A similar strip along 2 miles of Pete King Creek would be planted with conifers and
deciduous tree species.
Access Optjop 1 is included with the "no action" alternative, in which recreational access opportunities would remain
unchanged from existing management, as displayed in the Forest's current Access Guide. Specific recreational road
and trail opportunities are displayed in this guide. It should be noted that some of the roads displayed as open
(seasonally or yearlong) to motorized use are actually closed due to the recent mud and landslides of 1996. Also, a
majority of the trails are not usable, even for recreational hiking, due to their deteriorated condition. Re-opening of
these routes will take place as the landforms become stable and as funds become available.
Nortla Loc:Iasa Faee ElS
32
CIlaDier Two
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
ALTERNATIVE 2
This alternative is the proposed action that came out of the NFMA Assessment and focuses on vegetative treatments,
aquatic management activities, and social values. To the maximum extent possible, it responds to the purpose and need
and starts the move towards desired ecological and social conditions.
Prescribed FIre - For the purposes of maintaining healthy ecosystems and reducing the risk of catastrophic wildland
tires, prescribed fire (mixed severity) is proposed mostly within the FishIHungery Creeks and Face drainages. Although
these fires would not consume all of the trees and shrubs, the size of possible openings created would range from 50 to
500 acres.
Understory burns within ponderosa pine, grand fir, and Douglas-fir forest types are proposed mostly within the
breaklands. These bums will reintroduce fire as an ecological process and will help perpetuate the types of stand
composition and stnlcture naturally found on these landscapes. Upon completion of a fire management plan, prescribed
natural fire may take up additional acres, should lightning strikes occur in desirable areas at times when the risks and
consequences are at acceptable levels. A combination of understory and mixed severity tires are proposed within
portions of the Lochsa RNA.
A Forest Plan amendment (see Appendix C) is proposed to change the maximum burned acres from wildfire to
unscheduled for certain management areas having a primary resource emphasis other than timber. This is being done in
an effort to balance the suppression costs with resource values lost while also considering firefighter safety. This
amendment will also allow the use of alternative suppression strategies (confine and contain) within the Lochsa RNA.
It should be DOted that the implementation of the prescribed fire program will be extremely challenging, requiring
creative techniques, such as multiple entries into identified areas to slowly reduce fuel loads. Timing will be a critical
factor, as will the continuous monitoring of weather and fuels data to take advantage of the narrow window of
opportunity for burning. There are risks in using fire, such as unexpected changes in weather conditions resulting in
unplanned fire behavior and potential smoke problems. However, the continued exclusion of fire through suppression
efforts will continue to increase the build-up of fuel, increasing the risk of severe wildfires.
TImber Haaest - For the purposes of improving forest health and supplying timber for logging-dependent
communities, five timber sales totaling an estimated 8,980 acres (7% of the analysis area) would be offered for sale over
a 5-year period. Primary silvicuItural treatments would consist of regeneration hmvests and thinnings of commercial
size timber to reduce stand densities, change species composition, and achieve desired age class/size distribution and
structure patterns, plus, reduce the risk of high intensity wildfires on the breaklands.
Under the regeneration harvest treatment, the percent of trees proposed for removal will vary, depending upon the LTA.
On the breaklands, only half, and sometimes less, of the trees would be removed. About 65% of the trees would be
removed on the colluvial midslopes, and an average of 75% would be removed on the old surfaces. (Sample stand
diagnoses of proposed harvest treaments can be found in Appendix B.) Although the harvest sites would appear natural
with many trees remaining, the size of possible openings created would range from 40 to 450 acres.
The thinnings propose to remove up to 33% of the trees on any LTA. Suppressed trees, usually of smaller diameter,
would be harvested, releasing water and nutrients for the trees left on the site. Some of the thinnings labeled on the map
as "stocking control", are proposed for the purpose of maintaining a fully stocked stand less susceptible to insects,
disease, and/or high intensity wildfire.
It is proposed to use clearcut harvesting to remove off-site tree species in the Bimerick Creek drainage for the purposes
of better utilizing these sites with adapted tree stock and preventing the contamination of the local gene pool. The
existing access and gentle, rolling topography of this area, west of Bimerick Creek, lends itself well for the use of a log
foxwarder system, which can skid logs over slash filled trails to existing roads, causing minimal soil disturbance when
compared to a tractor skid trail. The area east of Bimerick Creek would require a helicopter to land logs to landings on
roads 5545 and 483. Should any of this area prove to be infeasible for harvest (i.e. no bids received), those areas will be
programed for prescribed burning to remove the off-site trees. Local seed sources would be used to replant the sites
with genetically adapted seral species. The size of possible openings created by proposed clearcut harvests range from
10 to about 1,000 acres.
NordI Lodasa Face £IS
33
CupferTwo
Salvage harvest is proposed mostly in the Walde Mountain area, with some units in the Canyon Creek drainage.
Approximately 10% of the stand volume, consisting of dead, dying, and high risk trees, would be harvested.
Conventional systems, using existing system and temporary roads, would yard the salvaged trees.
Approximately 75% of the area proposed for harvest has existing road systems and can be logged using conventional
systems (skyline and tractor yarding). The remaining 25% proposed for harvest will require helicopter yarding. Most
helicopter landing areas are proposed out of the river corridor along existing road systems. Two helicopter landing
areas are proposed on clearings within the river corridor near the mouths of Deadman and Bimerick Creeks, with a third
proposed on a large grassy area 1.5 miles up Pete King Creek. The Bimerick site, a dispersed campsite above the
highway, would require some clearing of trees to make it suitable as a helicopter landing.
•
•
•
••
A short (1.1 miles), ridge-top, system road needs to be constructed for yarder access in the Tick Creek drainage (Face)
near Van Camp. Forest Roads 481, 483, and 5545 will need some cwve widening and realignment to accommodate log
trucks from the Van Camp and Bimerick Meadows areas to about Frenchman Butte (approximately 11.4 miles).
Another 1.5 miles of the Pete King road (# 453) needs to be reconstructed to access a helicopter landing. Nine
temporary roads, located mostly in the Pete King, Canyon, and Deadman Creek drainages and each averaging about 0.5
mile in length, will be constructed for yarder access and obliterated after use.
Ag;css Optloa 2 was analyzed together with Alternative 2 to address their combined effects on watersheds and
wildlife. This option is the proposed action that came out of the NFMA Assessment. It would improve the quality of
recreational experiences on roads and trails by: (1) maintaining trail facilities; (2) relocating and/or reconstructing
problem trail stretches; (3) providing road and trail signing and infonnation; (4) developing riding "loop" opportunities;
and (5) providing opportunities that fit user's expectations. It stratifies the landscape into three zones (A,B and C) of
motorized and DOn-motorized recreational use. The delineation of the zones is based on social value considerations
combined with the suitability of the land to support different recreational experiences. Site-specific motorized and nonmotorized road and trail opportunities are described under Access Option 2 in Appendix A. What follows is a brief
description of the opportunities in each zone:
Recreational Access Management Zone A encompasses the Willow, Hungary and Fish Creek drainages. Recreational
and access opportunities emphasize the maintenance of a primitive to semi-primitive, non-motorized setting, with the
primary emphasis being a DOn-motorized opportunity focused on a mainline trail system. Existing motorized use of
trails within this ~ne would no longer be allowed with this option.
Recreational Access Management Zone B encompasses the Deadman, Bimerick and portions of the Fish and Lochsa
Face drainages, including the Lolo MotoIWay corridor. Recreational and access opportunities emphasize the
maintenance of a semi-primitive, limited motorized setting, with emphasis on retaining year-round accessibility by all
motorized vehicles on the perimeter forest road system into the area. Non-motorized opportunities would still exist in
both summer and fall use seasons.
Recreational Access Management Zone C encompasses the Pete King, Canyon, Glade, Apgar, Rye Patch, and portions
of the Deadman and Lochsa Face drainages. Recreational and access opportunities emphasize motorized experiences,
with the primary emphasis being a motorized opportunity where motorized use is on designated roads and trails. Nonmotorized opportunities would still exist in both summer and fall use seasons.
•
•!II
•
•
-•1)1
~
•111I
r'"
Nortla Lodsa Faee EIS
34
Cu'-rTwo
~
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
~
..
ALTERNATIVE 3
lbis was the preferred alternative in the DEIS. It focuses on the same treatments as Alternative 2, but emphasizes what
can be dODe, in relation to timber harvest, if DO Dew roads (system or temporary) are constructed. The IDT designed
this alternative to respond to the public comment that "one of your alternatives should be based on DO new road
construction at all".
Prescribed Fare - For the pwposes of maintaining healthy ecosystems and reducing the risk of catastrophic wildland
fires, prescribed fire (mixed severity) is proposed mostly within the FishIHungery Creeks and Face drainages. Although
these fires would not consume all of the trees and shrubs, the size of possible openings created would range from SO to
500 acres.
Understory burns within ponderosa pine, grand fir, and Douglas-fir forest types are proposed mostly within the
breaklands. These burns will reintroduce fire as an ecological process and will help perpetuate the types of stand
composition and structure naturally found on these landscapes. Upon completion of a fire management plan, prescribed
natural fire may take up additional acres, should lightning strikes occur in desirable areas at times when the risks and
consequences are at acceptable levels. A combination of understory and mixed severity fires are proposed within
portions of the Lochsa RNA.
A Forest Plan amendment (see Appendix C) is proposed to change the maximum burned acres from wildfire to
unscheduled for certain management areas having a primary resource emphasis other than timber. This is being done in
an effort to balance the suppression costs with resource values lost while also considering firefighter safety. This
amendment will also allow the use of alternative suppression strategies (confine and contain) within the Lochsa RNA.
Tjmber Harvest - For the purposes of improving forest health and supplying timber for logging-dependent
communities, five timber sales totaling an estimated 7,870 acres (6% of the analysis area) would be offered for sale over
a 5-year period. Primary silvicultural treatments would consist of regeneration harvests and thinnings of commercial
size timber to reduce stand densities, change species composition, and achieve desired age class/size distribution and
structure patterns, plus, reduce the risk of high intensity wildfires on the breaklands. The size of possible openings
created by proposed regeneration harvests range from 40 to 450 acres.
This also includes proposed clearcut harvesting to remove off-site tree species in the Bimerick Creek drainage for the
pwposes of better utilizing these sites with adapted tree stock and preventing the contamination of the local gene pool.
The existing access and gentle, rolling topography of this area, west of Bimerick Creek, lends itself well for the use of a
log forwarder system, which can skid logs over slash filled trails to existing roads, causing minimal soil disturbance
when compared to a tractor skid trail. The area east of Bimerick Creek would require a helicopter to land logs to
landings on roads 5545 and 483. Should any of this area prove to be infeasible for harvest (i.e. no bids received), those
areas will be programed for prescribed burning to remove the off-site trees. Local seed sources would be used to
replant the sites with genetically adapted seral species. The size of possible openings created by proposed clearcut
halVests range from 10 to about 1,000 acres.
Salvage harvest is proposed mostly in the Walde Mountain area, with some units in the Canyon Creek drainage.
Approximately 10% of the stand volume, consisting of dead, dying. and high risk trees, would be' harvested.
Conventional systems, using existing system and temporary roads, would yard the salvaged trees.
Approximately 70% of the area proposed for harvest has existing road systems and can be logged using conventional
systems (skyline and tractor yarding). The remaining 30% proposed for harvest will require helicopter yarding. Most
helicopter landing areas are proposed out of the river corridor along existing road systems. Two helicopter landing
areas are proposed on clearings within the river corridor near the mouths of Deadman and Bimerick Creeks, with a third
proposed on a large grassy area 1.5 miles up Pete King Creek. The Bimerick site, a dispersed campsite above the
highway, would require some clearing of trees to make it suitable as a helicopter landing.
Forest Roads 481, 483, and 5545 will need some cUlVe widening and realignment to accommodate log trucks from the
Van Camp area to about Frenchman Butte (approximately 11.4 miles). Another 1.5 miles of the Pete King road (# 453)
needs to be reconstructed to access a helicopter landing.
Nortla LoeIIsa Faee £IS
3S
CHpter'IWo
Ag;ess Opdog 3 was analyzed together with Alternative 3 to address their combined effects on watersheds and
wildlife. It is the preferred option that addresses the compromise needed between those desiring motorized access on
all North Lochsa Face roads and trails and those desiring a DOn-motorized recreational opportunity throughout the
landscape. It delineates motorized and DOn-motorized recreational use by major stream drainage, based on social value
considerations combined with the suitability of the land to support different recreational experiences. The quality of
recreational experiences on roads and trails would improve by: (1) maintaining trail facilities; (2) relocating and/or
reconstructing problem trail stretches, with those trails outside the HR 1570 portion of the Fish Creek drainage being
open to motorized trailbike riding opportunities after reconstruction; (3) providing road and trail signing and
information; (4) developing riding "loop" opportunities; and (5) providing opportunities that fit user's expectations,
including a range of challenging trailbike riding opportunities. Specific recreational opportunities on roads and trails
are displayed inAp~ndixA. The following describes the opportunities by drainage:
Hungery and Willow Creek drainages would emphasize the maintenance of a primitive to semi-primitive, nonmotorized setting, with the primary emphasis being DOn-motorized opportunities focused on a mainline trail system.
Fish Creek drainage would emphasize the maintenance of a semi-primitive, motorized setting, where motorized use
would be limited to existing use areas and trail conditions (i.e. DO reconstruction of trails for motorized use), which
would contribute to very challenging trailbike "loop" riding opportunities in the summer.
Deadman and Bimerick Creek drainages would emphasize the maintenance of a semi-primitive motorized setting,
which emphasizes motorized recreational opportunities while providing for fall elk security.
Pete King, Canyon, and Glade Creek drainages would emphasize motorized experiences, with the primary emphasis
being a motorized opportunity on designated roads and trails. Non-motorized opportunities would still exist in both the
summer and fall use seasons.
The face drainages, including Rye Patch and Apgar Creek drainages, would provide a natural lOaded setting, where
topography and landform stability primarily determine the type of access available from the river canyon into the area's
interior.
This option also identifies a specific monitoring strategy (see App~ndixA). Its purpose is to address the issue regarding
the maintenance 5'f motorized use, primarily on trails in the Fish Creek drainage, at existing levels to protect the high
values associated with the area's wildlife, fish, and primitive setting.
•.'
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
~,
L
NorIIa Loclasa FaCIe ElS
36
Claapter Two
'1
l
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•III
ALTERNATlVE 3. (Preferred Alternadve)
The IDT designed this alternative to respond to public comment requesting that we modify Alternative 3 to: 1) include
the construction of temporary roads to access more timbered areas by conventional means; and 2) eliminate those burn
uni ts within the FishlHungery Creeks area that would burn trees having a potential commercial value.
Prescribed Fjre - For the purposes of maintaining healthy ecosystems and reducing the risk of catastrophic wildland
fires, prescribed fire (mixed severity) is proposed in four units along the Lochsa River breaks. Although these fires
would not consume all of the trees and shrubs, the size of possible openings created would range from 100 to 420 acres.
Understory bums within ponderosa pine, grand fir, and Douglas-fir forest types are proposed mostly within the
breaklands. These burns will reintroduce fire as an ecological process and will help perpetuate the types of stand
composition and structure naturally found on these landscapes. Upon completion of a fire management plan, prescribed
natural fire may take up additional acres, should lightning strikes occur in desirable areas at times when the risks and
consequences are at acceptable levels. A combination of understory and mixed severity fires are proposed within
portions of the Lochsa RNA.
A Forest Plan amendment (see Appendix C) is proposed to change the maximum burned acres from wildfire to
unscheduled for certain management areas having a primary resource emphasis other than timber. This is being done in
an effort to balance the suppression costs with resource values lost while also considering firefighter safety. This
amendment will also allow the use of alternative suppression strategies (confine and contain) withi.n the Lochsa RNA.
TImber Harvest - For the purposes of improving forest health and supplying timber for logging-dependent
communities, five timber sales totaling an estimated 8,280 acres (6% of the analysis area) would be offered for sale over
a 5-year period. Primary silvicultural treatments would consist of regeneration harvests and thinnings of commercial
size timber to reduce stand densities, change species composition, and achieve desired age class/size distribution and
structure patterns, plus, reduce the risk of high intensity wildfires on the breaklands. The size of possible openings
created by proposed regeneration harvests range from 40 to 450 acres.
This also includes proposed clearcut harvesting to remove off-site tree species in the Bimerick Creek drainage for the
purposes of better utilizing these sites with adapted tree stock and preventing the contamination of the local gene pool.
The existing access and gentle, rolling topography of this area, west of Bimerick Creek, lends itself well for the use of a
log forwarder system, which can skid logs over slash filled trails to existing roads, causing minimal soil disturbance
when compared to a tractor skid trail. The area east of Bimerick Creek would require a helicopter to land logs to
landings on roads 5545 and 483. Should any of this area prove to be infeasible for harvest (i.e. no bids received), those
areas will be programed for prescribed burning to remove the off-site trees. Local seed sources would be used to
replant the sites with genetically adapted seral species. The size of possible openings created by proposed clearcut
harvests range from 10 to about 1,000 acres.
Salvage harvest is proposed mostly in the Walde Mountain area, with some units in the Canyon Creek drainage.
Approximately 10% of the stand volume, consisting of dead, dying, and high risk trees, would be harvested.
Conventional systems, using existing system and temporary roads, would yard the salvaged trees.
Approximately 75% of the area proposed for harvest has existing road systems and can be logged using conventional
systems (skyline and tractor yarding). The remaining 25% proposed for harvest will require helicopter yarding. Most
helicopter landing areas are proposed out of the river corridor along existing road systems. Two helicopter landing
areas are proposed on clearings within the river corridor near the mouths of Deadman and Bimerick Creeks, with a third
proposed on a large grassy area 1.5 miles up Pete King Creek. The Bimerick site, a dispersed campsite above the
highway, would require some clearing of trees to make it suitable as a helicopter landing.
Forest Roads 481, 483, and 5545 will need some curve widening and realignment to accommodate log trucks from the
Van Camp area to about Frenchman Butte (approximately 11.4 miles). Another 1.5 miles of the Pete King road (# 453)
needs to be reconstructed to access a helicopter landing. Eight temporary roads, located mostly in the Pete King,
Canyon, and Deadman Creek drainages and each averaging about 0.5 mile in length, would be constructed for yarder
access and obliterated after use.
Access Option J, the preCerred option, was also analyzed together with Alternative 3a to address their combined
effects on watersheds and wildlife. (See Alternative 3 for a description of this access option.)
NortJa LocIIsa Face EIS
37
OapterTwo
II
I
I
I
I
•
•I
I
I
I
I
•
•
ALTERNATlVE 4
This alternative is in response to having DO treatments in the North Lochsa Slope Roadless Area. The IDT designed
this alternative to respond to the public comments of "stay out of all roadless places"; and "there should be no
irretrievable loss of commercial timber due to prescribed or natural fire until the fate of the wilderness proposal is
resolved." It is also shows what can be done, in relation to prescribed fire, using current Forest Plan suppression
strategies. It includes the following treatment components:
Prescribed Fire - Understory bums within ponderosa pine, grand fir, and Douglas-fir forest types are proposed mostly
within the breaklands. These burns will reintroduce fire as an ecological process and will help perpetuate the types of
stand composition and structure naturally found on these landscapes. Upon completion of a fire management plan,
prescribed natural fire may take up additional acres, should lightning strikes occur in desirable areas at times when the
risks and consequences are at acceptable levels. Forest Plan standards for the maximum burned acres from wildfire will
govern wildfire suppression.
Timber Banest - For the purposes of improving forest health and supplying timber for logging-dependent
communities, five timber sales totaling an estimated 5,190 acres (4% of the analysis area) would be offered for sale over
a 5-year period. Primary silvicultural treatments would consist of regeneration harvests and thinnings of commercial
size timber to reduce stand densities, change species composition, and achieve desired age class/size distribution and
structure patterns, plus, reduce the risk of high intensity wildfires on the breaklands outside of the North Lochsa Slope
Roadless Area. The size of possible openings created by proposed regeneration harvests range from 40 to 450 acres.
Salvage harvest is proposed mostly in the Walde Mountain area, with some units in the Canyon Creek drainage.
Approximately 10% of the stand volume, consisting of dead, dying, and high risk trees, would be harvested.
Conventional systems, using existing system and temporary roads, would yard the salvaged trees.
A majority (86%) of the areas proposed for harvest have existing road systems and can be logged using conventional
systems (skyline and tractor yarding). There are some long corners and isolated areas within the Pete King, Canyon,
and lower Face drainages that will require helicopter logging. All helicopter landings are proposed out of the river
corridor along existing road systems,with one landing proposed on a large grassy area 1.5 miles up Pete King Creek.
Approximately 1.5 miles of the Pete King road (# 453) needs to be reconstructed to access a helicopter landing. Eight
temporary roads, loCated mostly in the Pete King, Canyon, and Deadman Creek drainages and each averaging about 0.5
mile in length, will be constructed for yarder access and obliterated after use.
Access Option 2 was also analyzed together with Alternative 4 to address their combined effects on watersheds and
wildlife. (See Alternative 2 for a description of this access option.)
•
•
•
•
NoJ1ll IAcIasa Face EIS
39
CllapterTwo
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
ALTERNATIVE 5
This alternative is in response to aUowing only prescribed lire in the North Lochsa Slope Roadless Area. The IDT
designed this alternative to respond to the public comment that "an aggressive program of prescribed fire is far more
appropriate in the Fish and Hungery Creek drainages than timber harvesting". It includes the following treatment
components:
Prescribed Burping - For the purposes of maintaining healthy ecosystems and reducing the risk of catastrophic
wildland fires, prescribed fire (mixed severity) is proposed mostly within the FishIHungery Creeks and Face drainages.
Although these fires would not consume all of the trees and shrubs, the size of possible openings created would range
from 50 to 500 acres.
Understory bums within ponderosa pine, grand fir, and Douglas-fir forest types are proposed mostly within the
breaklands. These burns will reintroduce fire as an ecological process and will help perpetuate the types of stand
composition and structure naturally found on these landscapes. Upon completion of a fire management plan, prescribed
natural fire may take up additional acres, should lightning strikes occur in desirable areas at times when the risks and
consequences are at acceptable levels. A combination of understory and mixed severity fires are proposed within
portions of the Lochsa RNA.
A Forest Plan amendment (see Ap~ndix C) is proposed to change the maximum burned. acres from wildfire to
unscheduled for certain management areas having a primary resource emphasis other than timber. This is being done in
an effort to balance the suppression costs with resource values lost while also considering firefighter safety. This
amendment will also allow the use of alternative suppression strategies (confine and contain) within the Lochsa RNA.
Timber Harvest - For the purposes of improving forest health and supplying timber for logging-dependent
communities, five timber sales totaling an estimated 5,190 acres (4% of the analysis area) would be offered for sale over
a S-year period. Primary silvicultural treatments would consist of regeneration harvests and thinnings of commercial
size timber to reduce stand densities, change species composition, and achieve desired age class/size distribution and
structure patterns, plus, reduce the risk of high intensity wildfires on the breaklands outside of the North Lochsa Slope
Roadless Area. The size of possible openings created by proposed regeneration harvests range from 40 to 450 acres.
Salvage harvest is proposed mostly in the Walde Mountain area, with some units in the Canyon Creek drainage.
Approximately 10% of the stand volume, consisting of dead, dying, and high risk trees, would be harvested.
Conventional systems, using existing system and temporary roads, would yard the salvaged trees.
A majority (86%) of the areas proposed for harvest have existing road systems and can be logged using conventional
systems (skyline and tractor yarding). There are some long comers and isolated areas within the Pete King, Canyon,
and lower Face drainages that will require helicopter logging. All helicopter landings are proposed out of the river
corridor along existing road systems, with one landing proposed on a large grassy area 1.5 miles up Pete King Creek.
Approximately 1.5 miles of the Pete King road (# 453) needs to be reconstructed to access a helicopter landing. Eight
temporary roads, located mostly in the Pete King, Canyon, and Deadman Creek drainages and each averaging about 0.5
mile in length, will be constructed for yarder access and obliterated after use.
Aecess Option 4 is included with this alternative, which would combine the one-month road closures from the elk
vulnerability study in specific areas with the existing situation. It addresses the issue regarding bull elk vulnerability
during the fall rifle hunting season. Areas affected include the Pete King, Canyon, and Deadman Creek drainages,
where road closures would be implemented for a one-month period (10/1 to 1113). The specifics of this option are
displayed in App~ndix A .
NoJ1Il Lodasa Faee E1S
41
CIl.pterTwo
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
F. Comparison or Alternatives
Comparison or the Alternatives to the Purpose:
VEGETATIVE MANAGEMENT
1. Use prescribed fire to maintain healthy ecosystems and reduce the risk of catastrophic wildland Ores.
Alternative 1, No Action, would not accomplish any ecosystem burning.
Alternatives 2, 3, and 5 would accomplish 6,130 acres of mixed-severity burns, and 6,510 acres of potential
understory bums over a 5-year period.
Alternative 3a would accomplish 930 acres of mixed-severity burns along the Lochsa River breaks only, and 6,900
acres of potential understory bums over a 5-year period.
Alternative 4 would accomplish
year period.
DO
acres of mixed-severity bums, and 1,040 acres of understory bums over a 5-
2. Reduce stand densities, change species composition, and achieve age class/size distribution and
structure patterns to desired levels; reduce the risk of wildland fire; reduce burn IDtensities on the
breaklands; replace orr-site tree species with appropriate stock, and prevent the contamiDation of the local
gene pool; salvage dead, dying, and high risk trees; and Improve Forest health.
Except for some roadside salvage sales planned in the current 5-year timber sale program and covered under other
NEPA analyses, Alternative 1 does not meet the full intent of this purpose, since no timber harvest is proposed for
the above stated purposes.
All action alternatives propose varying amounts of timber halVest as follows to be split among five different
timber sales over a 5-year period:
Alt. 2
All. 3
Alt.3a
Alts 4,5
Regeneration
Harvest
3,380 ac
2,990 ac
3,050 ac
2,465 ac
Commercial
niDDin.
2,950 ac
2,275 ac
2,580 ac
2,325 ac
Cleareut
Harvest
2,250ac
2,250 ac
2,250 ac
none
Salvage
Harvest
400ac
355 ac
400ac
400ac
Total Acres
8.980
7,870
8,280
5,190
3. Reduce the number of trees per acre in overstocked stands, and where desired, reduce the density of
tolerant species in favor of the seral species.
The current program (Alternative 1) would precommercially thin 35 acres/year. This is covered under other
NEPA analyses.
Over a 5-year period, the action alternatives would accomplish 1,290 acres of precommercial thinning in young,
overstocked stands, while favoring seralleave trees.
Nortll Lochs. Face EIS
43
CllapkrTwo
4. Eradicate new weed invaders; reduce the extent and density of estabUshed noxious weeds; Implement
the most economical, effective weed control methods for the target weed; aDd implement an integrated
management system using aU appropriate available IDethods.
Under Alternative 1, ongoing, low level, biological control agent distribution would continue as agents become
available as part of an overall Forest program.
Implementing an Integrated Pest Management approach to weed control, the action alternatives would treat
noxious and undesirable weeds along roads and trails, as described in Appendix D, over a 5-year period:
AQUATICS MANAGEMENT
1. Promote restoradon of Impacted watenheds by reducing the risk of sediment entering live streams, and
by encounPtg the natural DushiDg of iDstream sediDleDts.
During the next 5 years and as funding becomes available, all of the action alternatives would implement 94 miles
of road obliteration and place S9 miles of roads under long-term road maintenance. A new NEPA analysis would
be required to implement the same activities under Alternative 1.
I
I
•I
1
I
•I
I
2. Restore streamside veRetadon to promote the re-estabUsbment ad role of large wood in providing
shade, dwmel stabUlty, and fish habitat diversity.
I
I
I
All action alternatives would plant 450 acres along Fish Creek and 150 acres along Pete King Creek.
The same activity may occur under the Alternative 1, but would require a new NEPA analysis.
SOCIAL VALUES
1. To CODtinge to provide for recreation use aDd associated access on NatioDaI Forest roads and trans in
the North Lochsa Face area while protecdng Datural resource values associated with landforms, habitat,
wlldllte and fish species; and to maintain the mix of recreation opportunities near the existing condition
whne improving the quaUty of the experieDces for motorized ad non-motorized users.
Access Option 1 would manage area roads and trails under the existing travel plan. It maintains the current mix of
recreation opportunities, but does not improve the current quality of experiences for motorized and non-motorized
users.
Access Option 2 is the original proposed action. It protects natural resource values by proposing relocation or
reconstruction of problem trail stretches. Except for proposed non-motorized use in the Fish Creek drainage, this
option maintains the current mix of recreation opportunities and provides for riding loop opportunities and
handicapped hunting access.
Access Option 3 differs from Access Option 2 in regards to motorized riding opportunities (specifically in the Fish
Creek drainage) and season of use. Also, it has dropped the proposed trail reconstruction along Boundary Peak
Trail 118, Fish Creek Trail 224, and Ant Hill Trail 225 in order to maintain consistent interpretation of the 1993
Forest Plan lawsuit settlement agreement. This option provides riding loop opportunities and handicapped hunting
access, plus, a range of challenging trailbike riding opportunities.
Access Option 4 is similar to Access Option 1, except for the addition of the one-month (10/1 to 1113) road
closures from the bull elk vulnerability study.
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
II
II
•
•
\
Nortla LodIsa Face EIS
44
C. . . .rTwo
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•I
I
I
2.
Provide. supply of timber for loaiDl-depeDdeDt commUDides.
The current S-yr timber sale program (Alternative 1) is expected to salvage 2 MMBFlYear.
Alternative 2 proposes five timber sales averaging 15.8 MMBF/sale, totaling an estimated 79 MMBF.
Alternative 3 proposes five timber sales averaging 14.4 MMBF/sale, totaling an estimated 72 MMBF.
Alternative 3a proposes five timber sales averaging 15.0 MMBF/sale, totaling an estimated 75 MMBF.
Alternatives 4 and 5 propose five timber sales averaging 10 MMBF/sale, totaling an estimated 50 MMBF.
The following tables provide a comparison of the alternatives and access options in relation to the issues described
earlier in this chapter:
•
T ble U
Issues
. Comp;arisoDOr AIternad ves b
Water Quality
aod FISh
Habitat
~y
Issues
AILl
AIL 2
AIL 3
AIL 3.
AIL 4
AILS
No chaDge
from aarrent
recovery
Low risk of
impact
(sediment)
from road
Low risk of
impact
(sediment)
COlIStrucbOD,
prescribed fue
and limber
Sligblrisk
(sediment)
from
prescribed fue
aDd low risk
from timber
harvest.
Beneficial
impact from
Least risk of
impact
(sediment) of
all "action"
alternatives.
Beneficial
impact from
Low risk of
impact
(sediment)
from
prescribed fire
aDd timber
road
Beneficial
impacrfrom
road
obliteration
projects.
treDds.
prescribed fire,
aod timber
harvest.
Beneficial
impact from
road
obliteration
from
harvest.
Beneficial
impact from
road
obliteration
projects.
road
obliteration
projects.
obliteration
projec~
harvest.
projects.
T,E,.aodS
Wildlife
Species
NoimpacL
~
Elk Habitat
Provides for a
lower level of
elk seaarity
area than the
action
alteraatives.
Winter forage
is limiting
(ooly 10% of
the winter
raoge contains
browse forage
younger than
20 years).
May impact
boreal owl,
fISher,
harlequin duck,
aod wolverine.
Benefits
black-backed
woodpecker
and
Oammula1ed
owl.
Improves elk
summer habitat
effectiveness in
most of the
~plus,
significantly
increases elk
security during
the bunting
season.
Increases the
&mount of
wioterrange
conwaiug
browse forage
younger than
20 years to
18%.
Same as 2.
May impact
fisher,
harlequin duck.
and wolverine.
Benefits
blade-backed
woodpecker
and
flammuIated
May have a
slight impact
on the fISher.
Abseoceof
prescribed fue
eliDiiDares .y
Same as 2.
associated
beoefi~
owl.
Same as 2,
except
iDcreases the
amount of
winter range
containing
browse forage
younger than
20 years to
17%.
Same as 2,
except
increases the
amount of
winter range
containing
browse forage
younger thaD
20 years to
17%.
Same as 2,
except
increases the
amount of
winter range
containing
browse forage
younger than
20 years to
13%.
Same as 2,
except
increases the
amount of
winter range
containing
browse forage
younger thaD
20 years to
17%.
•
NortII Lodasa Face £IS
45
C. . . .rTwo
Table 2.2 (CODtlnued) • Com"'" IOD ofAlterDatives bY IsIaes
Alt.!
Alt.2
Alt.3
Issues
Laad sboalcI be
MaDaged
No iDcrase
over aurent
propams.
Uses an
ecosystem
maugemeot
approach to
vegetatively
treat 22,950
aaes
tbroapout tbe
aulysis area.
Alt.3.
Alt.4
All. 5
Uses.
Uses an
Uses an
ecosystem
ecosystem
ecosystem
IIWIaFlllent
approach to
vegetatively
treat 21.800
acres
tbroaghout tbe
aualysis area.
maaaaemeat
approacb to
veptatively
treat 17.400
acres, but
excludes mixed
severity bums
in the FISb
Creek area.
maugement
approach. but
treats the least
acres (6~20) of
an "action"
a1terDatives, by
excluding
timber harvest
aod all bummg
within the
Uses an
ecosystem
maaagemeDt
approach to
treat 19,160
acres,. bu I
Staud
replacement
treatmeDts
would affect
4,097 aoes of
mature aod 781
aaesoflate
malUre.
Iatermediate
1IeabDeDts
would affect
2,678 acres of
IDalUre aod
1,086 acres of
late malUre.
Same as 2.
Staud
replacement
treatments
would affect
2,816 acres of
matuJe aDd 499
aaesoflate
mature.
Iatennediate
trea1lDeDts
would affect
2,3fJ7 acres of
mature aDd
1,308 acres of
late matale.
Same as 2.
StaDel
replacement
treatments
would affect
1,483 acres of
mature aod 389
acres of late
mature.
Iatermediate
trea1lDe1lts
would affect
1,031 acres of
malUle and 960
acres of late
mature.
Same as 2.
Stand
replacement
treatments
would affect
3,332 aoes of
mature aDd 769
aaesoflate
mature.
Intermediate
treatments
would affect
2,564 acres of
mature aDd
1,063 acres of
late mature.
Same as 2.
Same as 2.
Same as 2.
Same as 2-
Same as 2.
excludes timber
harvest within
the NlSRA.
NLSRA.
Mature.d
Late Mature
Fora1S
Tbereare
cuneady
31,402 acres of
malUre (100160 yrs) aod
11,329 acres of
late malUre
(161+ yrs)
forests within
the aoalysis
area.
SeDsi1ive
Plants
Use of
Herbicides and
Control of
Noxious
Weeds
No immediate
impacts.
however,
expaadiDg
DOXioas weed
invasion could
threaten some
plaDt
populatiODS.
There would be
DO risks
associated with
the use of
babicides.
However. the
use of only
biological or
medwlit21
control
methods would
nol halt the
current level of
weed
iDfestatioas aDd
spread.
NortII Lodasa FMe ElS
StaDel
replacement
treatments
would affect
4,499 acres of
matuJe aod 854
aaesoflate
malUle.
lD1enDediate
treatmeDts
would affect
~ 703 acres of
malUreaod
1,129 acres of
late ma1llre.
PACFlSH
buffers should
keep impacts to
a miDimum.
BaraiDg
prescriptions in
the RNA would
be developed in
coordiDation
with a BotaDist.
Propose an
iutegrated pest
maaagement
approach to
weed ooutrol
aloag roads aad
trails. The
results of a
worst case
aaalysis
estimate
habicide
levels far less
thaD those
measured to be
toxic to
aquatic or
terrestrial
orpoisms.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•III
,
Table 2.2 (continued) • Comparison ofAltenatives by Issues
All. 2
All. 3
Alt.1
Issues
LocbsaRNA
AsplaDt
succession
CODtiDUes to
actvaace, bigber
fuelloadill&
stand densities,
aDd ladder
fuels will
increase tbe
risk of a high
inteDSity
wildfire that
could eliminate
the vegetatiOD
the RNA was
Roadless Area
VlSUaI Quality
The mix of
letbal and 000lethal bums
will anow fire
to play its
natural role iD
restoring and
maintaining the
iDtegrity of the
RNA plaut
communities.
This acbOD is
coasisleut with
theLocbsa
Alt.4
Alt.S
Same as 2.
Same as 1.
Same as 2.
Compared to
Alternative 2,
there would be
160 less acres
Compared to
Altemative 2,
there would be
160 less acres
harvested, DO
Noimpad.
Prescribed fire
would impact
6,130 acres.
Same as 2,
except for DO
impacts within
the NlSRA.
Similar to 4"
except for the
impaetsof
prescribed fue
within the
NLSRA.
RNA
established to
EstablishmeDt
preserve.
Report.
NoimpacL
Tunber harvest
wouldimpad
3,410 acres and
CODSUUet 1.1
miles of system
road aod ODe
temporary road
within the
NlSRA, and
prescribed fire
would impact
613Oacres.
Vegetative
NoimpaCL
Alt.3a
Same as 2.
harvested aod
DO road
CODStIUetion.
road
CODStrUchOD,
and 930 acres
of prescribed
fire.
Same as 2.
Same as 2.
treatments
would be
visible from the
bighwaylriver,
ceDtral trail.
and Lolo Trail
corridors.
However"
desigoaod
mitigatioD win
cause
treatments to
mimic natural
eveulS, in
which VQOs
will be met or
exceeded iD an
areas.
Nordl LoellA Face £IS
47
CII.pterTwo
Table 2.2 (CODtlnued) • Com.IOD of Alteraadves by bIaeI
Alt.!
Issues
Alt.2
Alt.3
Tribal Treaty
Righ1S
Noimpad.
Lolli-term
Samea2.
Alt.3.
Alt.4
Alt.S
Same as 2.
Less beDefits
tbaD 2 ill
regards to
improving
fola! health.
Slighdy less
beDefits thaD 2
ill regards to
improving
forest health.
Less impadS
Sameas3a.
Same as 2.
Halfoftbe
cosdy
belicopter units
are elimioated,
resulting iD a
PNVof$4.0
minion.
Prescribed fire
coDSisting of
Same as 4.
improvemeots
in forest health
due to
vegetative
treatments
should benefit
tribal hunting
aDdptberioa
Heritage
Resources
NoimpecL
EcoDOmics
The aarreD!
timber program
bas a present
net worth
(PNV) of $1.6
miniOlL
AirOuality
#
The continued
buildup of
forest fuels
plustbe
iocrased
mortality from
iDsedsad
disease would
iocrase the
risk of
catastrophic
wildlaDd fire.
Such a fire
would have an
adverse impact
on air auality.
No"" LocIIsa Face ElS
activities. The
restoration of
aquatic
resources may
beDefit tribal
flShiDg over the
10000-term.
Prescribed fire
is proposed
withio tbe Lolo
Trail corridor.
All other
impacllue
midDted.
PNVof
proposed
Same a 2.
than 2, since DO
prescribed fire
is proposed
within the Lolo
Trail corridor..
PNVia$4.6
millioo.
PNVis $6.1
million.
timber harvest
is $6.6 millioo.
Prescribed fire
(mixed-severity
Same as 2.
aod
uaderbams)
would treat fuel
loadiDgsOD
12,640 acres,
lessening tile
poteDtiai for
larae rues aod
the Qlmulative
effec1S 00 air
quality
identified for
Alternative 1.
48
Prescribed fire
would coDSist
of 930 acres of
mixed-severity
bum aod 6,900
aaesof
underbums.
This would
have less of an
impact in
lessening the
potential for
large fires.
Same as 2.
underbums
would treat fuel
loadiDgs OR
1.040 acres.
Compared to
the other action
alternatives.
this altemative
would have the
least impact on
lesseniog the
potential for
large fires.
CUDterTwo
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Table 2.3 • Compa rison ofAccess Options by Issues
Access OpUG. 1
Access Option 2
Issues
Motorized Use vs.
Non-Motorized
Use
Maintains current
coDditioD/mix of trails
aDd roads. Approx IS%
of the trails caD
pbysically accommodate
motorized use, assuming
motorized riders are of
average skill level aDd
desire an easy to
moderately difficult
rieliDg experience. 1bis
option bas the most
impact on those desiring
a DOn-motorized
experience.
27 miles of trail would
be recDDS1IUeted or
relocated. Although it
offers the most
motorized opportunities,
it does DOt iDclude roads
or trails specifically
designated to provide
access to bunters with
disabilities.
Recreation Access
OpportDDities
Due to motorized road
Bull Elle
Vulnerability
and trail densities during
the fall hunting season,
this option would have
the highest impact on
bull elk mortality (a
_ potential 32% averaged
over the wbole analysis
area).
Nortll Lodasa Face £IS
5'" of the roads aDd
43" of the trails would
be open to motorized
Ule. The FlSbIHuogery
Creeks area would be
totally non-motorized,
expect for some
peripberal roads. This
optiOD bas the most
impact on those desiring
a motorized experience
in this area (Zone A).
39 miles of trail would
be feCODStruded or
relocated. This option
does offer motorized
access for fall hunting
OD desipated roads to
bunters with disabilities.
Restrictions on
motorized access,
especially in the FISh
Creek draiaage, would
lessen the impact OD
bull elk mortality to a
potential 17" averaged
over the wbole aulysis
area.
49
Access Opdon 3
Access Option 4
S7" of tbe roads and
S2% of the trails would
be open to motorized
The effects are the same
as Access OptiOD 1.
except during the fall
bunting season.. wben
only 30% of the roads
would be open to
motorized use.
use, including a loop
trail route in the FISh
Creek area. This option
would have a similar
impact on nonmotorized users, but not
as severe as UDder
Access Option 1.
44 miles of trail outside
of HR. 1570 would be
recoostrueted or
relocated. Existing trail
opponunities for
trailbike recreationis1s
would remain in the
FISh Creek area. It
iDaeases opportunities
to disabled hunters by
extending openings OD
designa1ed roads to any
established bunting
season aDd by adding
designated trails.
Slighdy increased
motorized access over
that of Access Option 2
would result in a slightly
higher potential bull elk
mortality of IS"
averaged over the wbole
analysis area.
Same as 1.
This option would close
the most roads dUriDg
the faU bunting season,
but most trails would be
open as in Access
Option 1. This would
result in a potential bull
elk mortality of 21 %
averaged over the whole
aualY5is area.
ClaapterTwo
•
•...
--
CHAPTER THREE
,
AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
1
I
This chapter briefly describes the baseline (existing) conditions against which environmental effects can be evaluated
with the implementation of Alternative 2 (proposed action) or an alternative action. For the purposes of brevity and not
wanting to ovelWhelm the reader with technical detail, the environmental descriptions in this chapter are an abstract of
the existing conditions. They are supported by specialist reports and technical data contained in the project file.
Where applicable, a brief narrative has been included in each resource section linking this project with the Interior
Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project (ICBEMP) which documented the ecological, social, and economic
condition and trends for the Columbia River Basin in the ln~gra~d Scientific Assessment for Ecosystem Management
in the ln~rior Columbia Basin and Portions of the Klmnath and Great Basins (1996). The assessment does not
prescribe management direction, but instead shows historic and current conditions and trends which set the broader
context for the conditions and trends in the North Lochsa Face planning area.
The geographial extent of the environment which could be affected by the alternatives varies by resource. For
example, the affected environment for wildlife is determined by home range sizes, and extends beyond the analysis area
boundaries. For most resources, however, the affected area is the analysis area itself.
C_ges to Chqtsr Three sinee tIN DEIS: Losensky's age classes (1994) are utilized in the vegetation section, and
the Social Values section includes a discussion on American Indian Relations.
A. Landtype Associations
This section describes the general categories of LTAs found in the North Lochsa Face area. Along with each
deScription is a table providing information on parent materials, tire regimes, and landtype stability.
1. Stream Terraces (LTA lOA)
Approximately one percent of the analysis area consists of stream terraces. This LTA is found in the lower Pete
King drainage, and Fish Creek drainage. Many of these areas were burned by the fires early in the century, but are
now becoming reforested. Though most were burned recently, the tire intetvals are long.
I
I
•11II
Table 3.1 • Stream Terraces
LTA
Parent
Material
lOA
Alluvium
Fire Regime
Lethal,
Extremely
infrequent,
300+ yr.
Mass Wasting
Risk
Surface
Erosion Risk
TOITeDt
Low
Low
Low
Debris
Risk
2. Breaklands (LTAs 2lA, 2IB, 2IC, 23A, 23B and 23C)
These are the steep aspects along rivers and major streams. One-quarter of the analysis area occurs on south
aspect breaklands (LTAs 21A, 21B, 23A and 23B). Many parts of this aspect did not reforest following the large
scale burns in the early 19005. Many areas burned more than once. Most of the burned over areas carne back to
shrubfields with sparse conifer regeneration.
•
,,"
Nortla LoeIIsa Face £IS
51
C"pterTiafte
Cooler, north aDd east aspects on the breaklaDds (LTAs 21C aDd 23C) occupy seven percent of the analysis area.
A more dense, uniform tree cover occurs on this aspect.
Table 3.2 • Breaklands
LTA
Parent
Material
I
FIre Regime
Mass Wasting
RIsk
Surface
Erosion RIsk
Debris
TOITeDt RIsk
21A
Highly
Weathered
Granitic
Mixed,
Frequent,
26-SO years
Moderate
Moderate
High
218
Highly
Weathered
Granitic
Mixed,
Infrequent,
SO-I00 yrs.
High
Low
Moderate
Lethal,
Infrequent,
76-150 years
Mixed,
Frequent,
26-SO years
High
Low
Moderate
23A
Highly
Weathered
Granitics
Border Zone
Very High
Moderate
High
23B
Border Zone
Mixed,
Infrequent,
SO-I00 yrs.
Very High
Low
Moderate
23C
Border Zone
Lethal,
Infrequent,
76-150 years
Very High
Low
Moderate
21C
These slopes occur on 12% of the analysis area aDd form a transition between the steep breaklaDds and more
gentle, rolling uplands. In the unburned, upper drainages, there are older stands of trees, some of which are old
growth timber. Many shrubtields with sparse conifer regeneration are found on this transition ground.
Weathered
Granitic
63
Border Zone
I
I
J
3. Colluvial Midslopes (LT As 61 and 63)
Ta ble 3.3 . CoUu vial Mldslo.pes
LTA
PareDt
Material
Highly
61
I
FlreRepme
Mass WastiDg
RIsk
Surface
Erosion RIsk
Debris
TOlTellt RIsk
Mixed,
Infrequent,
76-150 years
Moderate
Low
Low
Mixed,
Infrequent,
76-150 years
High
Low
Low
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
NortII LoellA Face £IS
52
I
•
-•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
I
4. Frost Churned Uplands (LTAs 718 and 71C)
These are the higher elevation sites in the analysis area, occurring primarily along the Lolo Motorway. They
occupy about 17% of the analysis area and can be divided into two groupings. One group is the cold and dry
southerly aspects, and the other is the more moist, higher elevation sites.
..
T a ble 3 4 Frost-Cb1IrDeel U'pJIan d s
LTA
Parent
Material
Highly
71B
Weathered
Granitic
Highly
Weathered
Granitic
71C
s.
Fire Regime
Lethal,
Infrequent,
76-150 years
Lethal, Very
Infrequent,
100-200 years
Mass Wasting
Risk
Low
High
Debris
Torrent Risk
Low
Moderate
Low
Low
Surface
Erosion Risk
Old Surfaces (LTAs 8lA, 818, 83A and 84A)
These are the more gentle, rolling uplands, comprising 38% of the analysis area. There are two types of old
surfaces - mosaic and non mosaic. The mosaics are a fine textured pattern of alder swales intermixed within the
stands of trees. The mosaics make up about one-third of the old surfaces. Due to long fire intervals (many of the
old surfaces have not burned in hundreds of years), much of the late successional forest within the analysis area is
found on the old surfaces.
Table 3.5 • Old Surfaces
LTA
Parent
Material
Granitic
81A
.
Mass Wasting
Lethal, Very
Infrequent,
151-300 years.
Low
Surface
Erosion Risk
Low
FireReaime
Risk
Debris
Torrent Risk
Low
81B
Granitic
Lethal,
Extremely
Infrequent,
300+ years.
Moderate
Low
Low
83A
Alluvium and
Palouse Silts,
Non-Fragipan
Lethal, Very
Infrequent,
151-300 years.
Low
Low
Low
84A
Border Zone
Lethal, Very
Infrequent,
151-300 years.
Moderate
Low
Low
8. Aquatic Conditions
The Upper Columbia River Basin Science Assessment Team concluded strong populations of key salmonids are
associated with high elevation forested lands. The largest areas of contiguous watersheds supporting strong populations
of key salmonids are within the Central Idaho Mountains in areas like North Lochsa Face, where there is habitat for
chinook salmon, steelhead, bull trout, and westslope cutthroat trout All of these species were considered key salmonids
by the Science Team.
NorIIa LodIsa Face EIS
S3
cupternfte
The Science Team found that many of the aquatic strongholds occur in areas of low road density. Designated
wilderness and roadless areas, such as the Fish Creek drainage, are important anchors for strongholds throughout the
Columbia River Basin. Also, their analysis of stream survey data from across the basin indicates a major decrease in
pool habitat (both frequency and depth) over the last 40 to 60 years. These are attributable to losses in riparian
vegetation, road and highway construction, timber harvest, grazing. farming. and other disturbances. The losses appear
to be greatest in low gradient, biologically productive areas. Instream wood and fine sediment were also found to be
influenced by management activities. Timber harvest, road construction, and some grazing have 0CCUJ'l'ed in a majority
of the watersheds of North Lochsa Face. In addition, extreme wildland fires have burned some of the watersheds over
the last 90 years. Although DO comparisons of past and current conditions have occurred for these streams, it is likely
effects similar to those described by the Science Team have occurred, particularly in low gradient stream reaches.
The North Lochsa Face area includes the following major watersheds: Fish Creek, Pete King Creek, Canyon Creek,
Deadman Creek, Bimerick Creek, Apgar Creek, Glade Creek, and Rye Patch Creek. The State of Idaho had listed Pete
King, Canyon, Deadman, and Glade Creeks as being water quality limited (WQLS) due to sediment However, based
on a recent Beneficial Use Reconnaissance report (1998), the State Department of Environmental Quality has removed
these streams from the WQLS list, pending approval from the Environmental Protection Agency. The following is a
brief description of each watershed, fisheries, and associated habitat within the surveyed l portion of each creek. More
detailed information can be found in the Fisheries tmd WatersMd Specialist Report (project file). The WATBAL
sediment model, Rosgen channel classification, the DFC Fisheries Model and Analysis Procedures, and stream surveys
were used to estimate stream conditions. Refer to the map at the beginning of Chapter One for the location of each
drainage.
1. Watersheds
The Fish Creek watershed, including Hungery and Willow Creeks, drains 55,680 acres of forested lands. Its
aspect is generally east, and its elevation ranges from 2,000 feet at the mouth, to 5,450 feet near the headwaters.
Fish Creek is a sixth order stream. The average annual precipitation in the watershed is 52 inches. Runoff is
typical of snow dominated watersheds of the west, with peak flow occurring in Mayor June and low flow in
August through November. Cedar is the dominant tree in the channel bottoms with subdominant mixed shrubs.
The majority of the watershed is breaklands, old surfaces, frost churned uplands, and colluvial midslopes, with a
lesser amount of stream terraces. Parent material is Idaho Batholith gross and granites. Erosional processes range
from very low to high, with erosion coming from exposed soils on roads and skid trails. During the 1995-96 flood
events, Fish Creek experienced two slides from naturaI causes. Both slides ranged from 26 to 100 cubic yards.
Fish Creek has 9% type A channel, 55% type B channel, and 36% type C channel. The type A channel is defined
as a relatively straight and steep reach (typically 4% or greater gradient) that is structuraIly controlled with
frequent low falls or cascades. This is a "high energy" segment The type B channel is defined as having a
moderate gradient that may be incised into depositional material to some degree. This type of reach is moderately
confined by the adjacent slopes, but some degree of meandering may have developed. The type C channel is
defined as having a low gradient that is rarely confined by the adjacent slopes with a high degree of meandering.
Management activities began in the Fish Creek watershed in the late 1960's, but roading and timber harvest were
confined to the 1970's. Approximately 2,180 acres of the watershed (4%) has been harvested. Current road
density equals 0.6 mi/mi 2 , with most of the roads constructed in the upper portion of the watershed. The water
quality and watershed condition of Fish Creek is considered excellent
The Clearwater National Forest Plan requires that Fish Creek be managed as a "no effect" stream, at a minimum
of 100% biological potential. This means that the biological threshold cannot be exceeded at anytime. The "no
effect" standard allows for 45% sediment production over natural. The standard for sediment is being met, since
WATBAL model runs show no increases in sediment. Although some sediment is stored in Fish Creek meadows,
which may be natural or management induced, the stream is being managed below its geomorphic threshold 2 as
stream integrity and equilibrium are maintained. Both the A and B type channels are meeting the desired future
condition (DFC) of <25% cobble embeddedness. The cobble embeddedness in the C type channel is at 51 %
which is above the DFC of 30-35%.
1 The watershed surveys covered an area from the mouth of each creek up to a predetermined point. and thus may Dot be representative of the whole
stream.
2 The level of disturbance believed wbere tbe Qlmulative impacts of all activities can cause irreversible. or long-term and adverse channel changes.
NortIl LoclIsa
F~
ElS
54
1
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Frenchman Creek is an upper tributary of Fish Creek. It has a moderately steep to steep channel with a mean
gradient of 3.5%. The stream has stable banks. Cobble embeddedness for the entire stream averaged 35.7% in
1992. Instream cover was of moderately low abundance, with an average instream wood frequency of 14.6
pieces/lOO meters of stream. The pools in Frenchman Creek were of fair to good quality and created by large
wood or boulders. Pools formed by woody debris were more common and of higher quality than those created by
boulders. Vegetation within the riparian zone was typically dominated by conifers with an understory of alder,
willow, and other shrubs and grasses. Within the Oearwater Forest Plan, Frenchman Creek has been designated a
"high fishable" water quality objective and is managed for cutthroat trout in B channel types. Cobble
embeddedness in B channel types averaged 37% during the 1992 stream survey, 2% above the Forest Plan DFC.
Maximum short term sediment loading should not cause more than a 20 percent reduction from full biological
potential of the habitat for cutthroat trout Threshold levels of sediment should not be exceeded for more than 10
out of 30 years.
The Pete King Creek watershed, including Polar, Nut, and Walde Creeks, drains 17,500 acres of forested lands.
Its aspect is generally east, and its elevation ranges from 1,500 feet at the mouth, to 5,200 feet The average
annual precipitation is 38 inches. Runoff peaks in April and is low in August through November. Alder is the
dominant tree in the channel bottoms with a subdominant composition of mixed shrubs.
The majority of the watershed is composed of old surfaces and breaklands, with lesser amounts of colluvial
midslopes and stream terraces. The parent material is border zone schist. Pete King Creek, a fourth order stream,
has 65% type A channel and 35% type B channel.
The natural sediment production rate for the Pete King Creek watershed is 23 tonslmi 2/yr. The estimated
geomorphic threshold is 174% over naturaI, or 63 tonslmi 2/yr. Sediment delivery is generally high on the steep
slopes, especially the breaklands, and low elsewhere. The tendency, in Pete King Creek, is for sediment to
increase and deposit at a faster rate than the increased runoff can remove it The stream, therefore, has a tendency
to be sediment surplus and energy limited.
In 1934, approximately 6,000 acres of the Pete King drainage burned. Management activities began in 1953 with
the construction of Forest Road 101. Roads in this period were constructed prior to the implementation of modem
best management practices and therefore delivered sediment to the stream. Current road density equals 5.3
mi/mi 2 . Timber harvest began in 1954 and continued through the 1980's on National Forest lands. To date,
approximately·6,38O acres have been harvested, including land cleared for roads.
During the 1995-96 flood events, Pete King experienced a total of 47 slides; Polar Creek and Walde Creek each
experienced 10 slides; and Nut Creek experienced one slide. Most were road related, ranging from less than 25
cubic yards to more than 1,000 cubic yards, with much of this sediment reaching the streams. Sediment traps,
installed in the early 198Os, trapped some of this sediment Of note; surveys taken after the flood events seem to
indicate that the high flows scoured out much of the sediment in Pete King Creek, and that sediment in this stream
is on the decline.
The Forest Plan requires that Pete King Creek be managed as a "high fishable" stream, at a minimum of 80%
biological potential. This means that a short-term reduction in water quality is allowed if the stream is still likely
to maintain a fish habitat potential that can support an excellent fishery relative to the stream system's naturaI
potential, and if the stream will have the capability for essentially full habitat recovery over time. The "high fish"
standard allows for 45-55% sediment production over natural for 10 out of 30 years, starting with year 1984.
Current sediment levels are 21 % over naturaI at the mouth of Pete King Creek (within standard for sediment). Of
its critical reaches, Walde Creek (currently at 49%) exceeds the Forest Plan standard, because it has been above
the "no effect" standard of 45% more than 10 years out of 30. This determination does not take into account the
removal of 657 tons of sediment from sediment traps located in these streams and the recent completion of 14.5
miles road obliteration within the drainage. Although logging and roading activities have produced additional
sediment and runoff, the stream is being managed below its geomorphic threshold as stream integrity and
equilibrium are maintained. Cobble embeddedness in Walde Creek averages 45% in the B channel types, which is
10% outside the fisheries DFC.
Norda LoeIIsa Face E1S
55
I
The CaD)'OD Creek watershed, including Cabin and Mystery Creeks, drains 12,275 acres of forested lands. Its
aspect is generally south, and its elevation range is from 1,565 feet at the mouth, to 5,040 feet The average
annual precipitation in the watershed is 43 inches. Runoff peaks in Mayor June and is low August through
November. Cedar is the dominant tree in the channel bottoms with mixed shrubs being subdominant
The majority of the watershed is composed of low-moderate relief uplands and breaklands. The parent material is
grussic Idaho Batholith granites, granitics and micaceous gniesses and shists. Canyon Creek, a fourth order
stream, has 64% type A channel, 31 % type B channel, and 5% type C channel.
I
The natural sediment production rate for the Canyon Creek watershed is 17 tonslmi 2/yr. The estimated
geomorphic threshold is 207% over natural, or 52 tonslmi 2/yr. Sediment delivery is generally high on the steep
slopes, especially the breaklands, and low elsewhere.
1
Management activities began in the Canyon Creek watershed in 1954 with the construction of FS Road 101.
Current road density equals 5.3 mi/mi 2 . TImber harvest began in 1965 and continued through 1980's on National
Forest lands. To date, approximately 7,230 acres have been harvested, including land cleared for roads.
I
,
During the 1995-96 flood events, Canyon Creek experienced a total of 32 slides; Cabin Creek experienced seven
slides; and Mystery Creek experienced three slides. Most were road related, ranging from less than 2S cubic yards
to more than 1,000 cubic yards.
The Forest Plan requires that Canyon Creek be managed as a "high fishable" stream. Current sediment levels are
33% over natural at the mouth of Canyon Creek (within standard). Its critical reaches of South Fork Canyon,
above South Fork, and Mystery Creek are all within standard with 30%, 34%, and 36%, respectively. This
determination does not include additional reductions in sediment with the recent completion of 1.5 miles of road
obliteration within the drainage. Although logging and roading activities have produced additional sediment and
runoff, the stream is being managed below its geomorphic threshold as stream integrity and equilibrium are
maintained. Cobble embeddedness averages 38%, which is slightly outside the fisheries DFC.
The Deadman Creek watershed drains 12,642 acres of forested lands. Elevation range is from 1,500 feet at the
mouth, to 5,000 feet The average annual precipitation is 47 inches. Runoff peaks in Mayor June and is low in
August through November. Cedar is the dominant tree in the channel bottoms with dogwood being subdominant
The majority of the watershed is composed of old surfaces, breaklands, and colluvial midslopes. The parent
material is weathered granitic rock. Deadman Creek, a fifth order stream, has 87% type A channel and 13% type
B channel.
The natural sediment production rate for the Deadman Creek watershed is 17 tonslmi 2/yr. The estimated
geomorphic threshold is 207% over natural. Sediment delivery is generally high on the steep slopes, especially
the breaklands, and low elsewhere. Deadman Creek is similar to Pete King Creek in that there is a tendency for
sediment to increase and deposit at a faster rate than the increased runoff can remove it, causing the stream to be
sediment surplus and energy limited.
Management activities began in the 1960's with roading and timber harvest Eighteen percent of the watershed
has been harvested, and the current road density equals 2.0 mi/mi2.
During the 1995-96 flood events, five slides occurred in the Deadman Creek watershed. Four slides along the
mainstem were road related (481 and 5541 roads) and ranged from 26 to 1,000 cubic yards, and one slide was
attributed to a clearcut harvest unit along the West Fork of Deadman.
The Forest Plan requires that Deadman Creek be managed as a "high fishable" stream. Current sediment levels
are 7% over natural at the mouth of Deadman Creek (within standard). Its critical reaches of West Fork, East
Fork, and Middle Forks of Deadman Creek are all within standard with 23%, 0%, and 5%, respectively. Although
logging and roading activities have produced additional sediment and runoff, the stream is being managed below
its geomorphic threshold as stream integrity and equilibrium are maintained. Cobble embeddedness averages
45%, which is outside the fisheries DFC.
Nora Lcdasa F~ EIS
1
The Blmeriek Creek watershed drains 9,549 acres of forested lands. Elevation range is from 1,700 feet at the
mouth, to 5,562 feeL The average annual precipitation is 46 inches. Runoff peaks in Mayor June and is low in
August through November. Cedar is the dominant tree in the channel bottoms with alder being subdominanL
The majority of the watershed is old surfaces, breaklands, and frost churned ridges. The parent material is highly
weathered granitics. Bimerick Creek, a third order stream, has 100% type A channel from its mouth up to
Bimerick Falls, which acts as a barrier to fish migration further up the stream.
The natural sediment production rate for the Bimerick Creek watershed is 15 tons/mi 2/yr. The estimated
geomorphic threshold is 218% over natural. Sediment delivery is generally high on the steep slopes, especially
the breaklands, and low elsewhere.
Management activities began in the Bimerick Creek watershed in the 1930s with roading for fire control and
follow-up planting after large wildfires. Current road density equals 0.4 mi/mi 2 . Harvesting has not occurred in
the watershed. To date, a total of 8.3 acres have been cleared for roads.
The Forest Plan requires that Bimerick Creek be managed as a "high fishable" stream. This standard is being met
for sediment production, since estimates from WATBAL show there has been no increase in sediment in the
watershed. Roading activities have not produced additional sediment and nmoff, and the stream is being managed
below its geomorphic threshold as stream integrity and equilibrium are maintained. Cobble embeddedness
averages 17%, which is within the fisheries DFC.
The analysis area includes the Apgar, Glade, and Rye Pateb Creek drainages. Apgar Creek drains 1,037 acres,
Glade Creek drains 3,119 acres, and Rye Patch Creek drains 1,449 acres of forested lands. Elevation range is
1,600 feet at the mouth, to 4,500 feet for Apgar Creek. Glade Creek ranges from 1,590 feet to 4,853 feet, and Rye
Patch Creek ranges from 1,560 feet to 4,600 feeL The average annual precipitation is 40 inches for Apgar, 43
inches for Glade, and 38 inches for Rye Patch. Runoff for each peaks in Mayor June and is low in August
through November. Cedar is the dominant tree in the channel bottoms of Apgar and Glade, with dogwood being
subdominant. In Rye Patch, cedar is dominant in the channel bottoms, with spruce being subdominant
I
I
I
I
The Apgar Creek watershed consists of breaklands, colluvial midslopes, and old surfaces. The Glade Creek
watershed consists of old surfaces and brealdands, and the Rye Patch watershed consists of breaklands, mountain
slopes and ridies, and old surfaces. Parent materials range from highly weathered granitics to border zone schists.
Apgar and Rye Patch Creeks have 100% type A channel. Glade Creek has 57% type A channel, 8% type B
channel, and 35% type C channel. AIl are second order streams.
The natural sediment production rate for the Apgar Creek watershed is 53 fDnsimi2/yr, and the estimated
geomorphic threshold is only 11% over natural. This low number is most likely exaggerated by WAmAL due to
the small size of the watershed. The natural sediment production rate for the Glade Creek watershed is 19
tons/mi 2/yr, and the estimated geomorphic threshold is 196% over natural. The natural sediment production rate
for the Rye Patch Creek watershed is 48 tons/mi 2/yr, and the estimated geomorphic threshold is only 38% over
natural. Again, this low number may be exaggerated due to the small size of the watershed. Sediment delivery is
generally high on the steep slopes, especially the breaklands, and low elsewhere.
Management activities, consisting of timber harvest and roading. began in the Apgar Creek watershed in 1981; the
Glade Creek watershed in 1965; and the Rye Patch Creek watershed in 1974. Approximately 125 acres of the
Apgar Creek watershed has been harvested, with a road density of 0.98 mi/mi 2; the Glade Creek watershed has
had 1,302 acres harvested, with a road densi~ of 4.6 mi/mi 2 ; and 210 acres of the Rye Patch watershed has been
harvested, with a road density of 0.95 mi/mi 2 .
Apgar Creek experienced one road related slide during the 1996-97 flood events. This slide was attributed to the
FS Road 5542C and ranged from 101-200 cubic yards.
Nortla LoclIsa Face E1S
57
Cluapter 11afte
I
The Forest Plan requires that Apgar, Glade, and Rye Patch Creeks be managed as "high fishable" streams. At
their mouths, current sediment levels are 5% over natural for Apgar, 15% over natural for Glade, and DO increase
for Rye Patch. Although logging and lOading activities in these watersheds have produced additional sediment
and runoff, each stream is being managed below its geomorphic threshold as stream integrity and equilibrium are
maintained. Cobble embeddedness for Apgar, Glade, and Rye Patch Creeks averages 63%, 50%, and 55%,
respectively, which are outside the fisheries DFC.
The table below summarize important facets of the discussion presented above. Peak Flow is used to indicate
possible adverse changes in sediment dynamics in a basin. Peak flows increase due to the removal of water-using
vegetation (trees), increases in snowpack in DeW openings, and a earlier runoff due to increased solar energy.
Peak flow increases in the range of 15-20 percent are considered a "red /Iilg" that indicate there may be decreased
channel stability due to sustained increased energy in the stream.
T a ble36
• - Summaryorc1IITent watenbed CoDdldoDS ~or N0 rtb Lochsa F ace DraIDalies
Peak
Watenbecl
Fish
Frenchman
Pete King
WFPete King
Polar
Placer
Nut
Walde
Canyon
SF Canyon
Upper Canyon
Mystery
Deadman
EFDeadmans
WFDeadman
MFDeadman
Bimerick6
Apgar
Glade
Rye Patch
Flow
% over
Natural
1.0
1.0
4.5
5.8
5.4
3.2
1.7
7.3
8.0
8.0
10.0
8.4
2.2
0.7
4.9
1.2
0.2
1.9
5.6
1.5
Sediment
Sediment: %
over BaseJiDe3
witbID Forest
Plan
Standard?
0
0
21
33
51
3
0
49
33
30
34
36
7
0
23
5
0
5
15
0
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No FP std.
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
% Cobble
EmbeddedDess4
20
37
32
55
45
38
38
45
38
33
39
59
45
44
46
46
17
63
50
55
WlthID
CEDFC?*
Yes
No (+2%)
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No (+4%)
No (+3%)
No (+4%)
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
• The parenthesized values represent the actual percentage that CE exceeds the Desired Future Condition.
Although the numeric values may have an error of +/- 5% (Espinosa 1992), any that are beyond the DFC will be
considered to exceed the Forest Plan objective, and will be evaluated accordingly in the discussion on
environmental effects (Chapter IV).
Lochsa River - Consideration was given to include the Lochsa River because of the potential for cumulative
watershed impacts. A 1994 survey of the Lochsa River suggests there may be an improving trend in substrate
conditions. Data collected in the lower Lochsa River (downstream of Fire Creek) in 1934 was compared to recent
data collected in 1994 in the same stream reaches. In 1934, percent fines was ten percent higher than in 1994.
This elevated condition was believed to be a result of the large fires in 1910, 1919 and in 1934. Large amounts of
sediment were added to the Locbsa River again between 1950 and 1963 during the construction of Highway 12.
Additional sediment inputs occurred in the 1960's with the Idaho jammer roading and logging of the tributary
watersheds. The Lochsa River is currently recovering from these impacts. The State of Idaho currently lists the
Lochsa River as being WQLS due to temperature.
3 Sediment values are based on WATBAL output
4 Percent cobble embeddedness is based on stream survey data.
5 EF Deadman Creek is Dted a "C" channel type in tbe Forest Plan. but there are none in the stream. We Dted the DFC based on a "B" channel type.
6 Bimerick Creek is rated a "CB" channel type in the Forest Plan, but there ale Done in the stream. We rated the DFC based on a "A" channel type.
r ...~.........
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
1
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
I
The 1995-96 flood events caused 16 slides along the mainstem of the Lochsa River. Four of these slides were
related to FS Roads 5515 and 481 and ranged from less than 2S cubic yard to 200 cubic yards. Three slides were
related to clearcut harvest units that were less than 2S to 100 cubic yards. Nine slides were naturai and ranged
from less than 25 to 1,000 cubic yards.
Recent monitoring data indicates a fluctuation in cobble embeddedness values in Pete King Creek. Cobble
embeddedness and other stream parameters were measured over several years. The following table displays those
changes as measured in PeteKing Creek from 1991 -1998
I.
• ..
- Da ta
T ble37 Lower PeteKiD Creek Mom-to~rma
Year
1991
1997
1998
Reach
Number
PK12
PK13
PK14
PK15
PK12
PK13
PK14
PK15
PK12
PK13
PK14
PK15
Reach
Length
(meters)
1560
980
1970
860
1320 960
1230
510
1440
960
1020
775
Channel
Type
Gradient
B3
B3
B3
B3
B3
B3
B3
B3
C3b
C3b
C3b
B3
2.3
3.0
3.2
2.0
3.2
3.7
3.8
3.7
(%)
2.t
2.8
3.0
2.4
Cobble
Embed·
dedness
43
33
38
34
3029
32
29
.47
42
43
36
Bank
Stability
Chane)
Stability
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
--
5.0
64 (2OOd)
63 (2OOd)
4.9
5.0
4.5
5.0
4.9
5.0
4.6
----
59(good)
69 (P>d)
79 (fair)
73 (good)
73 (good)
77 (fair)
These data show a decrease in CE in the lower reaches of the stream in 1997. This is probably due to the scouring
effect of high flows in late 1995 and 1996. 1998 shows not only an increase in cobble embeddedness, but also a
flattening of the channel from a B3 type to a predominantly C3b type, and a slight decrease in channel stability.
This may ind-icate that flood-related sediments upstream are being entrained, and the cross sectional and
longitudinal changes occurring at the mouth are a result of the channel trying to process excess sediment.
Nora LoeIasa Face EIS
59
Cbpternree
2. Fisheries
Fish Creek has an excellent steelhead trout population and a few spring chinook salmon may be present. Pete
King, Canyon, and Deadman all have moderate steelhead populations. Spring chinook salmon have been
documented in Pete King and have occasionally been observed in Deadman which may provide some refugia.
Cutthroat trout are present in all the drainages. Some brook trout and rainbow are present in Bimerick. Current
conditions of threatened, endangered, and sensitive fish species and their occurrence with the North Lochsa Face
area are displayed in the following table:
Table 3.8 • Occurrence of lbreatened, End-Dlered. aDd Sensitive Fish Species
Species
OccUlftnc:e
Comments
Bull Trout (T)
Pall Chinook Salmon (T)
Spring Chinook Salmon (S)
Known
NotUkely
Known
Steelhead Trout (T)
Known
Westslope Cutthroat Trout (S)
Known
Historically, bull trout routinely used the
lower Lochsa River in the winter and early
spring and ascended the river as temperatures
rose. Current data indicates that bull trout
populations are present and considered
depressed in most of the tributaries of the
upper Lochsa River. There have been no
recent sightings of spawning bull trout in the
analysis area. Although a few sightings of
sub-adults have been observed in Fish Creek,
a recent survey failed to document any
summer occurrence of the fish in the project
area tributaries.
The majority of the fall chinook salmon
spawning documented over the last five years
has occurred within the designated critical
habitat reaches of the Oearwater River,
mostly downstream of the North Fork
Oearwater River. Current data suggests that
fall chinook salmon may have a historic
distribution only up to the mouth of the
Lochsa River.
Within the Lochsa River drainage, a majority
of spring chinook production (naturaI and
hatchery stock) occurs upstream of the
analysis area. Surveys within the upper
Lochsa River show a decline in natural spring
chinook production over the last 20 years. In
recent years, some naturaI spring chinook
production may have occurred in Fish Creek
and Pete King Creek.
Wild steelhead runs have declined over the
last several decades to very low numbers.
Steelhead migrate up the Lochsa River each
spring to spawn in many of its tributaries,
including Pete King, Canyon, Deadman, and
Fish Creeks. It is the Forest Plan indicator
species for these streams, with Fish Creek
containing the highest density in the State.
Cutthroat trout can be found in almost all
fish-bearing streams in the North Lochsa Pace
area. It is the Forest Plan indicator species for
Bimerick, Apgar, Glade, and Rye Patch
Creeks.
r ••ftf. . . . . . . . .
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3. Fisheries Habitat
The Upper Columbia River Basin Science Assessment Team has found riparian/Wetland vegetation structure and
diversity making substantial progress towards controlling erosion, stabilizing stream banks, and shading water
areas. This is true of the fisheries habitat within the North Lochsa Face analysis area, where the Fish Creek and
Bimerick Creek drainages are assessed as natural, and the lower drainages have experienced some impacts due to
past management activities (i.e. extensive roading and logging have occurred in Pete King, Canyon, and Glade
Creek drainages). Channel morphology and riparian conditions play an important role in providing high quality
pool habitat with adequate cover in all streams within the analysis area. Also, highly variable stream flows, bed
load movements, and channel instability influence the survival of salmonids, since these younger age classes are
closely associated with channel substrate for use as cover. The following tables and narratives summarize the
fisheries DFCs by major drainage:
I
•..__._---- Fish Creek ....•..._•....
I
I
I
I
Table 3.9 • Habitat Function Summary for Fish Creek
A ChlllUlel Reach
B ChlllUlel Reach
Desired Condition
Existin2 Condition
Existing Condition
In-Stream Cover
Pool-Riffle Ratio
5
50:50
4.6
57:43
3.5
67:33
Pool Qualirv
Snawninl!
% Fines SedimentY
In-Stream Cover
5
100%
<19%
5
3.1
73%
7%
4.6
2.0
84%
16%
3.5
.:P.c,
[;.:',~
:':-""""-'< ,.",_~
I~~t :',l~'" iO ":I<,.t:,~
.~-: ~J;.-T. :>r,.~~~. ~.
,~~
:,:
;;;,_~ :._,.~.,.~<..
• .;;·!t~ ~", ~
r~'J'. ~...
"t'"
-
r
I
l
I
7 This represeDts the biOlogical poteDtiaI needed 10 meet the Forest Plan Staadard. For FISh Creek. lCXl9' is requiRd for its A aDd B clwmels, aDd
80% is required for its C cbaonel.
8 The values displayed for pool quality. iD-stream cover. baok cover. and baDlt stability are based OD a rating system from 1 10 S. with S being the
best
9 This vallie represents the % of fme sedimeDt «6.4mm) iD a vertical profile of the substrate.
10 The muimum stream temperature for salmooid spawning, set by the State of Idaho. is I~C.
Nordl LocIIsa Face E1S
61
-
I
~
C ChaJlJle1 Reach
Dc:sired Condition
Existiag Condition
80%
16-1,oC
3
3
40:60
80%
30-35%
71%
1,oC
2.8
2.6
88:12
65%
51%
40:60
3
80%
22-24%
3
3
13°C
80%
80 iec:es/100 meters
40 iec:esl100 meters
3
3
88:12
2.8
71%
-
30%
2.6
2.8
13°C
57%
16 ieces
21 ieces
2.4
4.7
-
If all four habitat conditions are assumed to be equal and not limiting. then for comparison pwposes, the A and B
channels in Fish Creek are currently at about 73 percent of the biological potential. below the DFC of 100 percenL
Its C channel averages 66 percent. which is below the DFC of 80 percent of the biological potential.
Summer Rearing Habitat: The overall conditions of summer rearing habitat are below the desired level in all
channels. The primary reason is the higher than desired maximum temperature which may be attributed to lack of
shading from past fire events. Pool quality is also limiting which can be attributed to the lack of acting and
potential woody debris from past fire events. Pool to riffle ratio is limiting in the C channel. due mostly to its low
gradienL
WlDter Rearbag Habitat: The overall winter habitat conditions are below the desired level in all channels.
Again. the lack of pool quality is the major factor for the low rating. Substrate conditions as reflected by the
amount of sedimentation in the stream channel (measured as cobble embeddedness) are mostly rated good as are
the pool to riffle ratios. The higher levels of cobble embeddedness and pool to riffle ratios in the C channels is
due to its low gradienL
SpaWDiDg Habitat: The overall conditions of the spawning habitat are below the desired level in all channels.
Temperatures is limiting in the A channel. and pool quality is limiting in all channels. In the C channel. the
percent of fines is high. due to the sediment which tends to accumulate in these low gradient reaches.
RlpariaD Habitat: The baseline DFC condition for the riparian function is well below desired from all
perspectives. The low potential and acting debris parameters are due to Fish Creek flowing through an extensive
sedge meadow complex interspersed with altemating reaches of coniferous foresL Also. the extensive wildland
fires in the 19305 reduced the potential of existing stands to produce large wood. Therefore. the level of large
woody debris in the stream is low and is expected to remain so as long as the meadow ecosystem prevails. This is
a natural condition that does not fit the riparian description listed in the DFC tables.
Management Considerations: Current stream survey information indicates that fish habitat conditions are below
the desired conditions needed to fulfill the Forest Plan standard of "no effect" in the A and B channels and "high
fish" in the C channel. Improvements in pool quality is one option to achieve the standard. Future projects should
not reduce potential woody debris levels. In addition. stream temperatures need to be maintained or improved
(lower temperatures) in Fish Creek and its tributaries to maintain spawning temperatures below 13°C.
62
CbpterDree
-I
I
I
I
j
J
J
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•I
I
I
•••••••••••_- Pete King Creek _••••__._••
Table 3.10 • Habitat Function S........-a tor Pete KiDa Creek
y
Desired CollClidoa
S1UIUDer Rearma
Max. Tem.perature
Pool Quality
In-Stream Cover
Pool-Rime Ratio
Wiater Rearma
Cobble
809&
16-1,oC
3
3
40:60
809&
25-3S%
AC. . . .eIReada
EDstiq Coaclitioa
719&
21.1 OC
1.7
2.2
49:51
599&
62%
B CIIaaael Reada
Existbla Coaclitioa
659&
22.goC
1.5
1.8
SS:45
789&
37%
Embeddedness
Pool-Riffle Ratio
Pool Quality
Spawailla
% Fines Sediment
lA-Stream Cover
Pool Quality
Max. Temperature
RiDari.a.
Potential Debris
Actina Debris
Bank Cover
BaDk Stability
40:60
3
809&
22-24%
3
3
13°C
809&
80 pieces/loo meters
40 pieces/1oo meters
3
3
49:51
1.7
529&
36.8%
2.2
1.7
16.SoC
609&
21 pieces
17 pieces
3.3
5
5S:45
1.5
599&
24.8%
1.8
1.5
18°C
459&
S pieces
5 pieces
2.2
5
For comparison purposes, the A and B channels in Pete King Creek are currently at about 60 and 62 percent of the
biological potential, respectively, and are both below the DFC of 80 percenL
Summer ReariDa Habitat: The overall conditions of the summer rearing habitat are below the desired level for
both channels. The primary reason is the higher than desired maximum temperature which may be attributed to
lack of shading from the past management activities and tires. Pool quality is also limiting which can be
attributed to the lack of acting woody debris and potential woody debris.
Wiater ReariDg Habitat: The overall winter habitat conditions are below the desired level for both channels. In
the A channel, the main reason for the low rating is the high level of cobble embeddedness. Both channels display
a lack of pool quality, but pool to riffle ratios are good.
Spawning Habitat: The overall conditions of the spawning habitat are below the desired level for both channels.
The amount of fine material in the stream was limiting in the A channel, and temperatures are limiting in both
channels.
Riparian Habitat: The riparian habitat conditions are below the desired level for both channels. The limited
amounts of acting and potential woody debris, due to past management activities and fires, are the primary factors
for the poor riparian rating. Pete King Creek has especially low levels of potential woody debris indicating some
riparian management may need to occur in order to promote recruitmenL
Management Considerations: Current stream survey information indicates that fish habitat conditions are below
the desired conditions needed to fulfill the Forest Plan standard of "high fish". Future projects should not reduce
potential woody debris levels. In addition, stream temperatures need to be maintained or improved in Pete King
Creek and its tributaries to maintain spawning temperatures below 13°C.
I
I
Nortla Lochs. Face £IS
63
I
••••••••••••••• <:Ium3'()11
. .
T a ble 3 11 Habitat F unction Summary or
Desiral Collditioa
S1UIUDer Rearma
Max. Temperature
Pool Quality
In-StJeam Cover
Pool-Rime Ratio
Willter Rearma
Cobble
809&
I
I
~~It···············
nYOB Creek
AC..... Reada
EDstiq COIlCIidoa
799&
B CIIaueI Reada
C CIIaaael Reada
Existilla Coaclidoa
Em... Coadilioa
739&
809&
14-1,oC
3
3
40:60
19.2oC
1.9
3.5
49:51
17.50 C
1.8
2.9
52:48
809&
789&
809&
25-35%
33%
38%
19.90 C
3.6
3.6
99:1
579&
89%
40:60
3
49:51
1.9
52:48
1.8
99:1
3.6
809&
729&
649&
649&
12-24%
3
3
13°C
25%
3.5
1.9
14.6oC
18%
2.9
1.8
1,oC
38%
3.6
3.6
19°C
749&
14 pieces
43 pieces
4.6
4.9
I
Embeddecmess
Pool-Rime Ratio
Pool Qualitv
s......
%
Floes Sediment
In-Stream Cover
Pool Quality
Max. Temperature
v ........
Potential Debris
AC1iD2 Debris
Bank Cover
Bank Stability
809&
579&
599&
80 pieces/100 meters
40 pieces/100 meters
3
3
35 pieces
11 pieces
2.1
5
22 pieces
20 pieces
2.3
5
I
I
For comparison purposes, the ~ B, and C channels in Canyon Creek are currently at about 72, 70, and 67 percent
of the biological potential, respectively, -and are all below the DFC of 80 percenL
Summer Rearing Habitat: Considering an error range of +/- 5%, the overall conditions of the summer rearing
habitat in the A and B channels are meeting the desired level. The C channel is slightly below the desired level,
primarily due to the higher than desired maximum temperature which may be attributed to lack of shading from
the past activities and fires. The high pool to riffle ratio is due to the low gradient of the C channel.
WlDter ReariDg Habitat: Again, the overall winter habitat conditions in the A and B channels are within the
error range of meeting the desired level. The C channel is below the desired level, due to high cobble
embeddedness and pool to riffle ratio.
I
1
Spawning Habitat: The overall conditions of the spawning habitat are below the desired level for all channels.
The amount of fine material in the stream (channels A and C) and temperatures (all channels) are the major
limiting factors.
Riparian Habitat: The riparian habitat conditions are below the desired level for all channels. The limited
amounts of acting and potential woody debris are the primary factors for the poor riparian rating. Some of the low
levels of acting and potential woody debris is due to naturaI conditions from past fires which have set back
vegetative succession in some areas to younger tree/brosh species which do not contribute high amounts of large
woody debris. Canyon Creek has especially low levels of potential woody debris indicating some riparian
management may need to occur in order to promote recruitment.
J
1
Management Consldendons: Current stream swvey information indicates that fish habitat conditions are below
the desired conditions needed to fulfill the Forest Plan standard of "high fish". Improvements in pool quality is
one option to achieve the "high fishable" standard. Future projects should not reduce potential woody debris
levels. In addition, stream temperatures need to be maintained or improved in Canyon Creek and its tributaries to
maintain spawning temperatures below 130 C.
No..... Lodu F~ 1m;
1
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
,
••••••••••_ ••• Deadman Creek •••••••••••••••
I
. .
Ta ble 3 12 Habitat F DDCdon Summary 14or Dead man Creek
AC....dReada
SOlmer Rearilla
Max. TeD1Derature
Pool Qualitv
ID-Stream Cover
Pool-Rime Ratio
Wiater Rea....
Cobble
Desired Coadidoa
809&
£xis. . . Coadidoa
16-1,oC
3
3
40:60
72%
20.SOC
2.1
4.5
24:76
B CIwmeI Reada
£xis... Coadidoa
809&
16.SOC
1.9
4.8
31:69
8O~
609&
699&
25-35%
47%
45%
40:60
3
24:76
31:69
1.9
76%
29%
4.8
1.9
EmbeddedDess
Pool-Rime Ratio
Pool Qualitv
SpaWllilla
%
Sediment
In-Stream Cover
Pool QualitY
Max. Temperature
Ripariu
Potential Debris
ActiD~ Debris
Bank Cover
Bank StabilitY
rmes
809&
2.1
64%
22-24%
3
31%
4.5
3
13°C
2.1
16.50 C
809&
6390
S3~
80 oieces/loo meters
40 pieces/loo meters
3
3
26 pieces
20 pieces
15 Dieces
80ieces
3.2
5
3.6
4.9
13°C
For comparison purposes, the A and B channels in Deadman Creek are currently at about 65 and 70 percent of the
biological potential, respectively, and are both below the DFC of 80 percent
Summer Rearing Habitat: The overall condition of the summer rearing habitat is at the desired level for the B
channel and below that for the A channel. The A channel has a higher than desired maximum temperature which
may be attributed to lack of shading from the past activities and fires. Pool quality is also limiting in both
channels which can be attributed to the lack of potential and acting woody debris and high stream energy.
WIDIer Rearing Habitat: The overall winter habitat conditions are below the desired level for both channels.
Cobble embeddedness is rated high, and the pool to riffle ratio is lower than desired.
Spawning Habitat: The overall condition of the spawning habitat for the A channel is below the desired level,
but within the error range for the B channel. The amount of tine material in the stream and temperature are the
major limiting factors in the A channel.
Riparian Habitat: The riparian habitat conditions are below the desired level for both channels. The limited
amounts of acting and potential woody debris are the primary factors for the poor riparian rating. Some of this is
due to natural conditions from past tires which have set back vegetative succession in some areas to younger
tree/brush species which do not contribute high amounts of large woody debris. Deadman Creek has especially
low levels of potential woody debris, indicating some riparian management may need to occur to promote
recruitment
Mana3ement Considerations: Current stream swvey information indicates that fish habitat conditions are below
the desired conditions needed to fulfill the Forest Plan standard of "high fish". Improvements in pool quality is
one option to achieve the "high fishable" standard. Future projects should not reduce potential woody debris
levels. In addition, stream temperatures need to be maintained or improved in Deadman Creek and its tributaries
to maintain spawning temperatures below 13°C.
I
--_••_-- Blnleriek. Creek -----....
. kCree k
T a ble 3 13 . Bab·ltat F unction summary fIor B·unenc
I
I
Summer ReariD2
Max. Temoerature
Pool Quality
In-5tream Cover
Pool·Rime Ratio
Wiater ReariD2
CObble
Embeddedness
Pool-Riffle Ratio
Pool QualitY
SpawDia2
% Fines Sediment
In-Stream Cover
Pool Quality
Max. Temoerature
Rjpariaa
Potential Debris
Actio\! Debris
Bank Cover
Bank Stability
Desired Condition
80%
16·1~C
3
3
40:60
80%
25-35%
40:60
3
80%
22-24%
3
3
nOc
80%
80 oiecesl100 meters
40 oiecesl100 meters
3
3
I
A ChaJm.el Reach
ExistiDg Couditiou
I
69%
19.5oC
2.2
3.6
22:78
78%
17%
22:78
2.2
70%
10%
3.6
2.2
19°C
53%
320ieces
70ieces
1.4
5
For comparison purposes, Bimerick Creek is cunently at about 68 percent of the biological potential or 12 percent
below the DFC of 80 percent.
Summer Ramg Habitat: The overall condition of the summer rearing habitat is below the desired level. The
primary reason is the higher than desired maximum temperatuJe which may be attributed to lack of shading from
the past fires. Pool quality is also limiting which can be attn"buted to the lack of acting woody debris and potential
woody debris.
Winter Rearing Habitat: The overall winter habitat condition is within the error range of the desired level. The
lack of pool quality and low pool to riffle ratio are limiting factors. Cobble embeddedness is rated good.
Spawning Habitat: The overall condition of the spawning habitat is below the desired level. Temperature and
pool quality are the factors limiting spawning habitat.
RlpariaD Habitat: The riparian habitat condition is below the desired level. The limited amounts of acting and
potential woody debris are the primary factors for the poor riparian rating. This is mostly due to natural
conditions from past fires which have set back vegetative succession in some areas to younger tree/brush species
which do not contn"bute high amounts of large woody debris.
Maaagemeut Considerations: Current stream survey information indicates that fish habitat conditions are below
the desired conditions needed to fulfill the Forest Plan standard of "high fish". Considering the above information,
summer and winter rearing, and spawning and riparian habitat are not within standard. Improvements in pool
quality is one option to aclUeve the "high fishable" standard. Future projects should not reduce potential woody
debris levels. In addition, stream temperatures need to be maintained or improved in mainstem Bimerick Creek
and its tributaries to maintain spawning temperatuJes below 130 C.
I
I
I
I
J
I
I
J
I
I
1
I
I
I
j
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
....----... Apgar, Glade, and Rye Patch Creeks •.•••.•_-.•Table 3.14 - Habitat Function Summa
40:60
3
80%
12-14%
3
3
13°C
80%
80 ieces/100 meters
40 ieces/100 meters
3
3
34:66
1.7
69%
12%
3.3
1.7
17.50C
72%
S4 ieces
30 ieces
2.2
5
80%
72%
17.5°C
1.0
3.3
39:61
57%
5S%
.>
16-1~C
3
3
40:60
80%
30-35%
40:60
3
80%
22-24%
3
3
l30C
80%
80 ieces/100 meters
40 ieces/100 meters
3
3
No.... LodIIa Face £IS
67
. ..
78:12
2.9
59%
23%
3.3
2.9
17.50C
71%
34 ieces
35 ieces
3.1
5
93:7
3.7
71%
37%
4.2
3.7
66%
16 ieces
25 ieces
For comparison pwposes, the A channels have a biological potential of about 58% for Apgar, 72% for Glade, and
64% for Rye Patch, which are all below the DFC of 80 percent. The B and C channels of Glade Creek average 70
and 75 percent, respectively, and are also below the DFC of 80 percenL
Summer ReariDI Habitat: The overall condition of the summer rearing habitat is below the desired level for
Apgar. The primary reason is the higher than desired maximum temperature which was estimated on values from
Glade Creek. Pool quality is also limiting which can be attributed to the high cobble embeddedness and sand
substrate which may be filling the pools. The overall summer rearing habitat is below the desired level for the A
channel of Glade Creek, with the main limiting factors being temperature and pool quality. The B channel of
Glade Creek is within the error range of the desired level, and its C channel meets the desired level for summer
rearing habitaL Rye Patch Creek is below the desired level, with temperature (which was based on temperatures
in Glade Creek) and pool quality being the main limiting factors.
Wiater Rearing Habitat: The overall winter habitat condition is below the desired level for Apgar, Glade (A and
B ~hannels), and Rye Patch Creeks. The high amount of cobble embeddedness is the primary limiting factor.
Lack of high quality pools was an issue for all three streams. The C channel of Glade Creek meets the desired
level for winter rearing habitaL
SpaWDiq Habitat: The overall condition of the spawning habitat is below the desired level for Apgar, Glade,
and Rye Patch Creeks. The amount of fine material in Apgar, Rye, and the B and C channels of Glade Creek, and
stream temperatures in all three drainages are the major limiting factors.
RipariaD Habitat: The riparian habitat condition is below the desired level in Apgar and Glade Creeks, and
within the error range for Rye Patch Creek. The limited amounts of acting and potential woody debris are the
primary limiting factors. This is mostly due to natural conditions from past fires which have set back vegetative
succession in some areas to younger treelbrush species which do not contribute high amounts of large woody
debris.
MaDqement Considentlons: Current stream survey information indicates that fish habitat conditions are below
the desired conditions needed to fulfill the Forest Plan standard of "high fish". Improvements in pool quality and
potential d~bris are two options to achieve the "high fishable" standard. Future projects should not reduce
potential woody debris levels. In addition, stream temperatures need to be maintained or improved in Apgar,
Glade, and Rye Patch Creeks and their tributaries to maintain spawning temperatures below 130 C.
J
~
I
i
1
j
J
I
~
t
68
J
I
III
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•I
c.
Biota
The North Lochsa Face topography, geology, climate, and vegetative communities provide a diversity of habitats for the
hundreds of species of wildlife, trees, and plants believed to inhabit the area. This section provides a brief summary of
the existing condition of these species. More detailed information is contained in related specialist reports located in
the project file, plus, the Biological EvaluationlBiological Assessment can be found in Appendix H.
1. lbreatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Wildlife Species
The following table summarizes the existing biota condition for threatened, endangered, and sensitive wildlife
species:
Table 3.15 • Occurrence of lbreatenecl. Enclan•• ~""'" and Sensitive WiIcIUte Species
Species
Occurrence
CoDllDeDts
Bald Eagle (T)
Known
Grizzly Bear (T)
Not Likely
Gray Wolf (E)
Possible
North American
Lynx (S)II
Possible
Black-backed
Woodpecker(S)
Probable
The bald eagle is a winter resident and has been observed
from September through April along the Middle Fork of
the Oeuwater and the lower Lochsa Rivers. No nests
are known or suspected in these drainages.
A recent survey for grizzly bear habitat characteristics
recorded no suitable denning areas within the analysis
area. There have been no recorded sightings of grizzly
bears in or near the area, nor have there been any
confirmed sigbtings on the Forest. No critical habitat has
been designated, and the probability that grizzly bear
inhabit the area is low.
No absolute confirmation of wolves has yet been made in
the analysis area, and no active dens or rendezvous areas
are known to exist. The Fish and Hungery Creeks area
appears to contain most of the best features of wolf
habitat (denning, rendezvous site features, abundant
ungulate prey, and isolation from human disturbance).
Lynx are known to occupy habitats in Idaho occurring at
elevations above 4,000 feet Approximately 8,500 acres
(LTAs 71 and 81B) are considered suitable for lynx
habitat, with 750 acres potentially suitable for denning
habitat There is a low to moderate probability that lynx
occur within the analysis area.
This woodpecker occurs at lower elevations in burned,
haIVested, or beetle-killed forests, with numerous large
dead trees remaining. Suitable habitat is limited within
the analysis area. However, the area, by virtue of its fire
history, is capable of providing more suitable habitat for
this species. There is a high probability that black-backed
woodpeckers inhabit the area.
•I
II The lynx is proposed for listing by the U.S. FISh and Wildlife Service.
North Lodasa Face EIS
69
Cilapternree
w
Table 3.16 • Occurrence otThreatened, EDdaJ
__
tU!eJ.re.lL_ aDd SellSitive WIldUte Species (continued)
Species
Occu.rreDce
Comments
Coeur d'Alene
Salamander (S)
Known
Fisher (S)
Known
Aammulated Owl
(S)
Known
Harlequin Duck (S)
Known
Northern Goshawk
(S)
Known
Northern Leopard
Frog (S)
Probable
This salamander is most often found in moist forested
areas, where precipitation exceeds 20 inches per year.
All documented sightings have occurred within the
designated Lochsa Wild and Scenic River corridor, and
ongoing monitoring indicates a stable population.
Fisher inhabit moist, mature and late successional grand
fir habitats above 4,000 feet elevation and spend much of
their time along riparian zones. Approximately 8,500
acres (LTAs 71 and 81B) are considered suitable habitat
within the analysis area. Multiple sets of fisher tracks
have been documented in the head of Fish Creek/Mex
Mountain area.
These owls occur in Idaho at elevations up to 5,700 feet
amongst large ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir trees on
south and western slopes. Approximately 900 acres
(LTAs 21A and 23A) are considered suitable habitat
within the analysis area. Confirmation of 1 to 6 owls
have been documented within 1 to 2 air-miles of the
Lochsa River. No nests have been located.
Harlequin ducks are diving ducks that winter along the
Pacific coast and then migrate inland to nest along
forested, mountain streams. A survey along Fish Creek
and the Lochsa River confirmed the presence of duck
pairs.
Goshawks use immature, mature, and late mature forests
with dense canopy cover. Approximately 62,000 acres
(warm, moist LTAs) below 5,000 feet are considered
suitable habitat within the analysis area. Two nests, that
were later abandoned, have been found in the Pete King
Creek and Canyon Creek drainages.
Northern leopard frogs are usually frogs of marshes
and quiet waters with considerable vegetation.
Apparently they require moderately high ground cover
for concealmenL For reproduction, they prefer cattail
or sedge marshes and weedy ponds or temporary
waters with some kind of vegetation in the water. As
temporary ponds dry up in the summer, recentlymetamorphosed young disperse to moist upland
habitats or more permanent waters. Northern leopard
frogs probably hibernate in ponds and lakes or other
aquatic locations.
Northern leopard frogs seem to have suffered a severe
decline in numbers over much of their range, but we
have no information on this aspect in the NorthwesL
I
)
I
I
j
I
I
No.... Lodsa Face EIS
70
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•I
I
•
•I
Table 3.16 • Occurrence otThreateDed, EDdaDltftd, aDd Sensitive WIldUte Soecles (continued)
Species
OcculTence
Commeats
Townsend's BigNot Likely
Townsend's big-eared bats are normally found in arid,
Eared Bat (S)
desert shroblands, pinyon-juniper woodlands, or dry
coniferous forest where cave or cave-like structures for
hibernacu1a and maternity roost sites exist. They are
cave dwellers, often found in abandoned mines and
buildings.
Several surveys conducted in suitable habitat in Idaho
suggests that the core range for this species is limi ted to
south of the Salmon RiverlHells Canyon. There are no
caves, buildings, mines, or bridges that appear to meet
the criteria for suitable habitat in the North Lochsa Face
area. There are also no CUl'l'ent or historical records
documenting the presence of townsend's big-eared bats
on the Oeuwater National Forest.
Probable
Adult toads are largely terrestrial. Optimal habitat
Western Toad (S)
conditions in more humid regions are believed to occur
with moderate to dense undergrowth. In montane areas,
they utilize spring pools, ponds, lake shallows, and
slow-moving portions of streams. They prefer mudbottomed shallows of lakes and ponds.
Because of suspected available habitat, despite no
recent documented sightings within or adjacent to the
area, there is a moderate to high probability that western
toads are found here.
Wolverines prefer remote mountainous habitat above
Possible
Wolverine (S)
4,500 feet elevation during the winter and 6,000+ feet
elevation during the summer. Approximately 9,200 acres
(LTA 71) are considered possible wolverine habitat.
There are four documented sightings of wolverine east of
Deadman Creek aDd in the Fish Creek area. Although
sighting reports are sporadic and limited, there is a
moderate probability that wolverines occur with the area.
I
I
I
I
I
NortIl Lodasa Face EIS
71
C"pter1kee
!I
J
2. Management Indicator Species
Management indicator species have been selected to indicate the effects of management practices on major
biological communities or on water quality. Affected threatened, endangered, and sensitive species have already
been discussed. Table 3.17 summarizes the existing biota condition for other management indicator species and is
followed by a description of the current conditions of elk summer aDd winter ranges.
. .
T able317 Occurrence 0 t 0 ther MaDalement IDdIcator S.pecJeS
Species
Occurrence
Comments
Belted Kingfisher
Known
Moose
Known
Pileated Woodpecker
Known
Pine Marten
Probable
Fish-bearing streams provide habitat for belted
kingfishers.
Moose can be found in most of the analysis area. Recent
observations of moose and moose sign show an increase
in moose population over the last two decades.
Pileated woodpeckers prefer dense canopy stands of large
trees for nesting aDd foraging, and typically use areas of
mature and late mature patches of mixed conifer forests
which contain snags with advanced decay. There are
74,700 acres of pileated woodpecker habitat within the
analysis area.
High-elevation, moist habitats in mature and late mature,
mixed coniferous forests are preferred by the pine marten.
There are no surveys or reported sightings within the
analysis area, but there is a high probability of them
existing in the upper elevations. There are 116,000 acres
of pine marten habitat within the analysis area.
I
iI
I
I
,:1
a. Elk Summer Range
Approximately 70 percent of the 128,000 acre study area is considered elk summer range, with the best elk
summer range occurring on gentle terrain (old surfaces) above 4000 feet elevation. Features that promote
elk summer use include gentle terrain, abundant water, and cooler daytime temperatures. However, elk use
is not distributed uniformly, due to variable forage availability and seclusion which are critical to habitat
selection.
Within portions of the old surfaces, forest succession proceeds rapidly after a disturbance from
grass/forb/shrub to dense young foresL It is only in the earliest stages of the succession pattern that elk find
sufficient forage to sustain high summer use. When forage is not readily accessible, large expanses of area
receive only light to negligible elk use. Historically, elk use on the old surfaces has been associated with
forage areas created by logging (typically clearcuts or shelterwood harvest areas). Disturbances such as a
fire or logging may again be necessary to encourage and sustain a high level of elk use.
Within other areas of the old surfaces, forage remains available throughout all or most succession stages.
This is particularly true in those areas supporting a major portion of the grand fir mosaic. These areas
typically support moderate to high habitat use from June through September, with use most evident on major
ridges aDd within upland basins. On these sites, a disturbance such as a fire or logging may benefit forage
production and encourage use, but is not necessary to sustain a high level of elk use.
Some elk, primarily adult bulls, often reside most of the winter at summer range elevations. During mild
winters, other elk may also winter at summer elevations. These animals are able to access quality browse
forage that would otherwise be unavailable to them during all or part of the winter. Although the
management emphasis is focused on summer range habitat features, it is necessary to recognize that some
winter range habitat is provided here. Likewise, it is unnecessary to implement special management actions
to accommodate the winter habitat needs for those animals wintering at summer elevations.
[I
fI
(I
fI
)I
[I
•II
.~
Nortil ~Ilsa Face EIS
72
c"pternree
..
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•.•...
•
A critical component of elk summer range management relates to the availability and amount of suitable
security areas during hunting season. To qualify as a security area, it must 1) be at least 250 contiguous
acres; 2) be more than 1/2 mile from an open road; and 3) contain at least 60% hiding cover. Results of the
1991-95 Loehsa Elk Ecology Study on 'Road Oosures and Bull Elk Mortality', indicated that: 1) bull elk
survival was over 25% higher in areas where roads restricted motorized access; and 2) over 60% of elk
hunters using the area would accept or tolerate restricted motorized access during hunting season to improve
bull elk survival.
Elk summer habitat effectiveness was estimated using the Interagency Guidelines for Evalullting and
MtlIUlging Elk Habitats and Populations in central Idaho. Table 3.18 displays the current estimated elk
summer habitat effectiveness of the nineteen elk habitat analysis areas (BAAs) within North Loehsa Face. It
should be noted that the elk summer habitat effectiveness objective for Hungery Creek and middle Fish
Creek is 100 percent. The assumptions under which the elk model was developed precludes attaining this
objective where roads or motorized trails occur within the EAA. However, the roads included with these
BAAs are on the margins of the EAA, having minimal effect on elk summer habitat. It is therefore our
professional opinion that current land management practices within these areas are meeting this objective.
Table 3.18 • Elk Summer Habitat Eaeedveness by Elk Analysis Area
ELK
ANALYSIS AREA
(EAA)
Alder Creek
Bimerick Mdws
Boundary Peak
Bowl Butte
Bridae Creek12
Canyon East13
Canyon WestS
Ceanothus Creek
Deadman East
Deadman West
Fish Butte
Frenchman Creek
Gass Creek
Glade Creek
Obia Creek
Upper Fish Creek
Walde Creek3
w. F. Pete Kin2
Willow Ridge
AREA
(acres)
4,600
5,600
4,100
5,900
2,000
3,900
5,200
6,000
5,800
3,300
7,400
3,800
6,700
3,200
6,100
4,400
3600
3,600
5,600
ELKBABITAT
EFFECTIVENESS
OBJECTIVE
CURRENT
ELKBABITAT
EFFECI1VENESS
(%)
(%)
100
75
75
100
95
90
93
95
51
25
39
86
76
42
90
86
74
30
86
86
25
25
25
100
75
25
75
75
100
25
100
75
25
25
30
100
100
26
b. Elk Winter range
North Loehsa Face includes approximately 36,000 acres of elk winter range, characterized by 50 to 70
percent slopes from 1500 to 4200 feet in elevation on southerly exposures. Most of the winter range lays
between Big Hill and the mainstem of Deadman Creek, with the remaining portions split among the face and
Fish Creek drainages. High elk use occurs on south slopes and gentle, major ridges. Unless browse forage
quality is high and easily available, elk use on north slopes is typically less than other terrain.
12 Only a portion of the Bridge Creek EAA is within the NLF. This EAA is too small to effectively use the 1nteragency Guideliaes', and the values
the table are for comparison only.
13 These EAAs are affected to some degree (generally minor) by unauthorized cattle. This use occurs on aD intermittent basis. usually for only short
periods and not every year. The analysis recognized aDd accounted for some livestodc effects wbere it has been reported. In addition, two of the
EAAs are partly or wholly within aD active grazing allotmeDL
di~layed in
NortIl Lodasa Face E1S
73
c..... 11aree
The preferred browse species (redstem ceanothus, scouler willow, mountain maple, and service berry) are
developed in aDd adapted to a dry-season tire regime. Although some browse forage can be attributed to
timber harvest, most areas of shrubs are the result of large wildfires in the early part of this century.
During the 1950's, the Idaho Department of Fish and Game and the Forest Service jointly conducted winter
range improvement projects to promote winter browse forage production. Early efforts included the
application of herbicides to crown kill shrubs and promote sprouting. This practice was soon discontinued,
after it was determined that the herbicides were lethal to preferred browse species.
By the mid-1960's, prescribed fire was being used to improve browse production by killing the above ground
portions of the shrubs to promote sprouting from the root crown. Approximately 4800 to 5300 acres of
North Lochsa Face were treated in this manner. Recently, the spring burning of logged areas resulted in a
less than desired quality aDd quantity of browse production. Currently, less than 3,650 acres (10 percent of
the winter range) have browse forage younger than 20 years.
As previously stated, some elk move little in their seasonal habitats and often reside most of the year at
winter range elevations. These animals are relatively few in number and are most often associated with
forage created by recent logging or fire. Most elk begin to move, or are moved by hunting pressure, onto the
winter range in mid-fall. Steep terrain, dense vegetation, and remote features often provide some of the only
functional and effective security areas through much of North Lochsa Face. Although the management
emphasis is focused on winter range habitat features, it is necessary to recognize the value of winter range
areas in providing security during the big game hunting season.
During mid-May to mid-June, a large percentage of the pregnant cows calve on the winter range. The
preferred areas for this event are broad, gentle, dry ridges, having lush grass forage. Seclusion from human
disturbance (i.e. motorized activity) is important The best of these habitats are within the Pete King, Rye
Patch, and Canyon Creek drainages.
..
~
II
I
~
l
f:
Ij
I~
2. Vegetation
Vegetation within the North Lochsa Face area is primarily coniferous forest Much of the forest is a mix of tree
species, dominated by one or two species. For those who wish to "dig" deeper, refer to Appendix F, where there is
a detailed table of LTAs, habitat type groups, and forest types (tree species) by drainage and a summary table
comparing desired and existing conditions of major tree species within each LTA. The remainder of this section
summarizes the vegetation by major LTA groups, describes existing dead wood, and concludes with a table on
sensitive plant species.
a. Age Oass Distributions
Age classes were used to approximate stand structure and successional stages. We used the age classes from
Losensky's Draft of the Historical Vegetlltio" in Region One by Climatic Area (1994). They are as follows:
().4() 111t1TS - nonstocked, seedlings and saplings. The new forest or stand initiation stage, where new
trees and species become established after a disturbance such as fire.
4O-60,.1US - poles. The stem exclusion or young forest stage, where no new trees are being
established, some of the existing trees have died, and the swvivors grow larger.
60-100
immature. The immature or understory reinitiation stage, where understory vegetation
and some small trees become established under the tree canopy.
100-160,etUS • mature. The young forest, multi-storied or mature stage, where several age groups
have become established, but large trees are absenL
160+ yean - potential old growth. The old forest, multi-storied or late mature stage, where there is a
diverse distribution of tree sizes, and large trees are prominent in the overstory.
,.IUS -
Nortil Lodsa Face E1S
74
C"pter1kee
;~
•
•
.•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
1
Desired age class distributions were developed by the lOT, based on historic age class distributions over the
entire climatic zone. Comparisons between desired and existing age class distributions were key in
formulating the vegetative alternatives. A table that shows the correlation between successional stage,
structural stage, and age class is in Appendix G. The following tables compare the distribution of desired
and existing age classes for each LTA by drainage:
The stream terraces have a western redcedar component, which is a desired tolerant species. Surviving
stands in Fish Creek contain cedar trees over 400 years old, 8 to 10 feet in diameter. However, most of this
area was severely burned in 1934, aDd is forested with hardwoods (alder and some cottonwood with shrubs),
and a seedling conifer understory. These are primarily grand fir and western redcedar, the desired species.
I
0-40
40-60
60-100
100-160
160+
5-20
5-10
5-15
5-15
55-75
na
12.1
15.1
39.6
12.9
20.3
na
19.7
14.0
34.5
13.1
18.7
,
The breaklands have a Douglas-fir component, which is a desired seral species, but also have a higher than
desired level of grand fir. Other fire-tolerant seral types (i.e. western larch, ponderosa pine, and western
white pine) are lacking. Those species only occur occasionally as minor stand components. This higher
presence of grand fir, and lack of fire-tolerant seral species, has resulted in lowered resilience to fire events.
In a healthy breakland system on south aspects, much of the natural fire would occur as underbums, with
occasional patches of lethal fire. Those patches could regenerate relatively quickly because seed would be
available from nearby tire-resistant trees. Now, the grand fir is likely to be killed in even low intensity fires,
with only a few, widely scattered fire-resistant trees left to reforest the burned area. Existing patches are
about the expected size, though a few have been broken up by timber harvest activities.
0-40
40-60
60-100
100-160
160-300+
15-30
8-15
15-25
25-35
15-30
na
13.5
1.8
32.1
43.4
9.2
47.7
19.8
23.2
7.5
1.8
26.2
15.8
24.7
29.5
3.8
30.9
15.7
24.9
24.8
3.7
0-40
40-60
60-100
100-160
160+
25-45
10-20
20-30
8-15
7-15
na
16.7
8.1
37.0
31.4
6.8
34.2
153
30.7
13.5
6.3
na
28.3
12.5
32.9
20.0
6.3
6 Distribution percentages are irrelevant if the total acreage of an LTA within a drainage is less than 250 acres.
Nortl Loc" Face E1S
7S
0-40
40-60
60-100
100-160
160+
20-40
10-20
15-30
10-20
5-10
20.2
0
1.0
69.5
9.3
na
20.8
9.3
50.5
14.9
4.4
"
0-40
40-60
60-100
100-160
160+
0-40
40-60
60-100
100-160
160+
15-30
8-15
15-25
25-35
15-30
na
50.4
12.2
20.5
16.6
0.2
25-45
10-20
20-30
8-15
7-15
37.7
26.4
25.3
10.2
0.3
na
20-40
10-20
15-30
10-20
5-10
9.7
23.6
39.5
26.0
1.2
na
0-40
40-60
60-100
100-160
160+
.
j-'; .:._- :
:_'.':'='~"
na
na
a....
.~"~
na
:
35.9
12.2
21.9
26.8
3.2
~ ~ --'J'.
.'~-":'" ~
'.
37.7
26.4
25.3
10.2
0.3
·~~~~~.~-::_~~,Li~~,~
.r:';3-:.": ..~~';~~
~
..
~r~~'
19.8
12.2
23.5
38.2
6.2
,~·i' ;~t~~~~'-~.. · ::.; ~.:.
na
20.6
8.2
44.2
22.1
5.0
na
... ~~i~'
9.2
23.0
42.4
24.2
1.2
na
The coDovia) m1dslopes are also lacking the same fire-tolerant seral species as the breaklands. Some grand
fir is acceptable on these slopes, but it is found in greater abundance than the more desirable Douglas-fir.
These-higher levels of grand fir tip the fire hazard toward stand replacing fires and away from mixed severity
fires or non-lethal underburns. Patches have been broken into smaller units by past timber harvest in a few
places.
0-40
40-60
60-100
100-160
160+
-
--
30-55
10-20
10-20
15-25
10-30
na
------------------
33.8
1.2
5.5
31.5
28.0
30-55
10-20
10-20
15-25
10-30
30.2
6.7
18.1
40.1
4.9
na
76
35.1
8.1
28.1
18.2
10.5
------------------------~
- .::.
0-40
40-60
60-100
100-160
160+
43.4
11.1
24.4
17.3
3.8
33.2
11.2
42.8
10.5
2.3
.~~,~
_.:____
na
23.2
4.8
17.6
57.8
2.5
_••~ ~~~~~t~
27.5
5.9
17.9
44.5
4.1
~~~~
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The frost-ehurnecl oplaDds should be primarily lodgepole pine, Douglas-fir, and western larch, with
inclusions of Engelmann spruce, mountain hemlock, and subalpine fir. The spruce and tir would be found
on moist areas within 71C. Subalpine tir is being infested with balsam wooly adelgid all across the Lochsa
District, and there has been notable mortality in fir of all ages. It is partly because of this infestation that
subalpine tir is not one of the desired species on these LTAs. Until biological controls are found for this
insect, it is not likely that subalpine fir can be maintained as a major stand component Where there is a
subalpine fir component, we can expect higher fire risk and more intense tire behavior due to the high
flammability and firebrand production of dead subalpine fir. The desired species composition is lodgepole
pine in either pure or mixed species patches. Instead, subalpine fir dominates 47% of the area, and
lodgepole pine only 18%. Patches are about historic size. Little management activity has occurred on these
LTAs.
,
..
""
0-40
40-60
60-100
100-160
160+
.. , ..
"
~~~.~-
0-40
40-60
60-100
100-160
160+
na
na
50-70
......
.. ..at..
18.9
11.7
49.7
13.7
6.0
~~~~:-4 ~~::
~ . :.f,
903
0.0
5.8
3.9
0
na
50-70
18.9
11.7
49.7
13.7
6.0
na
11.1
6.8
48.2
18.7
153
57.2
16.0
25.4
0.7
0.6
~.~(:.'~
,:,".o,\.·;··:~1~
21.5
8.0
42.9
15.2
12.3
The old surfaees/roUlnI hills are closest to the desired species composition. Western redcedar and grand fir
should be, and in fact are, the major components in these long-fire-interval groups. What is missing is the
inclusion of ml!I.l patches of seral trees. These would be western white pine, western larch, lodgepole pine,
Engelmann spruce and ponderosa pine, that would have resulted from small spot fires that burned in root rot
centers or small patches of windthrown trees. Past timber harvest has left 15 to 40 acre patches of sera!
species, but those patches are generally larger than we would expect from insect and disease processes (1/4
to 5 acres), and smaller than expected for stand replacement events due to fire (1000 or more acres).
v
0-40
40-60
60-100
100-160
160+
25-45
5-15
10-20
20-35
20-40
48.6
0.8
3.3
22.9
24.4
36.7
5.1
11.5
31.1
15.6
44.8
5.4
23.5
18.9
7.4
20.3
7.8
45.4
18.1
8.5
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - __--~-.--.-__ r.-,\;.-".-';~
,-
0-40
40-60
60-100
100-160
160+
Nortl Loclasa Face E1S
30-50
5-15
10-20
20-35
20-40
na
31.3
1.2
10.4
42.5
14.6
77
7.9
3.1
39.3
37.4
12.2
:
:
r,a.-
'L
43.6
0.9
18.6
30.8
6.0
38.2
4.6
21.8
21.3
14.1
5~~t~.~.<~:~ .~(;:;~~~:
17.4
2.4
28.7
38.7
12.6
J
j
1
G-4O
40-60
60-100
100-160
160+
46.8
25-45
5-15
10-20
20-35
20-40
9.1
23.3
16.1
4.7
25-45
5-15
10-20
20-35
20-40
61.4
8.5
12.1
17.6
0.4
na
na
na
na
na
na
46.8
9.1
23.3
16.1
4.7
"';~~~'~F~~§£'
:
G-4O
40-60
60-100
100-160
160+
61.4
8.5
12.1
17.6
0.4
In general, the young age classes are higher than expected where past harvest was focused and where the
1934 fire burned on dry, southerly aspects. They are lower than expected where fire has not visited for 100
years or more. The following table provides a summary of the age class distributions:
Table 3.26 • SlIIIlIIUlry Assessment of Aae Class DIstrIbutions
LTA
Aae Class Assessment
lOA
21A
218
21C
23A
23B
23C
NortIl Lodsa Face EIS
40-60 and 60-100 year classes are higher than desired, reflecting the tire history from the
early 19005. There is a corresponding downfall in the 160+ age class, also due to fires in
the early part of the century.
0-40 is low in Canyon/Deadman, high in Fish Creek, and at desired levels in face drainages.
Average is a little above the desired level.
40-60 is also high overall, but low in Canyon/Deadman.
60-100 is high in CanyoD/Deadman, but at desired levels elsewhere.
100-160 is very high in Canyon/Deadman, very low in Fish Creek, and averages just below
the desired level.
160+ is very low everywhere.
0-40 class is low in Canyon/Deadman, but at desired levels elsewhere.
40-60 yr. class is also low in Canyon/Deadman, but at desired levels elsewhere.
60-100 is high in Canyon/Deadman, and high overall.
100-160 is very high in Canyon/Deadman, and at desired levels elsewhere.
160+ is just at the bottom of the desired range in all drainages.
0-40 class is at the bottom of the desired range in all drainages.
40-60 is low in Canyon/Deadman, and at the low end of the desired range elsewhere.
60-100 is very low in Canyon/Deadman, and very high elsewhere.
100-160 is very high in Canyon/Deadman, and in the desired range elsewhere.
160+ is within the desired ranae everywhere.
0-40 is very high in Pete King, and within the desired range in Face
40-60 is within the desired range everywhere.
60-100 is within the desired range everywhere.
100-160 is low in Pete King, and high in Face, the average is within the desired range.
160+ is very low everywhere.
Only found in Pete King, the 40-60 class is high, and the 160+ class is correspondingly low.
Only found in Pete King, the 0-40 and 160+ classes are low, and all other classes are high.
78
C"pternlft
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Table 3.27 • Summary Assessment of Aae o.ss DIstributions (continued)
LTA
Ale Class Assessment
61
63
718
71C
81A
81B
-
I
83A
84A
0-40 is within desired range everywhere.
40-60 is low in CanyonlDeadman, but within desired range elsewhere.
60-100 is low in Canyon/Deadman, but high to very high in Face and Fish Creek. Average
is high.
100-160 is high in CanyonlDeadman, low in Fish Creek, and averages within the desired
range.
160+ is very low in Fish and Face, but at the upper end of desired in Canyon/Deadman,
average is within the desired range.
0-40 is a little low in Face, and the average is just below the desired range.
40-60 is low in Pete King and in Face.
60-100 is within desired range everywhere.
100-160 is high to very high (Face) everywhere.
160+ is low to very low (Face) everywhere.
About 50% of the area is in the 60-100 age class. That is the bottom end of the desired
range.
Canyon/Deadman has one patch of this LT~ and 90% of it is in one age class. That is
acceptable given the small size of the patch. Fish Creek and Face have 50-60% in a single
age class (60-100 and 0-40 respectively).
0-40 is a little high in Canyon/Deadman, a little low in Fish Creek, and within the desired
range overall.
40-60 is low in Canyon/Deadman, and within the desired range elsewhere.
60-100 is low in Canyon/Deadman, very high in Fish Creek, with the average also above the
desired range.
100-160 is low in Fish Creek aDd Face, but the average overall is within the desired range.
160+ is low in Pete King, Fish Creek, and Face, but within the desired range in
Canyon/Deadman.
0-40 is very low in Fish Creek, but within the desired range elsewhere.
40-60 is low in all drainages.
60-100 is very high in Fish Creek, but within desired range elsewhere.
100-160 is high in CanyonlDeadman and Fish Creek, and the average is higher than desired.
160+ is low to very low everywhere.
Only in Pete King. 0-40 is above desired levels.
40-60 is within the desired range.
60-100 is above the desired range.
100-160 is a little below the desired range.
160+ is very low compared the desired level.
Only in Pete King. 0-40 is well above the desired range.
40-60 is within desired levels•
60-100 is also within the desired range.
100-160 is slightly below desired levels.
160+ is very low compared to the desired level.
b. Dead Wood
Available dead wood, both standing and down, varies by condition of the forest. There are four general
conditions found in the North Lochsa Face area: 1) areas burned over and since regenerated, 2) areas burned
over and poorly regenerated, 3) areas harvested in the past 20 to 30 years, and 4) areas that have had little or
no disturbance for over 90 years. Here are generalized views of those four conditions.
Areas that have burned over and regenerated are generally fouod on north aspect breaklands (LTAs 21C and
23C), colluvial midslopes (LTAs 61 and 63), and moist old surfaces (LTA 81A). An estimated 7% of the
analysis area is in this condition. They probably only experienced one, or maybe two, stand replacing fires
in the early part of this century. These stands have remnants of the previous forest still contributing to the
Nortl Lodasa Face E1S
79
cMpternree
J
struetme, and providing a continuous source of DeW saags. Older SDags are also present. Most of these
stands have reached a large enough size class that they can provide snags usable by a wide variety of
wildlife, as well as providing other ecological benefits such as nutrient cycling. Older snags would fit in
Bull, Parks, aud Torgerson's Oass 2 or 3, or have fallen over to contribute to soil buildup, stabilIty, and
nutrient availability.
Areas that burned over aud have DOt regenerated well are generally on southerly aspects with shallow soils
(LTAs 21A, 23A), OR, burned multiple times so that the soil microflora and -fauna were destroyed, limiting
reforestation, OR burned multiple times aDd did DOt regenerate because there was DO conifer seed source left.
For whichever reason, these sites have few to no standing dead trees, and logs are rare. An estimated 20% of
the analysis area is in this condition.
Areas that have been harvested in the past 20 to 30 years were mostly clearcuts, or shelterwoods that have
since had a final removal CUL Most of the harvest has been on the old surfaces, with some on colluvial
midslopes. Only the most recent harvest prescriptions called for retention of standing dead aud live trees.
Large down logs often survived slash burning after harvest, aDd are still available on site. An estimated 9%
of the analysis area is in this condition.
Areas that have not burned, or only underbumed, and which have not been harvested, have higher levels of
dead wood on site. The breaJdands in particular have a higher component of standing dead because there
have been iDCl'e8Sed levels of root rot and bark beetles due to drier than DOrmal conditions for the past
decade. Other LTAs have also experienced elevated rates of mortality, also due to root rots and bark
beetles. The Canyon drainage is a part of an ongoing study of root rot activity. Regional pathologists have
measured up to 5% mortality per year in some stands, scattered across all LTAs. The remainder of the
analysis area, 64%, falls into this category.
I
I
I
c. lbreatened and Sensitive Plants
The following table provides a description of the threatened and sensitive plants that may occur within the
North Lochsa Face area:
T.ble.3.28· OecmTenee otThreateDeci or SensItive Plant S
HowellUl aqutiliJ
(Water bowelia)
Low
Known 10 occur in wetlaDdlriparian habitats in Latah
probability
County. To date. It bas not been foud in Idaho
Coun .
Spirantbes cliIavialis
(Ute Ladies'-tIeSIeI)
Low
probability
Known to occur in wetland/riparian habitats from
1500 10 7000 feet e1evatioa. This species bas the
poteatial to occur in a wider range of habitats and
elevatioas tbaD previsously predicted, iDclucling
riD habita wet meadows, and river meaaders.
BlecJrum .Jpietml
(Deerfem)
Qadoftill _Mn.
(ADdeIeg's cladoDia)
suspecIed
BotrycJaillM C1ftIIlalllm
(Crenulate moonwort)
Notuowu or
suspected
NotkDowDor
80
Coastal disjunct - Ocatrs at 3,()()().4.S00 feet
elevation ill moist, shaded, westem Iedcedar fores1S.
Four populatiolls of this species have been
documented. with three of them recorded withiD the
riparian areas of LTA 81 aDd the fourth within the
. riaD uea of Deadman Creek.
Added to the Clearwater Forest's seDSitive species
list, March 1999. Very liale is Uowu about this
species aad is described from one incomplete
specimen only. collected tbree miles from Sud
Mountain OD the Palouse
District.
Added to the Clearwater Forest's seDSitive species
list. March 1999. Grows principally at low elevation
on drier miaosites of damp meadows, boggy areas
aDd marsby places. Koown Idabo locations are in
climu westem redcedar forests aDd bas a strong
affiaity 10 old growth WesIerD redcedar stands. Two
historical coUOCIioas uowa from Ceuwater
Coun Dear Washin on Creek.
I
fl
I
1
1
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
~:.~_
-'.
_
BotrychUun l~olatum
var.l~
-
~
_~ :1,__
--.;f:::
::__
Not known or
suspected
(Lance-leaved moonwort)
BotrychUun mingllMllSe
(Mingan moonwart)
Not known or
suspected
B~
(LeaOess bug-oa-a-stidt)
NotkDowD or
suspected
B~virUlis
Probable
apJrylkJ
(GreeD bug-on-a-stic:k)
CalocIro11JU IIitUlu.J
(Broad fruit mariposa)
Ca~
COIUIImcei
Known
(Co-.taDce's biuercress)
Cilru CIllif01'1lica
(California sedge)
Known
Carex~;;
(HeDdersoD's sedge)
Notkaownor
-..
- --- -- ............---.. , -~~~'~:~[~l:;;'" __.:.~-~~~;,t - -Added to the Clearwater Forest's seDSitive species
list, March 1999. 10 Idaho, plants have been
documeDted from opeD ripariaD meadows, sUded
western redcedar, roadsides aDd other habitats;
elevations are variable. nree sites are suspected 10
occur OD the Clearwater NatioD81 Forest (there is
some question to the accuracy of some of these
rts .
Occurs in a wide variety of habitats, iDcluding
meadows, prairies, riverbaDks, aad moist forest
habita1S. 10 Idaho, it bas been fouDd along poDd
edges, springs, extremely dease shrubfields, and
westem red cedar uDderstories. ElevatioDS vary
from 2500 to 4800 feet, and soils teDd to be acidic.
Added to the Clearwater Forest's sensitive species
list, March 1999. lohabilS temperate or boreal
fo. . . ad is often a pioaeer of mesic, sometimes
dis1arbed, soils. It is kDowD to occur on road banks,
woodlaDd trails. old logs or stumps. in opeD
suDligbt or partial shade ill moist forests or dry, opeD
forests.. The only known population in Idaho is from
the Nez Perce NatiODa1 Forest. The sunoandiDg
forest is opeD parklaDd of lodgepole piDe and
su
iDe fir.
Added to tile Clearwater Forest's sensitive species
list, March 1999. Habitat is soil, humus or very
rotteD logs in sbacly, moist forests. ElevatiODS lUge
from low 10 subalpiDe. Suspected threats to this
species is the deaease of decayed wood and
dimjnjslwt sbade. Known to occur in Lolo,
FJdorado and Lochsa River draina
IDhabilS grassy openings in sparsely stocked forests
of poDderosa pine and Douglas-fir. The ooly tDOWU
populatioD on the Dislriet is Dear the mouth of
Can on Creek.
Found in partially shaded cedar habitats oorth of the
Selway River. ODe population of this species bas
been documented on the breaklands, just west of
Knife Ed e.
Coastal disjunct· Open lOCky meadows on
mOUDtaiD peats (6000-7000 feet). This species bas
been foUDd in the Bimerick area aad Locbsa RNA.
well below the stated elevation range and habitat
es.
d
. don for this
Coastal disjuad - Low elevation cedar types along
the Locbsa River Canyon. This species bas been
confirmed within the ua1
area.
Occms in sphagnum bogs and wet meadows.
su
Probable
Known
Known
Duynotus daubenmirei
Known
(DasynohlS)
NortIl Loclasa Face EIS
81
Added 10 the Clearwater Forest's sensitive species
list, March 1999. Typically OCCUJS in subalpiDe
foralS growiDg on the bMes of ericaceous sluubs
aDd other woody p1aDts. MeDZiesia is probably the
most common host. Oae location on the Cearwater
National Forest near Sava Pass
Coastal disjoDCt - Ocaus in the Lochsa RNA.
Found in moist to dry, often rocky sites of mixed
conifers or cedar habitat types. This species bas
been found at 12 sites withiD breatland LTAs,
inclu· the Lochsa RNA.
Found in mid to high elevation graod fu, cedar. and
subalpine fir types. This species is common in the
NW comer of the Pete King drainage and a portion
of western Canyon Creek. Also knowu to occur in
the Lochsa RNA and on Walde Mountain on
disturbed aDd late mature forests.
HaplopappIU ItinIu
vu. sonchifoliMs
(Sticky goldeDweed)
Hoo/ceriQ lucens
(Light hookeria)
NotkDowDor
suspected
Possible
LonuuUun salmoniflonurl
NotkDownor
(Salmoned-flower desert-parsley)
suspected
Merten.siD bella
(Oregoa bluebell)
Kuown
MinuIlMs alsilloUles
(Chidtweed moakeyflower)
Possible
MUraIUu tllltplUmu
(Sp8cious lDODkeyflower)
Possible
MUraIUu clivicola
(Bank moakeyflower)
Known
No.... ~Ma F.... ~,s
R2
Added to the Clearwater Forest's seasitive species
list, March 1999. Habitat is moist (001 wet)
meadows aDd opeu or sparsely wooded slopes in the
foothills, between 2700 and 4700 ft. Known in
Idaho from Craig Mountain area aDd a single
occurreoce near Helmer, on tile Clearwater National
Forest The Helmer location is the easternmost
kDowD occurrence aDd, tberefore. coDSidered a
. hera! OD the Cearwater NatioDal Forest.
Added 10 the Clearwater Forest's sensitive species
list, March 1999. DisjuDCt populatiODS in DOrth
Idaho. Habitat is moist or wet shaded areas, on
rock, soil, humus, bart. conifer Deedles OD the forest
floor. and decayiDg wood. PredomiDaDdy ill wet
sites, especially iD bumid coniferous forest.
occasionally submerged in pools in depressions, 00
damp soil or rotteD wood, and sometimes along
watercourses. 00 the Clearwater Natioaal Forest it
is known in the Lolo Creek, Weitas Creek and
Lochsa River draina es.
Added to the Clearwater Forest's seDSitive species
list, March 1999. Habitat occurs on steep basalt cliff
~ ledges and stabilized talus, on all aspects. The
associated plaDt commuDity is always opeD with low
cover of vascular plants. KDowu to establish on
road cu 15. Ooly three populatioDS occur on
federally-mauaged public lands. Two are mauged
by the BLM aDd one by the Clearwater National
Forest Seldom collected far from the canyon
bottoms aloog a 100 mile stretch of the SDake River
and Clearwater River canyoDS in Idaho and
Washington. Clearwater Natioaal Forest
popuJatiODS occar in two isolated parcels of National
Forest land along the Middle Fort of the Cearwater
River within 4 miles u stream of Kooskia.
Coastal disjund - Moist habitats in montane sprucefir zone. This species bas beeD confirmed at 18 sites
00 LTA 815 within the aD81 . area.
Added 10 the Clearwater Forest's sensitive species
list, March 1999. lDhabitats shady areas, especially
io moss mats 00 cliffs. The immediate habitat may
be seepy cliffs or seasonally wet rock outcrops that
win be very xeric most of tile summer. The
surrounding forest is moist and both populations are
io the western Iedcedar zone. Generally the bald
forest opeDiDp are Sleep and rocky and without
trees. KDowo from two widely separate locations in
Idaho; one iD the St Joe River drainage and the
other in the Aquarius RNA. The Aquarius
lation bas ve few lants.
Added 10 the Clearwater Forest's sensitive species
list, March 1999. Occurs io grass1aDd ud open
forest sites from 2600 to 6900 ft elevation. KDown
locations occur OD both volcaDic and granitic soils,
generally OD mineral soil openings; sometimes OD
road cu IS. PIaots grow ia miaosites with enhanced
spring moisture or shade. Endemic to Idaho: known
from six widely scattered locations in Lewis, Nez
Perce. Idaho and Clearwater Couoties.
Found on 30-70% slopes OD south aspects in OpeD
areas of moist. exposed mineral soils within
Douglas-fir habitats. There are 16 doalmented sites
00 LTA 21s withio the aDa1 . area.
r ......... Th.......
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Or.' ....- ----
_ ..'-
PenlGgrtUNIIQ tritmpJaris
ssp. triangularis
(Gold-back fern)
NotkDowD or
suspected
Peuuites frigilJlu
var. pall1ldlllS
(Sweet coltsfoot)
NotkDowD or
suspected
Rhizonuailllll1UUlMm
(naked mnium)
Possible
SyndryriJ platyCQrpa
(Evergreen kittentail)
Known
Trianf!aa b,evistyla ssp. brevistyla
(Sbort-styled triaDtha)
Probable
WaltlsteinUJ Ulahoensis
(Idaho strawbeny)
Probable
•I
•
•
NortII LoeIIsa Faee ElS
83
~_ ~ .. _
0;:-
·~~#j ..~-:-:-J~"":~~~~rl'::.r:' .~~
__:,,!":~:~<r:..!~~":~'
Added to the Clearwater Forest's sensitive species
list, March 1999. Grows on opeD, rocky slopes and
ill rock crevices where seeps occur, on nortbwes~
north aDd east aspects, from 1500 to nearly 2700!t
elevation. Occurs in dry habitats on the friDge of
moister forests and is uDique among Idabo's many
other coastal disjuncts. Known populations
generally occur with rocks in grassland habitats.
DisjUDCt in Idaho where it is kDowD from three
locations (Snake River canyoa. viciDity of Peck and
ill the Elk Creek drainage on the Clearwater
National Forest). Generally this species is expected
to be well west of the Oearwater National Forest.
Poteatially suilable habitat appears to exteDd up the
Middle Fork Oearwater River onto Natioaal Forest
administered Iuds.
Added to the ClearNater Forest's seDSitive species
lis~ March 1999. lbe habitat type is very mesic
westerll redcedarlladyfem and hosts several other
coastal ctisjUDd species. Known to occur along
Long Meadow Creek, a tributary of Elk Creek on
the Palouse Ranger District. Clearwater National
Forest.
Added to the Clearwater Forest's seDSitive species
list, March 1999. Habitat occurs in boreal aDd
temperate forests on soil. humus, or rotten logs.
often along streams or in damp depressions.
Occasionally among boulders or talus at diff bases.
Usually in conifer forests. from near sea level to
subalDiDe zones.
Occurs in mid elevatioD, cool and moist habitats,
meado~ forested slopes, and seeps within the
grand fir aDd subalpine-mountain hemlock zones.
Three populatioDS of this species have been
documented in Van Camp, Brush Hill, aDd upper
Glade Creek.
Added to the ClearNater Forest's seasitive species
lis~ March 1999. Habitats include both wetlaDd and
riparian sites. This species'" a stIODg affinity for
the riparian areas of large sueams. Only seven
recorded OCCUI'I'eDCeS in Idabo. Three of the seven
occurrence records are from low-elevatioD canyons
of the Oearwater River basin, where plants are
fOUDd powiag ill rock and cobble below the
seasonal bi2h-water line.
Added to the Clearwater Forest's sensitive species
list, March 1999. Habitat occurs in montane
forests, in western redcedar, grand fir, and subalpine
fir habitat types, between 4000 and S()()() ft
elevation. Grows along streams, extending onto
toeslopes and even up to rnidslope positions. Cool,
moist microsites are most favorable for its
development. Though a shade-tolerant species of
climax understory, this species responds favorably
to increased light. It increases in coverage in forest
openings and after low to mixed severity tire.
Forest openings, even clearcuts, have been found to
be beneficial to this species. On the Clearwater
National Forest, occurs in widely scanered, midelevation l~ations on the periphery of its range. It
is most common in the vicinity of Powell Ranger
Station.
,
,
D. NoDous Weeds
By definitio~ a noxious weed is simply a weed that is injurious or unhealthy to other plants or animals. There are 35
v.·eed species designated as noxious under the Idaho Noxious Weed Law. In Idaho, to be a designated noxious weed, it
must: (1) be present in, but not native to Idaho; (2) be potentially more harmful than beneficial to Idaho; (3) have a
sufficient plan for its economi~ physical. and biological control (if feasible) on tile at the Idaho Department of
Agriculture; and (4) have a potential adverse impact that exceeds the cost of control.
1be Cleanvater Basin Weed Coordinating Committee, established in March of 1995, is a multi agency working group
including the Oearwater National Forest. This Committee is cooperatively developing management objectives and
strategies in order to reduce the spread of non native plant species throughout the Oearwater River Basin. In addition
to the thirty-five designated noxious weeds in Idaho, the Committee has designated Japanese knotweed (Polygomun
CKSpitUJlJIIn) and perennial peavine (Uuhyrw l4tifolUls) as new invaders to the basin that warrant control. Both of these
species occur within the project area.
1. Weed OccuITeoce
Noxious weed surveys have taken place throughout the Oearwater Forest since 1988. Within the North Lochsa
Face ~ \\~ species present include: spotted knapweed (Cmtmuea 1IIaCulosa), Canada thistle (Cirsium
~).. Dslmatian toadflu (LiIuzrUJ gnlistifoliD ssp- dillmatica), Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius), Scotch
thistle (01I0p0rdum GCIUIlltiIIIrI). and orange hawkweed (Hioacium tUUan~cum). The following is a brief
description of the weeds present in the North I..ochsa Face area:
Spotted knap\\-eed (C~a "'tJC1I/osQ) is a native of Eurasia, probably introduced as a contaminant in crop
seed. It is a biennial or short li'\"ed perennial and is widely distributed throughout North America. To date,
infestations are priJIwil)- along roadsides, abandoned roads and semiarid wildlands. It bas moderate shade
tl:'leran<:e and could potentially displ~ native flora throughout much of the project &rea_ Within the project area,
spotted knapy.-eed bas become established along Highway 12 and FS Roads 101, 417, 481, 5505, 5S42, and the
Io,.-er portion of fish Creek Trail 224.
Canada thistle (CirsiJDJI~)is a native of Eurasia. introduced as a contaminant in crop seed in the late 18th
centur)-. It is a coloD~·-forming perennial from deep and horizontal roots. It is an asexual plant that can maintain
high populatioo densities \\;thout producing fruits. Cultivation actually increases the number of plants. Canada
thistle is found scattered throughout the project area, particularly ",~bere major canopy openings are created.
Dalmati Ul tL»dilu Cl-iJ,uzriQ grnUrifolUl ssp- tlilbruuica) was introduced from southeastern Europe~ probably as an
or:wncntaL It is an aggressi'\~ perennial v.;th an extensi'\"e deep root S)'stem and a thick \\-ax)' cuticle on the leaf
,.-hich mues chemical control difficult. \\1thin the project area, Dalmatian toadflax is found along the till slope of
FS Road 51~.
Scotch broom (C~-n.w.s sc~) \\-as introduced from Europe as an ornamental. It is "';despread in the Pacific
I'crtln\-est ,.;th selected '\"3ri~ties still sold as ornamentals. Seeds remain vi able in the soil for many years and it
in,,-ajes forest and ,.-ili!and h1biuts.. \\ithin the project area. Scotch broom can be found along portioos of
High·V.t3~- 1:: and \\;thin the Dr)~ Point aru..
Scctch tl::~~ (Onopordwrt oc42lllhiWfl) '-as introduced from Europe. It invades roadsides and ",-ildlands. It is a
biennial that can gro,.- 10 ra~jve ~t tall and an form dense stands that d~ter use bv \\;ldlife and recreationists.
,,-:th.ix: Cle r:'C'.~ area.. Scc~ thistl~ h~ ~n located ",ithin an old haJ'\~st unit of the Lov.-ell Creek timber sale.
~""e hra·rv.~ (HintlcilDtc QJUGnli«JDll) '-as introd~ from Europe. prob3bly as an om~nul- It is a
ft"~us l'OC:ai pere=:::a: th1: spre3ds b)- st010n and ~d production. Distribution of this hav.·kv.-eed is increasing
as \lt~ o:.alu.g'eI'5 5Ur'~~ for it. To d3~. ~ infesutioDS ~ limited to north of the Lochsa Riv~r. This plant is a
f~ ron:peti~ f~ :ri~~n aOO ge~ra11~· outcompetes nati'\·e tlora "'·~re it becomes esublisbed. \\-ithin the
rX'.~-t aTe.1... ~~ b3,-i.:l\tt\:i has becc~ ~blis~ throughout the Pete Kin2 Crttk dr3iI13ge.. portions of the
C1=~-~ ~ C:ttk d.~~~ aOO at McUndon Butte.
-
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Japanese knotweed (Polygonum cuspidatum) was introduced from Asia as an ornamental. It is a perennial which
fonns long creeping rhizomes. This weed is an invader to roadsides, ditchbanks and riparian areas. Within the
project area Japanese knotweed has become established along Bimerick and Pete King Creeks.
Perennial peavine (Lathyrus latifolizls) is a native of Europe which is often used as stabilization cover on landslide
areas. It is perennial with climbing tendencies that could choke out native flora. Within the project area a small
infestation is known along FS Road 101, with another one near the proposed helicopter landing along Pete King
Creek.
Located in Appendix D, is a noxious weed table that describes the weed species, its location, type of infestation,
and proposed treatment within the North Lochsa Face area.
2. Management Objectives
The following table represents those weed species known to occur within the project area, the assigned
management objective for each species by the Clearwater Basin Weed Coordinating Committee, and
recommended treatment me tbod (s).
.
T able 3.30 Weed Ma DalemeDt
)Jec ves
WEED SPECIES
MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVE
TREATMENT METHOD
Spotted knapweed
Canada thistle
Dalmatian toadflax
Scotch broom
Scotch thistle
Orange hawkweed
Japanese knotweed
Perennial peavine
Confine/Contain
Confine/Contain
Eradicate
Eradicate
Eradicate
Eradicate
Eradicate
Eradicate
Biologicals, Herbicide. Manual
Biologicals, Herbicide
Herbicide OR Manual
Herbicide, Manual
Herbicide, Manual
Herbicide
Herbicide
Herbicide, Manual
3. Ongoing Efforts
Biological control agents have been released at low levels for the containment of spotted knapweed within the
project area and the agent Urophora quadrifQ.Scilltil has natura1ly distributed itself throughout northern Idaho. The
agent Metznerill paucipunctella, a seedhead feeding moth, was released within the Pete King Creek drainage during
1997 and 1998. To date, monitoring of the MetzMriap. release has shown establishment was successful but, it is
too early post release to measure any reductions in seed production due to this agent. Monitoring of this MetzMrill
p release site will continue as part of an overall Forest program. An experimental pathogenetic fungus, Sclerotinill
was released within the Pete King Creek drainage during 1997. Monitoring results suggest that the Sclerotinia
reduces the vigor of a small percentage of spotted knapweed plants but, does not provide effective control to
warrant further distribution.
Additional biological control agents are available for the containment of spotted knapweed. Those include: Larinus
minutus, a seedhead feeder and the root feeders CyphockolUlS tlclultes and Agapetll zoegana. The Forest has
greatly increased its utilization of biological control agents and will continue to release agents as they become
available.
Biological control agents for Canada thistle have been released on the Forest but, establishment has not been
successful. Biological control agents for Dalmatian toadflax and Scotch broom are available but the low levels of
infestation of these weeds within the project area would not warrant such efforts. There are no known biological
control agents available for Japanese knotweed, orange hawkweed, perennial peavine or Scotch thistle.
NOJ1Ia LoeUa FMe EIS
85
Cllapter1kee
E. Lochsa Research Natural Area
The Lochsa Research Natura1 Area (RNA) was established in 1977. It occupies 1281 acres, of which 1228 acres occur
in the North Lochsa Face Project Area. The area contains a number of types of vegetation that more typically occur in
the Pacific Coast areas of Washington and Oregon including Pacific dogwood (Comus nutt/llliz) and at least 13 other
plant species that are rarely found in inland locations. The area is located primarily on steep, granitic stream breaklands
(LTA 21A) dissected by a number of streams. Elevations range from 1600' to 3200' and aspects range mainly from
southwest to northeast. Annual precipitation is approximately 3S inches being distributed fairly uniformly throughout
the year, with the exception of a summer drought period from July through September. Temperature means are 70 to 72
degrees in the summer and 30 to 32 degrees in the winter months, creating moderate climatic conditions which may
partially explain the occurrence of the coastal disjunct plant species.
Pacific dogwood is the characteristic species for the area and historically has occurred throughout the RNA. Recently
this species has been attacked by an anthracnose disease which has killed over 90% of the population. Although the
climax dominant overstory species throughout much of the RNA is western redcedar (11tuja plictltll), most of area has
burned in the past and is occupied by various stages of secondary succession ranging from seral brushfields, seral
conifer stands, and climax stands of grand tir (Abies grandis) and western redcedar. The existence of vegetation typical
of the Pacific Coast as far inland as the Lochsa River is extremely rare and unusual, and was the primary reason for its
designation as a RNA.
Soils throughout the RNA are shallow to deep and generally the surface layers are fairly well mixed due to colluvial
activity on steep slopes. A mantle of volcanic ash is present across much of the areas with thicknesses of up to 20
inches in riparian areas. The volcanic ash has high moisture-holding characteristics which combined with the moderate
climatic conditions create a suitable environment for the coastal disjunct plant species.
Fire is a common natura1 process within the RNA. The historic tire regime across most of the area is a mixed (lethal
and DOn-lethal), frequent type with an average return interval of 26-50 years. The mid-seral species, Douglas-fir
(Pseudotsuga menziesu), ponderosa pine (Pinus poruJuosa), and western larch (Larix occidentillis) have historically
been maintained in this area by the frequent tires. Fire suppression efforts have allowed many areas of the RNA to
exceed the historical tire return interval and consequently climax tree species are becoming more prominenL The
Establishment Report for Lochsa RNA indicates that burning may be necessary to maintain the vegetation that
designation as a research natura1 area hopes to preserve.
F. North Loebsa Slope Roadless Area
A major portion of the 113,662 acre North Lochsa Slope Roadless Area #1307 (NLSRA) is contained within the
analysis area. (See the Alternative 4 map in Chapter Two that displays the portion of the NLSRA contained within
North Lochsa Face.) Appendix C of the Forest Plan EIS contains a complete map and description of the NLSRA, along
with its resources and values, the range of alternative land uses considered in that document, and the effects of
alternative management scenarios. Wilderness recommendation was considered for the entire roadless area, but that
alternative was not selected. During RARE IT and Forest Plan public involvement efforts, there was interest in retaining
the roadless values of the Fish and Hungery Creek drainages to the north and northeast. This area was previously
covered under proposed wilderness legislation HR 1570.
The NLSRA is located in the Lochsa River drainage. Access is provided by U.S. Highway 12, the Lolo Motorway, and
Roads #481 and #483, which are low-standard and dirt-surfaced. A sparse network of trails maintained at minimal
standards crosses the area. Few are suitable for stock use, with many even challenging for recreational hiking.
Two major types of drainages flow through the NLSRA: the large Fish Creek drainage, and a series of short (one to six
mile long) streams draining directly into the Lochsa River.
Large forest fires in the early 1900s had a major influence on the existing vegetation, creating a mosaic of large brush
fields with scattered concentrations of various sizes of trees. Trees are beginning to re-establish themselves in brush
fields, especially on the north slopes. The following discussions focus on the roadless characteristics and wilderness
features of the NLSRA.
J
J
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
1. Apparent Naturalness
This is the perception of most people visiting the area that the environment is natura1. Even though physical
evidences of man's activities are obvious, their impacts are considered relatively minor to the overall natura1
integrity of the area. Most of the land as viewed from both within and from the boundary and intruding roads
offers a diversity of vegetative types and openings that appear natura1.
Roads from Frenchman Butte to Fish Butte Lookout and from Middle Butte to Van Camp Lookout site were
constructed in the 1930s. They were built primarily for wildfire control and reforestation work on areas burned by
the large fires in 1934. They are single lane, dirt roads with alignments that fit the topography.
2. Remoteness and Solitude
The remote Fish Creek drainage provides the best opportunity for solitude. Its broken topography, relatively flatbottomed streams, and diverse vegetation effectively screens out the sights and sounds of man's activities. Within
112-mile of the existing access roads, a person has a feeling of being in a relatively large area that has had very
little development. It also provides excellent opportunities for visitor dispersion.
The southwest portion centered in the McLendon ButtelBimerick area does not offer high solitude. Large timber
harvest units to the southwest are clearly visible, and some timber harvest noise is noticeable during various times
of the year.
The steep breaklands (Face drainages) do offer views of the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness and other roadless areas
to the southwest. However, U.S. Highway 12 is a major visual focal point, and its traffic noise detracts from
giving one a feeling of solitude.
3. Special Features
These are those unique geological, biological, ecological, cultura1, or scenic features that may be located in
roadless areas. The Lolo Trail is one of the most important features and is discussed later in this chapter.
Also within tOe NLSRA is the Lochsa RNA. It was established to protect and study the unique Pacific coast
vegetation that occurs within its boundaries.
The Middle Fork-Lochsa Recreation River corridor, established under the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act,
runs the full length of the roadless area north of U.S. Highway 12. The management of this corridor emphasizes
the scenic values of the river environment.
4. Effect of Size and Shape on Wilderness Attributes
Although this roadless area is large, the narrow and irregular shape of all lands along the Lochsa River breaks
severely detracts from many wilderness attributes, principally solitude (sight and sound). This is not the situation
with the Fish Creek drainage, which is an enclosed landscape where most wilderness attributes are unaffected.
5. Manageability and Boundaries
This relates to the ability of the Forest Service to manage a roadless area to meet minimum size criteria (5,000
acres) and on well-defined boundaries. The shape of an area influences whether it can be managed for wilderness.
Because the lands (Face) draining directly into the Lochsa River are narrow and irregular in shape, detracting from
their wilderness attributes, a more logical boundary would exclude these lands from possible wilderness
designation. Also, the narrow strip from Deadman Creek to below Rye Patch Creek has been roaded with recent
timber sales and retains few wilderness attributes. The Fish Creek drainage, being an enclosed landscape where
most wilderness attributes are unaffected, would be a better manageable boundary for possible wilderness
designation.
NortIl LoeUa FMe ElS
87
Cllapter TIaree
I
G. Social ValDes
The previous sections descnDed the physical and biological conditions present in the North Lochsa Face area. But,
what is it about this area that causes one to visit it for pleasure or their livelihood? How has man used this area in the
past, and what does it hold for him now and into the future? The answers to these questions are what is socially valued
about this area, such as recreational opportunities, visual quality, treaty rights of the Nez Perce Tribe, heritage
resources, and resources for dependent communities.
1. Recreational Opportunities
The landscape structure of North Lochsa Face appears predominantly natural, with a primitive to semi-primitive
roadless backcountry character. The internal core area comprised of the Fish and Hungery Creek unroaded and
untrailed areas provides the most primitive recreational opportunity.
The south to eastern analysis area boundary is comprised of the Wild and Scenic River Corridor. U.S. Highway
12 runs through this corridor providing for a roaded natural recreational opportunity. This corridor provides the
highest level of developed recreation within the North Lochsa Face area, with seven developed facilities providing
camping, picnicking, hiking, rafting, and swimming opportunities. The Lochsa Historic Ranger Station Visitor
Center is also within this corridor just outside the eastern boundary of the analysis area.
The northern boundary comprising the Lolo Trail System surrounds the Lolo Motorway and provides a semiprimitive motorized recreational opportunity. A nOD-motorized trail opportunity exists on the historic trails,
allowing the trail system to provide a semi-primitive (trail segments in close proximity to the motorway) to very
primitive (Hungery Creek area) recreational trail experience, where a segment of the Lewis and Oark National
Historic Trail route still remains without trail tread.
The recreational opportunity on the western portion of the analysis area is classified as roaded modified. The
character of this area resulted primarily from lOading and timber harvest Although classified as a roaded
modified area, trail corridors in the Mex Mountain area (SW Fish Creek) have maintained a semi-primitive to
primitive character. In contrast, the remaining areas to the west provide for motorized public access via road and
trail systems, providing a roaded modified opportunity.
a. Recreational ValDes
Recreational visitors venturing into the area often concentrate and begin their travel from the developed or
dispersed recreational sites located in the roaded fringe. The North Lochsa Face area is highly valued by a
diversity of people for many different reasons. The reasons include:
Backcountry/roadless recreational opportunity
Backcountry/roaded recreational opportunity
Frontcountry/developed recreational opportunity
Hunting and fishing opportunities
Mountain biking opportunities along the Lolo Motorway
Viewing scenery and wildlife
Historic trail experiences
Camping/hikinglbackpacking opportunities
Kayaking and rafting
Motorcycle trail opportunities
Winter sports opportunities
Commodity resource's such as commercial timber, firewood, berry picking, minerals, and outfitter
opportunities.
Nordt Lorida F~ ms
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
III
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
b. Roads aod Trails
The existing condition and management of roads and trails within the analysis area are displayed in two
tables that can be found in Appendix A. Not included in the table is the damage sustained by many of the
roads during the flood event of 1996. However, a majority of these roads have been repaired, and those
remaining will be repaired on a priority basis with available funds. There are three major types of access in
the North Lochsa Face area. These include roads, trails, and historic corridors.
High Standard Roaded Corridor - U.S. Highway 12 along the Wild and Scenic Locbsa River Corridor.
Low Standard Boaded Corridor - This includes the Lolo Motorway (Road 5(0) on the northern
boundary and the Smith Creek Road (Road 101) on the western boundary. The Lolo Motorway is
primarily a single-lane dirt road, which can be rough and muddy. It's not usually suitable for
motorhomes and other 10w-c1earance vehicles. This road receives a considerable amount of traffic,
especially during the summer and fall seasons. Use of this road is expected to increase during the
upcoming Lewis and Oark bicentennial observance.
1be Smith Creek Road is a single-lane gravel-surfaced road with turnouts, suitable for passenger car
use, and is approximately 30 miles in length that connects Highway 12 with Road 500 at Canyon
Junction. 1be southeast portion of the area is well roaded with a road system that connects to various
points on the Smith Creek Road. Many of these roads provide both motorized and non-motorized
recreational opportunities depending on the season of the year. 1be Forest Access Guide provides a
listing of acceptable vehicle access and time periods when motorized and non motorized use are
appropriate.
l1:Ii.!§ - Area trails provide primary access corridors linking the roaded fringe to the roadless internal
core area. With few exceptions, the trail system is badly deteriorated, prohibiting even recreational
hiking use on the majority of the trails. Even where these trails are usable, they are often challenging
for stock and trailbike users due to the rugged, steep terrain that characterizes the area. Trail use is
heaviest during the fall hunting season, when they are primarily accessed from "end of road" camps
found along the road system listed above. Numerous non-system spur trails are originating from these
end. of road camps. These are a result of jeep and OHV users pioneering motorized access deeper into
the FishlHungery area.
Historic Corridors - Although defined as discrete trail corridors, the overlapping prehistoric buffalo
trail and historic Nee-Me-Poo, Bird-Truax, and Lewis and Clark trails hold historic and cultural
significance. Throughout the summer and fall months many historians, archaeologists, and
recreationists visit the area just to tour this corridor. This historic corridor is further discussed in the
heritage resource section of this chapter.
c. Seasonal Use Patterns
The flow of recreationists along corridors accessing the landscape is not only determined by the visitors
values, but is largely determined by the season of the year. This is due to the dramatic climate changes of
each season and the steep terrain which limits access to the area during winter.
During the summer, there is a major motorized flow of developed site users and visitors viewing scenery and
wildlife along the Wild and Scenic River Corridor via U.S. Highway 12. Some of this motorized flow is
detoured onto Forest system roads and across the Lolo Motorway for those desiring a more backcountry, but
motorized experience. The flow of people into the area via the system roads is often comprised of local
forest users who are gathering firewood, picking berries, or traveling to the historic corridors via the historic
Lolo Motorway. There is a light flow of people using trails for day hiking or overnight backpacking and
camping. Most of the day hiking opportunities take place either on Trail 2 and originate from developed
camping areas or road pull-offs along the highway, or from interpretive sites along the Lolo Motorway
which encourage travel along segments of the historic Lewis and Oark Trail. These trail users are usually
on foot or use pack·and saddle stock. Summer use by trail bike riders also occurs and is concentrated
NoJ1ll LoeUa FMe £IS
89
I
primarily along trails accessed from the Fish Creek Trailhead, including the North Lochsa River Trail (2)
and the Fish Creek (224), Fish Butte (223), and Fish Butte Saddle (229) trail system.
During the fall, Forest system roads become the major access points for fall recreationists who are primarily
hunters interested in accessing game populations supported by the unroaded internal core area. The use of
developed sites along Highway 12 declines, but is still occurring during hunting season. The fall hunting
season brings a seasonal expansion and quick collapse of the dispersed sites. In the backcountry, along
system roads and the Lolo Motorway, the flow pattern begins to change subtly in late August as hunters start
bringing in their camps and claiming their "historic" dispersed campsites. Bow hunting brings recreationists
into the backcountry, but these users differ from summer backcountry users in their campsite selection and
corridor use by venturing off the established trail and road corridors and into the landscape. As rifle season
approaches, the road "pull-off' camps and the larger "end of road camps" begin to emerge. These camps
remain for longer periods of time. This season has the highest density of dispersed sites along travel
corridors. Pack and saddle use becomes the primary mode of travel during this use period. Firewood
gathering also occurs during and after hunting season, until snows close the main travel corridors.
During the winter, U.S. Highway 12 and plowed Forest Development Roads become the major access
corridors for winter recreation. These corridors facilitate the recent, very light flow of cross-country skiers
and snowmobilers onto groomed roads. This winter use is light across the landscape as most roads are not
plowed open and travel corridors are closed by snow. A recent outfitting operation at Mex Mountain has
encouraged this use. The Lolo Motorway is groomed for snowmobile and cross-country ski use, and the
Smith Creek Road is used to access the Walde Mountain Lookout Cabin maintained as a Forest Service
winter cabin rental. There is little opportunity, however, for snowmobilers to leave the general trail corridor
and venture into the internal core of the landscape due to its' rugged character.
2. Scenic Quality
Landscape Character and Inherent Scenic Attractiveness: The North Lochsa Face area and surrounding landscape
are part of the Bitterroot Mountain Range which is typified by generally rounded landforms dissected by
numerous river canyons. Most of the area has a natural appearing forest landscape with a continuous vegetative
cover composed mostly of coniferous species. Openings created by rock outcrops, rock slides, and grassy
meadow areas are common.
Fire contributed significantly to the evolution of the visual character of this region. Some areas along the river
canyon breaklands experienced numerous large lethal fire events that left extensive brush fields with only small
irregular timbered patches. In the more gently rolling, wetter uplands, fire created openings are limited to small
isolated enclaves of brush and snags found within the continuous coniferous canopy.
The rivers and creeks are the focal point of most of the views from the roads and trails. The distinctive river
canyons often have large waterfalls, cascades, pools, rock outcrops, islands, and other pool characteristics.
Tributary streams more commonly have small waterfalls and cascades, minor rock features, meanders, and pools.
High elevation views, such as the view from the Lolo Trail, are composed of repetitive river canyons and ridge
structures that continue across the landscape toward the prairies to the west and the peaks of the Selway Bitterroot
Wilderness to the south. These uninterropted views create a feeling of vastness that are much different from the
confined view of the canyon found in the U.S. Highway 12 corridor.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Native American use of this region has been documented as early as 7,000 years ago. The ridge system located on
the northern portion of the analysis area was used as a travel route between the fishing grounds in the west and the
buffalo country in the easL This travel route contains sacred sites, located in areas where there are extensive
views of the surrounding lands. Views from several locations along the Lolo Trail route stretch from the Camas
Prairie to the peaks of the Selway Bitterroot Wilderness.
One of the first written descriptions of this area was recorded during the Lewis and Oark expedition. Both Lewis
and Oark wrote of the vegetation of the area and of the views from the Lewis and Clark Trail. Entries in Clark's
journal indicated that their party viewed the surrounding hills and open prairies to the south and west from a site
thought to be Shennan Peak, which is still an important part of the scenic resource of the Lolo Trail System. As
they entered the Hungery Creek drainage, they remarked that the landscaped changed to one that was "tolerably
Nortla LorMa
F~
EIS
90
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•III
III
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
level and covered with timber" and that the long leaf pine ends at the higher elevations found in Hungery Creek.
This area corresponds to the old surfaces of the analysis area. They also observed that the southwest sides of the
hills had a great deal of fallen timber and burnt woods, and that the northeast sides of the hills were thickly
timbered with pine and undergrowth. This is similar to what is found there today.
The scenic beauty of the Lochsa River Canyon was recognized in 1964, when it was designated as one of the
nation's tilSt Wild and Scenic Rivers. For nearly 80 miles between the communities of Lowell and Powell, the
natural appearing forest landscape is intenupted only by U.S. Highway 12, campgrounds, picnic areas, and
trai Iheads. The deep canyon with its large side canyons, massive rock outcrops, cliffs, and boulders provides a
dramatic backdrop for the associated water features. Coniferous and deciduous vegetation, which are especially
scenic during the fall, are intermingled throughout the canyon area. Also found in this area is a large community
of coastal disjunct plant species (pacific dogwood). The Lochsa River itself is composed of numerous cascades,
rapids, large boulders, islands, and pools. Tributaries flowing into the Lochsa also exhibit distinctive
characteristics including waterfalls and cascades. These unique features found in the south and east sections of the
analysis area contribute to its classification as a distinctive or Oass A landscape.
The interior of the Lochsa Face Analysis area is natural appearing forest land composed of ridges and rounded
hills which are not visually dominant in the landscape. Although it contains some features including minor rock
outcrops, talus slopes, and avalanche chutes; this landscape is typified by a series of interconnected ridgelines and
subordinate canyons. The streams in the area may have small waterfalls, cascades, meanders and pool features,
but generally are considered to be minor drainages which exhibit shoreline characteristics. This area to the north
and west of the Lochsa River Canyon is classified as a COmmon or Class B landscape.
In regards to scenic integrity, public comments indicate that visitors to the area value the natural-appearing forest
landscape of the river corridor, the Lolo Motorway, and the dispersed areas found in between. The analysis area is
viewed from several visual travel corridors, developed recreation sites, administrative sites, and areas of dispersed
use. Critical views are from U.S. Highway 12, the Lolo Trail System (includes the Lolo Motorway), and from the
complex of trails found in the Fish and Hungery Creek drainages.
Views from the highway are limited to the canyon breaklands with some narrow views up major tributaries on
each side of the river. Development is of low visual impact and is related to the highway and developed
recreation sites. Users of this corridor are mostly moving through the area rather quickly, and campers and day
use occupants·of the campgrounds and picnic areas generally use the facilities for short durations. This corridor
has a high scenic integrity level and the scenic nature of the corridor is a critical element in the visitors enjoyment
of the area.
Views from the Lolo Trail System stretch across to the Selway Bitterroot Wilderness Area to the south, the North
Fork of the Oearwater Drainage to the north, and the Palouse Plateau to the wesL Due to the extensive vegetative
cover adjacent to most of the travel corridor, much of the views from this area are limited. There are only four
critical viewpoints from this section of the Lolo Motorway. At the head of Gass Creek and Obia Creek the
existing vegetation opens creating sweeping vistas of the area to the south of the roadway. Viewpoints on Bowl
Butte and Sherman Peak are accessed by short trails. Views from these sites stretch both north and south of the
ridge-top trail system. The Lolo Trail / Lolo Motorway corridor has a high scenic integrity level and a high visual
sensitivity due to its importance as an historic and recreation resource. Users of this corridor are varied. Some
uselS pass through the area quickly and are looking for a one time reCreational or cultural experience. Some
visitors use the area extensively as a traditional recreational and cultural area. The views of the large, wild
expansive country is an essential part of their experience.
Although there are a number of trails which link U.S. Highway 12 with the area to the north and west of the river,
the most visually complex of trails follows Fish Creek and later Hungery Creek as they travel toward the 1..010
Trail. Most of this area has not been modified from its natural state. There are some remnants of past human
occupation in the form of historic cabins, but these cultural features are a very insignificant element in the
landscape. Visual impacts from improvements are very minor, and a majority of the area exhibits a very high
scenic integrity level.
Nortla l «lisa Faee £IS
Cupter Tlaree
Mex Mountain Work Center is an administrative site located on the western border of the analysis areL It is also
considered to be a public contact site. The sensitivity level for tbis viewshed is high.
The concern level for scenery from other roads and trails witbin the central aDd western portions of the analysis
area is considered to be low. Modifications of the landscape in the form of timber harvest and road building are
found here on the more gently rolling old surfaces. Evideuce of timber harvest is also present in the steeper
breaklands of the headwater sections of several of the major tributary drainages including Deadman Creek, Glade
Creek, Canyon Creek, Rye Patch Creek, and Pete King Creek. The scenic integrity level is low, and users of the
area are looking for dispersed camping, motorized and non-motorized trail experiences, and gathering activities
(wood cutting, berry picking, etc.). The remote nature of the area contributes to their recreational experience, but
the scenic integrity of the area is not as critical a component of the recreation experience for these visitors. There
are areas adjacent to Forest Road 101 where the combined effects of the various harvesting activities creates an
unacceptably low scenic integrity level.
3. American Indian Relations
Tribal govemments have an increasing influence on the formulation of public land policy through agency
recognition of their legally established rights as well as their unique trust relationship with the U.S. Government.
A series of Indian trade and intercourse acts, initiated in 1790 and permanently adopted in 1834, became the
cornerstone of Federal Indian policy. The Marshall Trilogy (three Supreme Court decisions made between 1823
and 1831) established that: (a) only the Federal Government has the pre-emptive right to procure Indian land; (b)
the Federal Government has trust responsibilities toward American Indian tribes; and (c) treaties take precedence
over state laws.
a. Treaty Rights
For the purposes of western expansion, keeping the peace, and adding new states to the union, the United
States Government negotiated treaties with Indian tribal governments and obtained the vast majority of
public domain land in the lower 48 States. Approximately sixty of these tribes negotiated and reserved their
treaty rights to off-reservation lands and resources. Off-reservation treaty rights on National Forest System
lands are very important to Indian tribes and may include grazing rights, hunting and fishing rights,
gathering rights and interests, water rights, and subsistence rights. In some treaties in the Pacific Northwest,
the U.S. Government is obligated to protect the tribes' right to access usual aDd accustomed grounds and
stations and must assure that Forest Service actions protect treaty resources and do not prevent tribes or their
membelS from accessing such locations to exercise tribal rights.
b. Trust Responsibilities
1be trust responsibility is the u.S. Government's permanent legal obligation to exercise statutory and other
legal authorities to protect tribal lands, assets, resources, and treaty rights, as well as a duty to carry out the
mandates of Federal law with respect to American Indian and Alaska Native Tribes. For the Forest Service,
trust responsibilities are those duties that relate to the reserved rights and privileges of Federally Recognized
Indian Tribes as found in tre.aties, executive orders, laws, and court decisions that apply to the national
forests and grasslands. Currently Forest Service policy, as outlined in FSM 1563.03, is to: (a) maintain a
governmental relationship with Federally recognized Tribal Governments; (b) implement our programs and
activities honoring Indian treaty rights and fultilllegally mandated trust responsibilities to the extent they are
detennined applicable to National Forest System lands; (c) administer programs and activities to address and
be sensitive to traditional Native religious beliefs and practices; and (d) provide research, transfer of
technology, and technical assistance to Tribal Governments.
c. Nez Perce Tribe
For thousands of years the valleys, prairies, and plateaus of north central Idaho, northeastern Oregon, and
southeastern Washington, encompassing 13 million acres, were home to the Nez Perce people. Living
primarily in the valleys of the Clearwater and Snake Rivers and their tributaries, they fished the streams,
hunted in the woodlands, and dug the bulbs of the edible camas lily on the high plateaus.
Nortll LoeMa F~ EIS
92
·1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•III
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
In 1855, Isaac Stevens, the governor of the newly formed Washington Territory, called the Nez Perce leaders
to a council at Walla Walla to create a reservation. An agreement was reached that reserved most of their
traditional homeland (7.7 million acres) as their exclusive domain. Article 3 of this treaty states: "The
exclusive right of taking fish in all the streams where running through or bordering said reservation is further
secured to said Indians; as also the right of taking fish at all usual and accustomed places in common with
citizens of the Territory; and of erecting temporary buildings for curing, together with the privilege of
hunting, gathering roots and berries, and pasturing their horses and cattle upon open and unclaimed land."
After the discovery of gold on the reservation, a new treaty was signed in 1863 that reduced the size of the
original reservation to 780,000 acres. Not all of the Nez Perce bands were in agreement with the new treaty,
which gave rise to the "treaty" and "non-treaty" factions. Fours years later the U.S. Government launched a
campaign to move all of the Nez Perce onto the new, smaller reservation. After several skirmishes with the
U.S. Army, Chief Joseph led about 750 men, women, and children across the Lolo Trail into Montana in an
attempt to escape into Canada. Three months later and having traveled 1,500 miles, they were forced to
surrender just 40 miles short of the Canadian boundary.
In 1893, the Nez Perce Tribe ceded and sold to the U.S. Government all unallotted lands on the reservation
with exception of "the boom"'. The current reservation consists of 750,000 acres, of which approximately
90,000 acres are owned by the Tribe. However, the Nez Perce Tribe still retains the treaty rights agreed to in
the 1855 Treaty. These rights apply to most of the aearwater National Forest, including all of the North
Lochsa Face area.
4. Heritage Resources
Those of you who are history buffs will be interested to know that the North Lochsa Face Analysis Area contains
a rich and colorful history. The earliest written records of the area come from the journals of uwis and aark
(1805-06). Native activities prior to the Lewis and aark expedition are much more difficult to determine,
however, excavated cultural materials from prehistoric sites along nearby rivelS such as the Lochsa suggest that
Native Americans may have been using this area as much as 7000-9000 years ago. The Nez Perce Tribe used this
area for subsistence practices and traveling to and from the buffalo lands of the Northern Plains, and the Plains
tribes used the area to gain access to the various drainages for fishing activities.
a. Lolo Trail System
This consists of both the prehistoric and historic travel routes and includes all the major routes that traversed
the generally east-west ridge just north of the Lochsa and Middle Fork of the aearwater Rivers.
Prehistorically, the Indians traveled this area on their way to the buffalo hunting lands east of the Rocky
Mountains. The Nez Perce name for this route was Kushahna Ishkit (the buffalo trail). This trail was
approximately 100 miles long (on the Idaho side only) and ran from the camas gathering areas near Weippe,
ID to the Bittenoot Valley (Lolo, MT) of western Montana. This trail is potentially thousands of years old,
however, travel over it was probably limited prior to the arrival of the horse (ca. 1700 A.D.) Once the horse
was acquired, travel likely took place more frequently and over longer distances.
In 1805 and again in 1806, the Lewis and aark expedition utilized some of these same trail segments on
their journey to and from the Pacific Ocean. This group generally followed the prehistoric trail between
Sherman Peak and the Willow Ridge along the northern border of the analysis area. From Willow Ridge, the
Lewis and Oark party, during their westward journey, descended into Hungery Creek rather than staying on
the main trail along the ridge.
The second group of Euro-americans to cross the trail was the John Work party in 1831. John Work, a
Hudson's Bay Company employee from Vancouver, led a party of up to 60 men (fur trappers/traders),
women, and children across the Lolo Trail. They were on the trail from September 30 to October 13, 1831.
7 This consists of traditional flShiDg places and spiritual po.Dds doWDriver from the Spalding railroad tleSde bridge to the Spalding Historical Park.
NoJ1ll LoeIIsa FMe EIS
93
In 1866, Wellington Bird was commissioned by the U.S. Congress to construct a wagon road across this trail
system from Lewiston, ID, to the gold fields of southwestern Montana via Lolo Pass. Bird set out with a
survey crew, which included road builder Major Truax, to survey a route through the mountains. They found
six feet of snow and the country covered with a dense forest, heavy underbrush, and numerous wiDdfalls.
Bird notified the Deparbnent of the Interior that it was not possible to construct the road in this location with
the funding allotted. He did, however, survey a route for the road and construct a trail along the route that
could be developed into a road at a later time.
1
In 1877, during the Nez Perce War, the DOn-treaty bands of the Nez Perce used the Lolo Trail, as improved
by the Bird-Truax work party, in their flight from their homeland eastward into Montana Territory. They
were pursued by a colmnn of cavalry led by Major General 0.0. Howard. This route is known as the NeeMe-Poo Trail.
The last major happening along the Lolo Trail route was the construction of the Lolo Motorway in the mid
19305. The Motorway was originally designed as a Model T road through the rugged Bittenoot Mountains.
The route generally follows the Nee-Me-Poo Trail traveling the ridge line from saddle to saddle.
All of these trails are included within the Lolo Trail System. Given the history and significance of these
trails, it (1..010 Trail) was designated a National Historic Landmark in 1962, was listed on the National
Register of Historic Places in 1966, and was also designated as part of the Nez Perce National Historic Park
by the passage of Public Law 89-19 in 1965. In 1978, the route that Lewis and aark followed was
designated as a National Historic Trail. The Nee-Me-Poo Trail was designated a National Historic trail in
1986. The Lolo Trail System, along with the Lolo Pass area and Musselshell Meadows are co-managed by
the Forest Service and the National Park Service.
b. Archaeological Sites
These are likely 10 be encountered almost anywhere in the analysis area. The highest probable areas for sites
to occur are in locations such as ridgelines, near springs, and along stream terraces. Numerous sites are
found along the various trails in this region. The analysis area contains 118 identified archaeological sites,
of which 82 (69.5%) are historic, 19 (16.1%) are prehistoric, and 17 (14.4%) are multi-component (both
prehistoric and historic) in nature.
Many of the recorded historic sites are directly related to the Forest Service. These sites include lookouts,
cabins, and ranger stations. Generally, the original lookouts were simply tree stands that were later
modernized with the addition of a tower and associated structures and facilities. Many of these lookout
trees, towers, and associated structures perished during forest fires, especially the 1934 fire. Other historic
sites are associated with the Lewis and Ouk Expedition, the Bird-Truax work party, the flight of the Nez
Perce, the construction of the Motorway, the Carlin Hunting party expedition (1893), trapping, and mining
activities. These sites are campsites, cabin sites, trash dumps, or traplines found throughout the forest.
The prehistoric sites are generally located along ridgelines, confluences of streams, or terraces above
streams. Prehistoric evidence is recorded as trails, bouse pits, campsites, lithic scatters (stone tool workshop
areas), rock cairns, peeled trees, and possible stone quarrying locations.
One important site is a stone quarry/source area that was recently located within the Fish Creek drainage on
the ridge system extending south from Sherman Peak. This site is an important resource, for the modem
archaeologist now, as it also was to the prehistoric inhabitants of the Lochsa River region. The stone
vitrophere is a high quality obsidian-like material that is found in all the prehistoric sites (which possessed
lithic material) observed during the 1993 and 1994 surveys along the Lolo Trail. It is also found in many
sites along the Lochsa River and farther west along the Clearwater River. Vitrophere appears to be a
dominant material type for the lower Lochsa and upper Oearwater River regions.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Very few of the recorded sites within the analysis area have been evaluated in regard to their National
Register of Historic Places status. Of the 19 sites that have been evaluated, 13 have been detennined to be
class I (eligible for inclusion in the National Register), and 6 have been determined to be ineligible (class llI)
for inclusion in the Register. The class I resources include several Lewis and aark sites, Forest Service
lookouts and ranger stations, and the World War IT Canyon Creek prison camp. One site, the Lochsa
Historical Ranger Station, is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. However, many of the
recorded sites (99, 83.9%) have yet to be evaluated and therefore remain classified as class II sites.
5. Community Economics
Local coUDties and communities are closely aligned to the North Lochsa Face area because of geographic location,
historic reasons for settlement, economic dependency, and traditional land use patterns. Some areas were first
settled because of mining activities. Agriculture aDd cattle rauching occurred in the early 1900s, when farmers
and ranchers settled the Middle, South Fork, and main Oe81Water River valleys, aDd the Weippe and Camas
prairies. Logging came shortly thereafter and became the primary industry for most communities of the area.
a. Local Zone of InDuence
This includes the communities of Lowell, Syringa, Kooskia, Stites, Kamiah, Grangeville, Pierce, Weippe,
and Orofino. Other than Lowell and Syringa, whose few businesses depend on highway travelers and
recreationists, these communities are primarily dependent on the harvest of timber for economic survival.
Grangeville and Weippe have some cattle-grazing as well, but they are still primarily timber-dependent.
Although Pierce began as a gold-mining town, logging is the primary means of support DOW.
The populations in most communities have remained relatively stable and impact from newcomers is
minimal. The exceptions are Kamiah and Kooskia. Both of these towns are experiencing an influx of
retirees and other people settling in the area, many without work. Schools are filled to capacity, and there is
a concern about employmenL Many of these people are moving into subdivisions or parcels of land outside
city limits, but their children attend local schools.
b. Community Stability
Idaho bas always been a natural resource-based state, economically, although as dependency on natural
resources becomes less stable, there is some movement towards diversification. Many communities have
made impressive strides in achieving GEM Community status and working to diversify their economies.
(The GEM Community Program was established by the Idaho Department of Commerce to encourage
communities to plan their own future). As reported by the Idaho Department of Labor, the timber products
industry went through some hard times in the early '80s, but those firms which survived were streamlined
and modernized. The result is reduced dependence on hired labor.
Logging has been the primary means of support and a way of life for many residents of these small
communities throughout their existence. Assuming a wood supply was available, and the economy was
favorable, the tradition would likely continue for many more generations with children following in their
fathers' footsteps. Although some former loggers have ventured out into a new line of work, such as a
business or auto mechanics, the majority of workers in the timber industry are opposed to a change in
lifestyle, particularly if they have spent many years in this work.
Preliminary findings from a study recently done by University of Idaho sociologists working on the
Columbia River Basin Assessment reveal some new information about rural communities. The study shows
that many timber-dependent communities tend to be more resilient and able to tolerate change than is
commonly assumed. While mill closures have impacts in some communities, the shutdowns have little
impact in others.
Generally, the attitude of community leaders in Kooskia and Kamiah is to try to be flexible enough to meet
the challenges brought about by a change in economic structure and to accommodate the influx of new
people to the area. Both towns are looking for ways to diversify their economies to counter the dwindling
employment from timber production.
Nordt Lo.-JIa Fue ElS
Community leaders in these towns recognize the importance of recreation and tourism. They see the timberrelated jobs disappearing and young people leaving because of lack of work. Comments they made were:
"One way to help our economy is to promote tourism," and "Unemployment is high; the mills are not
employing as many people as they use to. We need to diversify."
The Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project notes that a large amount of primitive and
semi-primitive recreation opportunity in the Basin, like provided in the northern portion of North Lochsa
Face, is noteworthy and provides substantial economic value. From a national perspective, these areas are
valued for both their exceptional scenery and solitude, that draw visitors from both a national and
international base. This type of attraction also draws visitor use into surrounding local communities.
Outfitting operations also have played a role in the economic stability of these communities, primarily
supported by the fall hunting season and the influx of out-of-state hunters. Recently, this industry has
experienced growth associated with recreational opportunities such as horse-back riding, photography and
viewing of scenery, mountain bike riding along the historic Lolo Motorway, and winter sports. It is
anticipated that this growth will continue as the local communities promote more recreation and tourism.
H. Fire and Air Quality
There is a wide range of tire regimes present in the North Lochsa Face area, from mixed severity on south-facing
breaklands with mean tire return intervals of 26-50 years, to lethal severity on some of the old surfaces with mean fire
return intervals of 300+ years. Fire impacted all I andtype associations to some degree with either: (1) many small low
intensity tires (DOn-lethal) that would smolder and creep around in the ground and surface fuels; (2) mixed severity fires
that would be of low intensity, underburning some areas, occasionally burning more severely, killing patches of
overstory trees; or (3) tires that were longer duration, stand replacing events (lethal severity).
Prior to effective tire suppression, tire played a major role in shaping and developing the vegetation and ecosystems
within the analysis area. Forest tire history records indicate frequent large tires, over 1,000 acres, burned within and
adjacent to the analysis area (see fire occurrence map at the end of this section). The 1910, 1919, 1924, and 1934 tires
burned a total of 77,100 acres (61%) of this area at various intensity levels. Several of the major drainages burned 2 to
3 times between 1910 and 1934. Most of these double/triple burns set succession back, creating extensive sera!
shrubfields, still present today. A much lesser degree of non-lethal underbuming also occurred. These tires contributed
to a mosaic of vegetative COnditions, reduced ground and ladder fuels, thinned stands, and favored larger individuals of
fire resistant species.
The role of tire has been removed, to some extent, as a result of effective tire suppression. This has caused a gross
distortion in the fire regimes, removing most tires of low aDd intermediate severity and increasing the proportion and
potential of large, high severity fires. The vegetation has changed across the landscape to one of more ground and
ladder fuels and denser stands of smaller diameter, fire susceptible tree species. There have been plenty of fires (457
fires between 1955 and 1994) that might have further altered the vegetative pattern had fire suppression not taken place.
In general, it could be said that the probability of a large stand replacement tire occurring in the North Lochsa Face
analysis area would have been likely and is even more likely now given changing conditions.
1. Legal Requirements
The Clean Air Act (pL88-206) and its amendments were designed to: (a) protect and enhance the nation's air
resources; (b) initiate and accelerate a national research and development program in order to achieve the
prevention and control of air pollution; (c) provide technical and tinancial assistance to State and local
governments in connection with the development and execution of their air pollution prevention and control
programs; and (d) encourage and assist the development and operation of regional air pollution control programs.
The 1970 amendments require the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) to identify air pollutants that have
adverse effects on public health and welfare and to establish primary and secondary NAAQS (National Ambient
Air Quality Standards) for each identified pollutant. Additionally, each state is required to develop a plan for
maintaining air quality within these National Standards.
NOI1II LoeUa Face ElS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
n,
m
and
areas for air
The Oean Air Act amendments of 1977 included a process for designation of Oass I,
quality management. Class
areas Can best be described as areas of good air quality with no air quality
restrictions. However, these areas are governed by NAAQS established by the EPA. Oass I areas are the
"cleanest" areas and receive special visibility protection. They are allowed very limited increases of pollutants
and particulate concentrations. Oass I areas on the Clearwater are those lands which fall within the administrative
boundaries of the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness. All areas of the forest outside the wilderness, including the
North Lochsa Face analysis area, are designated as Oass IT areas. No Oass
areas have designated at this time.
n
m
Responding to the above legal requirements, the Forest Service has become an active participant with the North
Idaho Smoke Management Memorandum of Agreement. This agreement establishes procedures to regulate the
amount of smoke produced by prescribed fire and identities airsheds for management purposes. The analysis area
falls within North Idaho Airshed 13, which encompasses the area from Cottonwood Butte, east to the Montana
State line, south to the Nez PercelPayette Forest Boundary and west to the Oregon State line. This is an area
averaging 120 miles wide (east to west) and SS miles (north to south).
Restrictions on prescribed burning on the Clearwater National Forest have been imposed in the past during the fall
burning season because of adverse effects on air quality in parts of western Montana and Northern Idaho.
Historically, broadcast and underburning on the Oearwater N.F. were generally done during the late summer/early
fall. Recently the Forest has been accomplishing more of this type of burning during the spring and early summer
months when smoke dispelSion is more favorable.
2. Airshed Characteristics
•I
The Aleutian Low and the Pacific High strongly influence local climates. The normal air flow is to the
east/northeast with prevailing west/southwest winds. The Aleutian Low dominates during the winter months,
bringing periods of heavy precipitation in the form of snow and spring rains. The Pacific High dominates during
the summer, resulting in hot and dry weather. Low intensity, long duration frontal storms occur commonly in fall,
winter, and spring. High intensity, short duration thunderstorms accompanied by locally high winds occur
between May and October.
I
Locally, all major river canyons are subject to temperature inversions which pool smoke in the drainage bottoms.
Temperature i~versions can occur at any time during the year, but they are common in the fall .
•
•I
I
I
I
•
3. Historical Conditions
Although there is no known historical air quality data for natural ecosystems in Montana and Idaho, tire has
historically played a major part in the vegetative dynamics of the northern Rocky Mountains ecosystems as
evidenced by the bum mosaics of the forested lands. Fire history indicates that much of the Oearwater basin was
burned between 1910 and 1934, including the analysis area.
The annual amount of smoke generated from forest fires, including wildfires and prescribed fires, has generally
decreased since the early 1900s. Prior to that time, there were probably some 1500 to 2000 fires burning annually
within the northern Rocky Mountains. Those fires generated smoke for as short as a few hours to as long as 90 to
120 days. Since that time smoke has been reduced considerably due to the advent of successful fire suppression
efforts. Smoke emission estimates from the pre-settlement time period (before 1935) were 1.3 to 10 times greater
than the recent period (1979-90). Fire ecologists and other scientists are suggesting, that where smoke is
concerned, our skies may currently be too clean, and that the current cleanness of the air may be an indicator of
other serious problems in the ecosystem.
4. Existing Conditions
Air quality associated with the analysis area is generally considered good to excellent most of the year. Local
adverse effects result from native-surfaced roads, occasional wildfires and other prescribed fire activities.
Prescribed burning activities in the analysis area would have an effect on air quality. The effect of settlement and
subsequent tire protection has been to reduce the amount of area burned and to reduce the duration of smoke
emissions from wildland fires. In the case of prescribed tire, the amount of smoke generated has been mitigated
from earlier levels of post settlement burning by forest managers scheduling bums for periods of good dispersion.
Nortla Locl!!!~ F!!ee ElS
97
Cllapler Tlaree
I
5. Sensitive Areas
The following sensitive areas located adjacent to the analysis area were identified as potentially being affected by
smoke emissions from prescribed burning in the analysis area:
Table 3.31 • Sensldve Areas
Air MDes " Direction
~orHuman
Area
from Area
Occupation Period'
Missoula, Mt
Middle Fork Oearwater River
Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness
6SNE
lOSW
3E
Yearlon2
Yearlong
May --Nov.
Lochsa Historical Station
Wilderness Gateway
r
und
6NE
lOSE
June -Oct
April-- Oct
Apgar Campground
3SW
IS
April-- Oct
of ~or buman
activity wItbID alnbed 13
Areas
Knife Edae River Access
June -- Oct
8 With the exception of Missoula and the Middle Forte of the Clearwater River. the rest of these areas receive their most use during the late spring and
summer months from Memorial Day through the end of October.
r
...
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.'
Large Fire Occurrence by Major Drainage
North Lochsa Face
•
•
•
•
•
CHAPTER FOUR
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
J
1
This chapter forms the scientific and analytic basis for comparisons of the alternatives, including the revised proposed
action (40 CPR 1502.16). It emphasizes measures to mitigate adverse environmental impacts [(40 CFR IS02.16(h)]
through compliance with Forest Plan standards [36 CFR 219.11(c)] and summarizes monitoring programs required by
NEPA [40 CPR 1505.2(c)] and NFMA [36 CPR 219.11(d)].
Except for landtype associations, the resource elements are discussed in the same order as in the previous chapter.
Effects on LTAs are incorporated in the other resource discussions. Each discussion centers on impacts (effects) that
are direct, indirect, or cumulative. These can be either beneficial or adverse. They are defined as follows:
DIrect impacts are caused by the action and occur at the same time and place [40 CPR 1508.8(a)].
lDdireet impacts are caused by the action and are later in time or farther removed in distance, but are still
reasonably foreseeable [40 CPR 1508.8(b)].
Cumuladve impacts are those which result from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past,
present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions [40 CPR 1508.7]. A cumulative effects analysis was completed
for each of the resource, ecosystem, or social concerns using the following steps: (1) established the geographic
scope for the analysis; (2) established the time frame for the analysis; and (3) identified past, present, and
reasonably foreseeable future actions. (The existing conditions described in Chapter Three take into account past
activities.)
Changes to CluqMr Four sincs tIN DElS: Alternative 3a has been added to each effects analysis, and also added is a
section covering tribal treaty rights.
1
--•
•
•
•
•
•
•
I
t
A. Aquatic Conditions
This section is divided into two subsections; (1) watersheds and (2) fish and their habitaL In the first subsection,
potential sediment production and changes in equivalent clearcut acres (ECAs) and peak flow are displayed on a
watershed basis for each alternative. The second subsection discusses the effects of each alternative on the fish habitat
conditions, described as "limiting" in Chapter Three.
1. Watersheds
The potential effects to aquatic resources from actions proposed in this project could result from road
construction, harvest and burning. However, road construction and reconstruction is designed to meet riparian
management objectives. Road reconstruction will concentrate on stabilizing existing road-related sediment
sources through surfacing and culvert replacement (sized for 100 year flood events). During road construction,
standard methods will be used to prevent sediment delivery to live water. Harvest units will require PACFISH
mandated buffers, and ignition points for prescribed fire will be located outside of the riparian areas. These
mitigation measures are expected to minimize effects on streams and riparian areas. To assess potential effects
from all proposed activities, the following tools were utilized:
WATBAL Sediment Model.
Stream Survey Data.
Landslide Risk Screen.
Sediment reduction effects of road obliteration and sediment trap removal.
Sediment reduction effects of PACFISH buffers.
Professional Judgement.
No.... LocIIsa F-ee EIS
99
The WATBAL sediment model is the most commonly applied tool to evaluate water quality on the ForesL
Although not designed to directly model catastrophic events (such as the 1995-96 floods), it remains a reasonable
method to compare the relative impacts of management activities. All of the proposed road
construction/reconstruction and vegetative treatments were modeled in WATBAL. However, WATBAL is IlOl
capable of evaluating the overall benefits reaped from: 1) the obliteration of old roads; 2) the obliteration of
temporary roads constructed specifically for this project; and 3) the removal of sediment traps from Walde and Pete
King Creeks. WATBAL also does not consider the spatial context of any proposed activity. In other words: It
does not really "know" where an activity is occurring in relation to the actual delivery distances required for
sediment to ~ach live water. Although WATBAL may predict delivery of "x" units of sediment to a stream, that
particular activity may be 1,000 or more feet from water; therefore, that unit of sediment may be prod:Mc«l, but not
necessarily uliv.1WL These circumstances will be discussed site specifically below. Please refer toAp~ndixI for
a more complete discussion of assumptions used in the model. All of the activities were modelled in accordance
with the proposed years of implementation, with the first activity scheduled for 2000. In addition, the following
parameters were evaluated to determine potential effects.
- To avoid ovenU watenbed impacts: Identify the presence/absence of five landslide indicators at locations
proposed for DeW road construction (temporary and specified), including: geologic parent material; elevation;
aspect; slope; and landform.
- To avoid Impacts to substrate eondltioDS from lIDe sedlmeat deUvery via roads: Evaluate proposed road
construction/reconstruction in terms of total miles, number of live water crossings, road locations, and design
specifications.
- To avoid Impacts to stftaIII ellaDDel latepity resuldq from ellaD3es ID q.....dty and tialIDg of ruaolt
WATBAL was used to calculate ECAs and peak flow increases. Threshold values of 15-20% increases in peak
flow will be used to identify potential areas of concern.
- To avoid sedlmeat deUvery from harvest/bum IIDIts to tile stream: Maintain or improve conditions in the
Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCAs) through implementation of default PACFISH buffers.
The following comparison of alternatives is based on model predictions and professional judgement of events and
actions anticipated to occur in the future. As such, they do not iDCOrporate the effects of randomly occurring large
scale disturbances such as wildfires.
1
A1te.....tlve 1 <no action): No harvest, road building or burning will occur under the no action alternative.
Sediment-producing sites on existing roads would eventually be corrected through normal road maintenance, but
would be dependent on funding, which may delay their repair. Because the proposed burning was, in part, to reduce
fuels, the risk of larger fires in the watershed will increase under Alternative One. Concomitant to that risk is the
increased probability of surface erosion, and a subsequent increase in delivered sediment to aquatic systems. Other
than 0.25 miles, no further road obliteration will occur in the North I..ochsa Face area until this analysis is
completed. There are 70 miles of obliteration survey (funded through the Northwest Power Planning Council)
which would still be carried out under Alternative One. The removal of in-channel sediment traps in Walde, Pete
King. and WF Pete King Creeks are also contingent on the completion of the NEPA process.
AU Action Alternatives: Proposed road obliteration, and road obliteration survey will occur as scheduled under all
action alternatives. Removal of the in-channel sediment traps discussed above will also occur.
1
1
1
The report Assessnunt ofthe 1995 and 1996 Floods and LandsliMs on the Clearwater National Forest
(McClelland, et al1997) identified the following geomorphic parameters that could be used to assess the inherent
risk of failure of new road construction (permanent and temporary):
Geologic Parent Material • The report tabulated landslide frequency by geologic parent material. In
decreasing order of occurrence per thousand acres they were: Border, Batholith, Belt, Alluvium, and BasalL
All of the proposed road construction is in either Border or Batholith geology.
1
1
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Elevation • It was found that the highest rate of landslides (1.66/1000 acres) occmred between 3,001-3,500
feet of elevation. The proposed road construction in North Lochsa Face falls into three elevation zones: 1)
3,soo-4,000 feel This range ranked fourth in the Landslide Report with a frequency of 1.10
slides/thousand acres, 2) 4,001-4,500 feeL This range ranked sixth with a frequency of 0.85 slides/thousand
acres, and 3) 4,501-5,000 feet. This range ranked seventh with a frequency of 0.50 slides/thousand feel
Aspect • The report stratified failures by prevailing aspect. They found that landslides/1,000 acres were
greatest on south aspects, followed by southwest, and westerly. The roads proposed in this project are
found on all aspects except north. A 0.3 mile segment of Temporary Road 184, and a 0.4 mile segment of
new specified road construction are on south aspects.
Sideslope • The flood assessment found the highest rate of landslides occmred on slopes in excess of 56%.
All road construction in North I..ochsa Face is on slopes ranging from 15-40%.
Landform • The greatest landslide rate by landform occun:ed on mass wasted slopes (1.72/1,000 acres),
followed by brealdands, at a rate of 1.1211,000 acres. There are two segments of road; 0.6 miles of DeW
construction, and 0.1 miles of temporary construction proposed on dissected brealdands. The balance is on
low to moderate relief rolling uplands and mountain slopelands.
Table 4.1 Landslide IDdlcaton: TemDOranr Roads
~;~:":.~~~k~'~:f:t~~2~f~~~~u.
Permanent'l
0.4
Permanent'l
0.1
Permanent'l
0.6
Temo'l
Te1Jl1) '1
0.4
0.1
Border
Temp #2
0.6
Border
Temp #3
0.4
Batholith
Temp #3
0.1
Border
Temp #14
0.5
Border
~~ .~ .~.
Batholith
Low Relief
S
41S0
2S
E
4100
30
Disseded
Breaklands
SE
3900
40
E
Uoland
Mod. Relief
SE
3600
3640
3S
E
4100
30
4420
15
4400
30
4200
35
RollinS! Hills
Mod. Relief
Rolliu UolaDds
Batholith
Rollill2 Uplands
Low Relief
Hills
Upland
NE
Mountain
Siapeland
30
~n:.;~
.• ,",",;~.~~', ~::;';~.l' .p:r~Q.-h·:· :;:--~ ~.:. .·.!~.r:)~::t/·:::~;l'~~~J;;~ ..-t:~":'ry~~~.,,,,~ ~~.~cr.~S~.r(~~-;t ~.~~1~~;::4::-:'"";l"~ ::,~-:'f.~ ;-;~:::~~i~~'~i1
Low Relief
Batholith
4800
Temp tIS
0.7
E
20
Rolliu Hills
Disseded
Brakland
Temp 116
0.1
Temp 116
0.3
Border
Temp #7
0.3
Batholith
Temp 1#8
0.1
Temp 1#8
0.3
Temp 1#8
0.1
Temp 1#8
0.3
Mountain
Siooelands
Low Relief
Hills
Low Relief
RollinS! Hills
Mod. Relief
RoUina Up1aDds
MOWltain
W
3840
40
NW
4000
30
NE
4400
30
sw
4600
30
4280
35
S
4200
30
E
4250
2S
SE
4200
3S
Siapelands
Mod. Relief
Rollill2 Uplands
2S
NE
K.~'~~~~.' '~"~~~~~~~!~'i~E~g~~~)jf~l
Temp #19
TempI#<)
0.1
0.1
Batbolith
Low Relief
RollinS! Hills
Mod. Relief
Rollill2 Uplands
CupterFo..-
Considering each landslide risk factor, the proposed roads were rated as shown in the following table.
High Risk .. 1; Low Risk .. 0
Geology: Border and Batholith = 1
Elevation: 3,000-5,000 feet 1
Aspect: S, SW, or W 1
Slope: >56% = 1
Landform: Breakland or Mountain Slopes = 1
=
=
-
T ab)e 4.2 RiskFactor Ra·
tin2--T emporary Roa ds
Road
Permanent
#1
Temp #1
Temp #2
Temp #3
Temp #4
Temp #5
Temp #6
Temp #7
Temp #8
Temp #9
Overall
Geology
Landform
Aspect
Elevation
Slope %
1
1
0
1
0
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
2
3
2
4
2
3
2
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
Riskl
LaDdtIIde IDdlcator SUDUDary: Based on the parametem discussed above, there is a moderate risk of road related
problems in the watershed. However, it is important to note that although all were weighted equally, they do not
contribute equally to the risk associated with any given road location. The five landslide indicatom also do not
consider the position on the slope, or distance to live water for any proposed locations. Slope and geology are
arguably the most important considerations. These temporary roads are all located on ridgetops. For this project,
geology ratinp iDdicate high risk, but the slopes rank as a very low risk. Additionally, none of the proposed roads
cross live w.rer. This is a particularly crucial consideration, because nearly all of the debris torrents that occurred in
the 1995-96 events were the result of plugged culverts or associated fill failures, resulting in channelized flow in
the form of debris torrents. Other potential problems related to roads ioclude:
Non-chanpelize4. overlapd flow: The primary flCtom influencing overland flow are a) distance to live water,
and b) type of material through which it will flow. For virtually all the proposed road, delivery distance to
live water is a minimum of 600'. The exception is the existing 5545 Road, which will require a culvert
replacement in addition to the proximity to a wet area disclosed in the following tables. For all the other
roads, any non-cbannelized flow is likely to infiltrate or be absorbed by forest litter well before it reaches an
active channel. Additionally, any new construction (specified and temporary) will have a slash filter
windrow at the toe of the fill. This technique is highly efficient at trapping and retaining sedimenL
The risk of the road prism intercepting groupdwatcr: In areas of high groundwater, it is quite common for a
road to intercept the groundwater zooe. This is usually seen as cutslopes that chronically slough, and
cutslopes that regularly "weep" water. All the road locations were analyzed by landform and soil type and
rated for that risk. Again, except for Road 5545, the probability of this occurrence is very low to moderate.
The following tables and narratives summarize the direct and indirect effects of the alternatives within each major
drainage. The tables display sediment, ECA, and peak flow data as the maximum increase (+) or decrease (-)
from the existing condition. The existing condition, or "no action" alternative, is depicted in year 1999.
Equivalent ckarcllt acres (ECA) attempt to quantify the effective size of a harvest or bum uniL Initially the ECA
for a unit is related to the established crown cover before the practice, and the magnitude of the practice itself. For
example, a 100 acre unit that had an initial cover of 50 percent, and 50 percent of the crowns were removed,
would have an initial ECA of 25 acres. The ECAs for a given unit decrease through time as hydrologic recovery
l1bis represe1IlS I summation of the risk factors wbete: 1 • low risk; 3a moderate risk; and 5 • bigb risk of road relaled problems.
NortIt r.a"...., 11'_ ElS
102
,....................
r"
.,
!:
.!
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•~
•
progresses. Increases in ECAs should not be viewed as static, but need to be interpreted in the context of changes
in water yield and sediment delivery increases.
Peak flow is also used to indicate possible adverse changes in sediment dynamics in a basin. As ECAs increase,
there can be a concomitant increase in peak flows and in-channel erosion. Peak flows increase due to the removal
of water-using vegetation (trees), increases in snowpack in new openings, and a earlier runoff due to increased
solar energy. Peak flow increases in the range of 15-20 percent are considered a "redflag" that indicate there may
be decreased channel stability due to sustained increased energy in the stream.
D",tIIio" ofP_ Flow (T,.aJ}, although not a component of the following tables, it will be used in the narrative
to characterize changes in flow regime related to management proposals. T~ak is the percentage of days that
discharge is expected to exceed 75% of the peak flow. This is referred to as the "channel impact period", or the
time during which streamflow may accelerate channel erosion. Typically, Tpeak should not exceed 20 percent.
At the beginning of each "effects" discussion, the relevant standard to which the proposed activity is held will be
displayed. For most watersheds, that would be "No Measurable Increase". This standard is from the Forest Plan
Lawsuit Stipulation of Dismissal. It means that the activity cannot produce measurable quantities (using standard
hydrologic methods) of sediment, or that an equivalent or greater amount of sediment will be mitigated through
restoration activities in the watershed (such as road obliteration).
FlSb Creek: Standard--"No Effect". Sediment below 45% above baseline.
Table 4.4· MaDmum Changes from EDstbli Condition (1999) • Fish Creek
Upper FISh
2, 3, ]a, 5
0
0
0
0
0
0
DO ldivity
DO ldivity
DO activity
DO activity
DO activity
4
0
Middle FISh2, 3, 3a, 5
0
+3
+6
+6
+3
0
excludiaa Unit 26
4
0
DO activity
no activity
DO activitv
no activity
no activity
Middle FISh
2, 3, 3a, S
0
+3.0
+6.0
+6.0
+3.0
0
iDdudin2 Unit 26
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
Frenchman Creek
2, 3, 3a, 5
0
+2
+4
+4
+2
0
excludiD2 Unit 26
4
0
DO activity
DO activity
DO activity
DO activity
DO activity
Freuchman
2, 3, 3a, 5
0
+2.0
+4.0
+10.0
+14.0
+18.0
induding Unir 26
4
0
0
0
+6.0
+12.0
+18.0
~~~~~'.:,;.> ..,.~ ...;:~z;. .~~~~"J":~ ',~~2";~:::~r~:~~~r~ .:;)._._~:~.~ ..;.~~.:..;_.:~~ .:;:,:.....:~;~~~ ·~~·~~i~:t_JJ
Upper FISh
2, 3, 38, 5
Middle FIShexcludiDa Unit 26
Middle FISh
iDcludin2 Unit 26
Frenchman Creek
excludiD2 Unit 26
Frenchman Creek
indudin2 Unit 26
4
2, 3,3a, 5
4
2, 3, 3a, 5
4
2, 3,3a, 5
4
2, 3,3a, 5
4
9.4
2.9
2.9
0
DO ldivity
+6.9
DO activity
+6.9
0
+8
DO activity
+8.1
-0.1
-0.1
DO activity
+6.9
DO activity
+6.9
-0.1
+7.9
DO activity
+7.9
-0.1
+1.2
no activitY
+7.4
DO activity
+8.5
+1.0
+7.8
no activity
+13.6
+5.5
2.5
0
0
DO activitv
+2.0
DO activity
+1.5
0
+2.0
DO activity
+.2
DO activity
+2.0
DO activity
+1.8
0
+2.0
DO activity
1.6
1.6
1.6
2.9
~··='~·»~iZ<~BI_L;,,· ",,~~. ~ . . ;~_
Upper FISh
Middle FIShexcludiD2 Unit 26
Middle FISh
indudiD2 Unit 26
Frenchman Creek
excludin2 Unit 26
Frenchman
inducting Unit 26
2, 3, 3a, 5
4
2, 3,38, 5
1.0
4
2, 3, 38, 5
4
2, 3, 3a, 5
4
2, 3, 3a, 5
4
1.0
1.0
1.0
DO ldivity
+2.0
DO activity
+1.5
0
+2.0
DO activity
+1.1
no activity
+7.3
DO activitY
+8.5
+1.0
+7.6
no adivity
+13.4
+5.4
+.2
activity
+2.0
DO activity
+1.7
0
+2.0
DO activitv
+0.2
no activity
+1.0
DO activity
+1.4
0
+2.0
no activity
+2.7
+1.0
+2.7
+1.0
_VR~.,_~t~;~~~<:'!
1.2
+1.9
+1.9
1 0 0
• Middle Fish includes Frenchman Creek and Upper Fish Creek.
+1.2
DO activity
+7.3
DO activity
+8.5
+1.0
+7.7
DO activity
+13.5
+5.4
+2.7
+1.0
DO
.f
Upper Fish Qeek: Standard--"No Effect". Sediment below 45% above baseline. Under all action alternatives
2%) increase in ECAs (Alts 2-5)
there is no sediment increase predicted for upper Fish Creek. There is a small
in 2002-2003, but it begins to decline again the following year.
«
The prescribed fire (mixed severity) proposed in Alternatives 2, 3, 3a, and 5 cause slight increases in sediment
production, but are still well below the 45% allowed by the Forest Plan.
Frenchman Creek: Standard-No Measurable IDcrease In Sediment A tributary of Fish Creek, Frenchman Creek
exceeds the DFC objective for cobble embeddedness (Table 3.6). The WAmAL modeling for direct and indirect
effects in Frenchman Creek was done to portray two different sceDerios.
1.
Esdudlq UDit #26: Alternatives 2, 3, 3a and 5 show a small (4%) iucrease in sediment production due to
timber harvest and burning. Because the WAmAL model does not take into account PACFlSH buffers, it is
not probable that a sediment increase this small would reach live water, or be measurable if it did. Duration
of peak flow increases are also low, less than 10%, further decreasing the possibility of measurable change in
the stream channel. There is no scheduled activity in Frenchman Creek UDder Alternative 4.
2.
lDdudlllg UDit #26: Under alternatives 2, 3, 3a, and S there is a maximum increase in predicted sediment
delivery of 18% above existing conditions. Although the PACFlSH buffers discussed above would help trap
some sediment prior to reaching live water, there is a good probablility that measurable quantities would
reach the stream. The risk associated with this unit is largely due to the harvest method (tractor), parent
materials comprised of grussic Idaho batholith granitics, and soils that may have high surface water in the
form of alder glades. Additionally, the subsoils are highly erodible and sensitive to disturbance, and although
the skid trails and landings would be restricted to less than 15% of the area, the risk to live water still exists.
Middle Fish Creek: Standard-"No Effect". Sediment below 45% above baseline. This includes the entire fish
Creek watershed, including Frenchman Creek, and is the reach used for analyzing cumulative effects. The
WAmAL modeling for cumulative effects in the Fish Creek drainage intended to portray two different !CeDerios.
1.
Exdudla(l UDit #26: WAmAL predicts a maximum sediment increase of 6% above existing conditions for
Alternatives 2-5 and DO increase at all for alternative 4. ECAs increase to a maximum of 7.4 percent over
existing (9.0% above baseline) in 2002 and 2003, while peak flows increase 2%. This level of change will
have no impact on channel morphology or sediment dynamics within the stream system.
2.
IDcludlllg Uail #26: The predicted sediment delivery from unit 26 is not measurable at the mouth of fish
Creek, although slight increases in ECAs and peak flow may occur. This level of change will have no impact
on channel morphology or sediment dynamics within the stream system, and is within the Forest Plan
sediment standard applicable at the mouth of Fish Creek.
1
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
I
Pete Kina Creek: StaDdard--"High Fish". Sediment below 55% above baseline.
Table 4.5· MaDmam Chanaes from EDstiDa Condition (1999) • Pete Kina Creek
Pete King Mouth
2, 3&, 4, 5
Pete King Mouth
2, 38, 4, 5
9
+1.5
+1.9
+1.6
+2.2
+1.7
+1.1
+1.4
+1.1
+1.7
+1.3
3
2-5
12.2
+0.9
+0.9
+0.5
+0.1
-0.5
WF Pete KiD2
Walde Creek
2, 3&, 4, 5
14
+4.8
+4.3
+3.9
+3.6
+2.4
+3.3
+2.9
+2.5
+2.1
+1.2
3
Placer Creek
2,]a, 4, 5
5.7
+0.1
-0.1
-0.1
-0.5
-0.7
3
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.7
2, ]a, 4, 5
3.6
+2.3
+2.2
+2.0
+4.2
+4.1
Nut Creek
3
+1.7
+1.6
+1.5
+3.5
+3.5
Polar Creek
2, 38, 4, S
14.4
+1.1
+0.6
+0.1
-0.4
-0.9
3
+0.6
-0.1
-0.7
-1.1
-1.6
iP~?:·~\~:·":-:~~"7~~X1t~"'·~~~~J.~7F·~~:!0;~~~7~~tf·~~·>:mr02,:r?;5~\~i.;~.:.. ;:-'~~.~'}~
WF Pete Kin2
Walde Creek
Placer Creek
Nut Creek
Polar Creek
3
2-5
2, 38, 4, 5
3
2, 38, 4, 5
3
2,]a, 4, 5
3
2, 38, 4, 5
3
4.5
5.8
7.3
3.2
1.7
5.4
+0.3
+0.3
+0.3
+1.4
+1.2
-0.8
-0.8
+1.8
+0.8
0
0
+0.3
+0.3
+0.8
+1.1
+1.2
-0.8
-0.8
+1.8
0
0
0
+0.2
~1
0
+1.1
+0.5
-0.8
-0.8
0
0
0
0
+0.4
+0.3
0
+0.8
+0.5
-0.8
-0.8
+0.8
+0.8
0
-0.8
+0.4
~1
-0.3
+0.5
+0.3
-0.8
-0.8
+0.8
+0.8
-0.8
-0.8
Pete King Creek is to be managed as a "high fish" stream, with the high fish standard allowing up to 55%
sediment production over natural for 10 out of 30 years. Currently only Walde Creek has been above 55% for
more than 10 years, and is still above the 45% threshold for sediment Walde Creek also does not meet the DFC
objective for cobble embeddedness. Since this stream is still out of standard, at least an equal amount of sediment
of what the action would produce must be removed from the system, before the action can be implemented. The
removal of sediment has occurred in Walde Creek and other parts of the Pete King drainage that were not
accounted for in the WATBAL model. This includes the removal of 657 tons of sediment from sediment traps
and the obliteration of 14.5 miles of problem roads (please refer to road obliteration sediment benefits in
watershed effects summary). Thus, the slight increase in sediment in Walde Creek shown for the action
alternatives bas been more than offset by effects of the restoration activities. Additionally, the reconstruction of
the Pete King road (#453), which may cause some short term sediment production into Pete King Creek, should
result in an overall decrease in sediment due to stabilization of problem areas and control of surface runoff.
West Fork Pete King Creek: Standard--No Measurable Increase. Timber harvest activities, which are limited to
skyline logging in all alternatives, are not anticipated to have any adverse impact on the watershed. There are no
increases in sediment levels; consequently, there will be no measurable increases at the mouth of west fork. ECAs
and peak flow quickly return to base levels after a slight increase.
I
NortII LocIIsa F-ee E1S
105
CupterFou
Walde Creek: Standard--No Measurable Increase. Activities are predicted to have a minor i~ in sediment
(1 %). An increase of this magnitude is probably within the margin of error for the WAmAL model;
consequently, this predicted increase, in concert with small increases in ECAs and peak flows would have no
adverse effects on channel geometry or flow regimes in the watershed, and as such would not be measurable at
the mouth of west fork. The decrease in sediment from road obliteration and sediment trap removal discussed
above would amount to a decrease (no measurable increase) in sediment in the watershed and an overall
improvement in watershed condition. There are an additional two miles of road to be obliterated in W-alde Creek,
however they have no stream crossings, and would not contribute to the overall sediment reduction in the
drainage.
Placer Creek: Standard--No Measurable Increase. The proposed activities would have no adverse effect on
stream conditions in Placer Creek. WAmAL predicts no increase in sediment delivery to the stream. Under
Alternatives 2, 3, 3a, 4, and S, there is 0.5 mile of temporary road proposed that poses DO risk of sediment
delivery, given its distance from live water.
Polar Creek: Standard--No Measurable Increase. Effects in Polar are predicted to be similar to those discussed
above for Placer Creek. Under Alternatives 2, 3a, 4, and S, there would be 0.8 mile of temporary road
construction OD a ridgetop that would not be a threat to aquatic systems. There are no temporary roads proposed
under Alternative 3. Harvest activities are also DOt anticipated to increase recovery time for peak flow or ECAs in .
the watershed.
Nut Creek: Standard--No Measurable Increase. Proposed harvest activities in Nut Creek are predicted to cause a
slight (2%) increase in sediment and a maximum increase of 4% in ECAs. Peak flows may increase by 1.8%
under alternatives 2, 3~ 4, and 5, and by a maximum of 0.8 percent under Alternative 3. Given the small size of
the watershed (2.32 mi ), it is likely that WAmAL is overestimating effects. In any case, the predicted increases
are not likely to be measurable at the mouth of Nut Creek, particularly given its high ratings for bank aDd channel
stability (Oearwater Biostudies 1997).
None of the action alternatives would result in an increase in sediment as measured at the mouth of Pete King
Creek. For all alternatives, there is an overall decrease in sediment delivered at the mouth of Pete King. There
are small increases in ECAs and peak flow, but neither will push these values beyond threshold. The duration of
peak flows,. at 14%, is also well below threshold levels. Consequently, there will be DO measurable adverse
channel changes as a result of proposed activities.
No.... LorIIsa F~ ElS
106
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•I
'
I
I
I
I
I
Canyon Creek: Standard--No Measurable Increase.
Table 4.6· Maximum Chanaes from Existinl CoudldoD (1999) • CaDYOU Creek
Canyon Mouth
excludillg 27, 31,
2, 3a, 4, 5
33
33
-2.0
-2.0
-6.0
-6.0
-6.0
-6.0
-4.0
-6.0
33
33
-2.0
-2.0
-6.0
-6.0
-4.0
-6.0
-2.0
-4.0
30
30
34
34
-5.0
-5.0
-1
-1
-8.0
-8.0
-1
-1
-9.0
-9.0
0
0
-3.0
-3.0
+2
+2
+1.0
+1.0
3
34
34
-1
-1
-1
-1
+4
+4
+10
+10
+14
+10
2-5
36
0
0
0
0
-3
38, 4, 5
3
16.8
16.8
-0.7
-0.7
-1.4
-1.4
-0.3
-0.1
2, 38, 4, 5
16.8
16.8
-0.7
-0.7
-1.4
-1.4
+1.4
+1.0
16.2
16.2
20.6
20.6
-0.7
-1.4
-0.9
-0.9
-1.4
-1.4
-1.7
-1.7
_-1.5
-1.4
-1.3
+0.7
3
20.6
20.6
-0.9
-2.9
-1.7
-1.7
+4.2
2 -5
19.6
-0.9
-1.8
-1.4
2, 38, 4,5
8.0
8.0
0
0
-1.0
-1.0
0
-1.0
0
-1.0
-0.1
-1.0
8.0
8.0
0
0
-1.0
-1.0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7.3
7.3
10.0
10.0
-0.4
.Q.9
-1.0
-1.0
-0.7
.Q.7
-1.0
-1.0
-0.7
-0.7
+1.0
0
.Q.4
-0.4
+1.0
-1.0
-0.4
.Q.4
0
-1.0
3
10.0
10.0
-1.0
-1.0
-1.0
-1.0
+1.0
+1.0
0
0
0
0
2-5
8.4
-0.6
-0.6
-1.2
-1.2
-1.2
3
-2.0
-4.0
&6OasHeIi
Canyon Mouth
including 27,31,
2, 3a, 4, 5
3
0
-2.0
& 60 as Tractor
South Fork Canyon
2, 3&, 4, 5
Upper Canyon
excluding 27,31,
3
2, 3&, 4, 5
3
+4
+4
&60asHeli
Upper Canyon
includiua 27,31,
& 60 as Tractor
MvsterY Creek
2, 38, 4, 5
Canyon Mouth
excluding 27, 31,
~
~~~:~~:.:,).~:~~~.,"~ ~,~:~~:;<.~~~~~",,:~.~~~~.~.=,-:,.,.:~ :~.,,"':'.,.,..~.~;~ ~}t··.·"~~.~ ~~
-)."~.: .~. : .~:~~<~~.;~
& 60 as Heli
Canyon Mouth
iDcluding 27,31,
3
& 60 as Tractor
South Fork Canyon
2, 3&, 4, 5
Upper Canyon
exdudiua 27, 31,
3
2, 3&, 4, 5
3
& 60 as Heli
Upper Canyon
including 27,31,
2, 38, 4, 5
+4.8
& 60 as Tractor
MvsterY Creek
Canyon Mouth
excluding 27, 31,
3
&6OasHeli
Canyon Mouth
iDclucling 27, 31,
& 60 as Tractor
South Fork Canyon
Upper Canyon
excluding 27, 31,
'" 60 as Heli
Upper Canyon
including 27, 31,
& 60 IS Tractor
Mvsterv Creek
2, 3a, 4,5
3
2, 38, 4, 5
3
2, 38, 4, 5
3
2, 3a, 4, 5
Canyon Creek and its tributaries are out of compliance with the Desired Future Condition Objective for CE;
therefore, they must meet the "no measurable increase" standard. It should be noted that 1.5 miles of road
obliterated has been recently completed in this drainage, which is not reflected in the WAmAL model.
South Fork Canyon: Standard--No Measurable Increase. Proposed activities in South Fork Canyon are not
predicted to cause any increase in sediment, and only a 1.3% increase in ECAs in 2003. There are DO anticipated
increases in peak flows under any of the action alternatives. A proposed temporary road, to be built under
Alternatives 2, 3a, 4, and 5, will not deliver sediment to live water, since it is a ridge top road with no stream
crossings.
WAmAL modelling for Upper Canyon, and Canyon Creek at mouth watersheds portray two different harvest
scenerios.
Nol1ll LocIIsa Fa« ElS
107
Claapter Foar
J
I
Upper Canyon: Standard--No Measurable Increase.
1.
EsdudiJII UDits rJ and 31, and Unit 60 belieopter harvested. Under all action alternatives the WAmAL
model predicts a maximum sediment increase of 4% in 2004. Given the implementation of PACFISH
buffers, and a small margin of error in the modelled output, it is probable that any sediment generated would
not be measurable in the stream. Additionally, road obliteration in the watershed will further decrease
delivered sedimenL Increases in ECAs, and peak flow are less than 1 %, and well below the levels at which
adverse channel changes may occur.
2.
IDdudblg Units 27 aDd 31, aDd UDit 60 tractor harvested. Under all action alternatives the WAmAL
model predicts a maximum sediment increase of 14% above existing conditions in 2004. The potential
sediment risks in these units in similar to that discussed above in Frenchman Creek Unit 26. The landtypes
have grussic parent material, there is a high subsoil erosion risk, and there is a likelihood of high surface
water in the portions of the units with "45" and "95" soil series. Although PACFISH default buffers would be
used on all units, it is probable that a predicted sediment increase of 14% would be measurable at the mouth
of Upper Canyon Creek.
Mystery Creek: Standard-- No Measurable Increase. None of the action alternatives will cause an increase in
sedimenL Peak flows and ECAs would also decrease. Therefore, there will be no adverse impacts or measurable
increase in sediment to the stream as a result of this proposal.
Mouth of Canyon Creek: Standard- No Measurable Increase.
1.
Emudblg Valts 27 aDd 31, and Unit 60 beIieopter harvested. WAmAL modelling indicates no increase
in sediment at the mouth of Canyon Creek as a result of any of the action alternatives. There are very small
increases in ECAs « 1%) and no increases in peak flows; consequently there will not be sufficient energy to
change sediment dynamics or flow regimes in the watershed. In addition, the obliteration of 16.8 miles of
road in the watershed will prevent the potential delivery of over 21,000 (Table 4.12) tons of sediment to
aquatic systems in the drainage.
2.
-
ladudblg UDits 27 and 31 aDd UDit 60 tractor harvested. No sediment is predicted to be delivered to the
mouth of Canyon Creek as a result of the action alternatives. The effects of harvest from units 27, 31, and 60
are diluted at the mouth due to the increase in watershed size (Canyon @ mouth = 19.2 miles2, versus 6.2
miles2 for Upper Canyon). Changes in ECAs and peak flow are also oegligble, and as is also true for
sediment, will not be measurable at the mouth of Canyon Creek.
Nortla LoeIu Fa« EIS
108
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•I•
•
•
•
•
DeadJDaD Creek (at mouth): Standard-No Measurable Increase in SedimenL
De<ldman Mouth
WFDe<ldman
EF De<ldman
De<ldman~~Sj~~~~~~~S~
MF
~
Deadman Mouth
.~
WFDeadman
EF De<ldman
MFDe<ldman
..
;'('l.
De<ldman Mouth
WFDeadman
EF De<ldman
MF De<ldman
West Fork Deadman: Standard-No Measurable Increase in SedimenL None of the action alternatives will add
any sediment into the stream. ECAs and peak flows are predicted to increase by 0.5% and 0.3%, respectively.
This level of impact will cause no measurable changes in stream conditions.
East Fork Deadman: Standard--No Measurable Increase in SedimenL There is no predicted sediment increase
resulting from any of the action alternatives, and increases in ECA and peak flow are less than 0.5%. This level
of impact will cause no measurable changes in stream conditions.
Middle Fork Deadman: Standard-No Measurable Increase in Sediment There is no predicted sediment increase
as a result of any of the action alternatives, and the less than one percent increase in ECA and peak flow will not
be measurable as adverse changes in channel mOlphology.
Deadman (Summary)
None of the action alternatives will produce measurable quantities of sediment at the mouth of Deadman Creek.
Current modelled levels are at 5.4% over natural for 1999, and that value will drop by 2% through the life of the
project ECA and peak flows show at most a 0.5% increase, which will have no effect on sediment dynamics
within the watershed. The reconstruction of the Middle Butte and Van Camp Roads will result in a overall
decrease in sediment due to the stabilization of problem areas and control of surface runoff. Road obliteration will
further reduce overall sediment delivery in the watershed.
Blmerick Creek: StaDdard- "High fish". Sediment below 55% above baseline.
Table 4.8· Maximum Chan es from Exislin Condition (1999) • Bimerick Creek
:*...... ... ...........
I
':?..-;~
Bimerick Mouth
kJ!'clS
•.,
'if
2. 3, 3a
?1~.· ",.
NortIl LocIlIa Face £IS
109
-.
Bimerick Creek is to be managed as a "high fish" stream. with the standard allowing up to 55~ sediment
production over natural for 10 out of 30 years. Alternative 4 proposes no activities in the Bimerick area and thus
maintains the existing condition of the watershed. Alternative 5, which proposes only underbuming in Bimerick
Creek, would increase sediment by 4%, as predicted by WATBAL. ECAs and peak flows show only a slight
increase as well. Alternatives 2, 3, and 3a cause a larger increase in sediment production, as does the
reconstruction of Roads 481 and 5545. Under these alternatives, ECAs and peak flows also increase considerably,
raising the probability of sediment delivery to live water. T~ak also increases to 25% during the years 20042007; however, all of the channels are steep, "A" systems WIth bedrock and boulder substrate which has a very
low sensitivity to changes in flow and sediment load. None of the activities, however, exceed the Forest Plan
sediment standard for Bimerick Creek. In addition, the large amount of activities modelled in the watershed
would most likely occur over a 3-5 year period. This would lower the projected sediment estimates and ECAlpeak
flow increases. However, hydrologic recovery would still lag behind harvest activity, and the risk of sediment
delivery, although lowered, would still remain. The Bimerick Meadows road (# 5545) has been a chronic source
of sediment where it parallels the creek. Its reconstruction would result in an overall decrease in sediment due to
stabilization of problem areas and control of surface runoff.
Appr Creek: Standard- Geomorphic Threshold.
Glade Creek: Standard- "High fish". Sediment below 55% above baseline.
Rye Patch Creek: Standard- Geomorphic Threshold.
.~
"
~.4
+8.2
+7.7
-1.3
+9.4
~.9
+1.1
+1.1
+2.0
+2.0
~.4
~.4
~.7
0
0
+1.4
+3.8
+3.4
~.6
.-.
~.9
Glade
R e Patch
5.6
1.5
Apgar, Glade, and Rye Patch Creeks are to be managed as "high fish" streams, with the 55% sediment production
standard applicable only for Glade Creek. Apgar and Rye Patch Creeks, due to their small size, are estimated by
WATBAL to have geomorphic thresholds of 11% and 38% over natural, respectively. This means sediment
production cannot exceed these levels to remain within standard. Only Apgar Creek shows any increase over its
geomorphic threshold, due to the action alternatives. However, the small size of this watershed (1.63 mi2 ) causes
the WATBAL estimates to be exaggerated; therefore, it is not a reliable indicator of watershed response to
management activities. Based on the use of PACFlSH buffers, the reliance on helicopter and skyline yarding
systems, and canopy removal no greater than 65%, it is probable the proposed timber harvest would not delay
recovery of this stream. Thus, none of these streams are expected to fall outside the sediment standard, as a result
of implementing anyone of the alternatives.
Additioaal MidptiDl Factors tor all Ac:doD Altenadves:
TiJDber Harvest· To minimize the risk of surface erosion and mass movement within harvest units, the following
canopy retention and buffering guidelines apply to all proposed stands in the analysis area.
•
•
•
•
At least 50% canopy retention on breakJand landtypes
At least 35% canopy retention on colluvial midslopes.
At least 25% canopy retention on old surfaces. The exception is the Bimerick off-site pine conversion. Some
of these units may have less than 25% canopy retention.
Implementation of default (no cut) PACFlSH riparian buffers in all harvest units.
Nordl LocIIIa Fue EIS
110
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
In addition, active or recent landslide areas will receive a 100' buffer; as will small wetlands aDd seeps. The
guidelines discussed above should prevent overland flow of nOD-channelized sediment, and the risk of debris
torrent would be minimized through substantial overstory retention.
Underbum • The proposed underburning was only modelled in Bimerick Creek. Because the modelled output
showed only a small sediment increase (2 tons/mi 2/year), and DO change in peak flows, it was felt that the overall
impacts across the analysis area would also be quite small.
BMPs - Best Management Practices will be followed for all action alternatives as stipulated by the Idaho Forest
Practices Act and detailed in the Appendix J. The Oearwater National Forest has an excellent record of successful
implementation of BMPs. In 1997, the Forest had a 98.8% rate of BMP implementation and a 98.8% rate of
effectiveness (Jones 1997).
PACFlSB - Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCAs) will be implemented in the project area. Road
construction guidelines stipulated in PACFISH will keep sediment production from road surfaces to a minimum
and reduce the risk of road failure. Riparian vegetation and woody debris would be left intact to catch and retain
overland sediment before it can reach streams. Many studies have documented the effectiveness of buffers in
arresting sediment resulting from logging. A review of studies in Idaho (Haupt 1959a, 1959b; Ketcheson and
Megehan 1990; Burroughs and King 1985, 1989) and elsewhere (packer 1967; Swift 1986) conducted by Belt et
ala (1990) concluded that movement of sediment overland (oon-channelized) rarely traveled more than 300 feet,
the buffer width identified in PACFlSH for Oass I fish bearing streams. In addition, PACFISH RHCAs will
minimize any change in water temperatures by preserving overhead riparian canopies.
Water Tempenture - There will be no measurable increase in water temperatures as a result of timber harvest
under any of the proposed action alternatives, primarily due to implementation of PACFISH buffers that would
protect shade-providing riparian vegetation.
Contamination from Petroleum Products - Transportation of small to moderate volumes of petroleum products
to support road construction or other land management activities will occur under all of the action alternatives. To
minimize the risk of an accidental spill, as well as to protect water courses and aquatic biota from adverse effects
in the event of a spill, site specific BMPs and the Fuel, Transport, and Containment Plan developed under Section
7 consultation-with the NMFS will be applied throughout project implementation. In addition, service landings
for helicopter fueling and maintenance will require an approved spill plan. Absorbent materials, spill kits, and
diking around fuel storage areas will be required at the landing site to contain spilled fuel. All landings will be
inspected for compliance by the Forest Service prior to initiating helicopter operations.
TelDponry Roads • All of the proposed temporary roads were modelled using WATBAL. They were considered
ridge roads, which means that they do not cross live water, and are on the upper third of the slope. Although these
roads will be obliterated after use, there is no way to model obliteration in WATBAL. Therefore, the output will
continue to show sediment production as if the roads still existed on the ground. The temporary roads were
included in the modelling, because it was important to show sediment produced (if any) by their construction,
even though it would cause the model to show more sediment than actually might be generated in subsequent
years. Given the ridgetop locations of the temporary roads, their distance to live water, and their low to moderate
risk of intercepting groundwater, the probability of measurable sediment reaching live water is very low.
Road ObUtention • This activity may produce some short term sediment delivery to headwater streams when
stream crossings are removed, and during spring runoff. From past monitoring of obliteration on the West Fork of
Squaw Creek and from road obliteration monitoring on the Nez Perce National Forest, we expect only minor
amounts of sediment delivery to headwater streams, mostly in the form of suspended sedimenL Monitoring of the
West Fork of Squaw Creek showed a delivery of 0.2 cubic yards of sediment over a 13 day period when an
adjacent road was being removed. A road obliterated on the Nez Perce National Fores~ at Relief Creek on the Elk
City Ranger District, resulted in no sediment delivered to the stream (Nick Gerhardt, Personnel Communication).
Sediment delivery to headwater streams from the road obliteration will result in only suspended sediment being
delivered to downstream fish bearing streams. This sediment increase would be far less than that delivered by not
obliterating roads. By not obliterating roads, we can expect numerous landslides in the future, especially in Pete
King Creek.
NortII LocIIsa Face ElS
III
CUpterFo..-
~
discussed previously, it is DOt possible to use WATBAL to model road obliteration. Any potential sediment
delivery obviated through road obliteration is DOt displayed in the model, but can realistically be viewed as sediment
that offsets any which may be delivered through the proposed project. We cannot precisely say how much sediment
did not go into a stream because a road was obliterated, but we can present the potential of delivered sediment via
road failure. The following tables display road obliteration data for drainages within the analysis area.
. -
Table 4 10
~0 tal
....
FIll to be relDoved from d nws on road 5 propo:sed ~or obllteration ill North Loehsa Face
eo..... (....)
Pete Kia
CaDvoo/Deadm.aD
FlSb/FreocbmaD
Face
Total
24.2
1.5
0
0
25.7
:"'.~(
42.3
16.8
3.0
6.3
68.4
)
TotaiMles
CuieY. .
66.5
18.3
3.0
6.3
94.1
36.990
25190
380
980
63540
Of the total volume of 63,540 cubic yards, approximately 41,260 cubic yards are still in the unobliterated tills on old
roads, no longer needed for managemenL Theoretically, all of that material could potentially be delivered to streams
in the analysis area. Although it is unlikely, even under a worst case scenario, it does show the substantial reduction
of risk (and sediment) gained through an aggressive road obliteration program.
The table below compares the natural sediment rates in North Lochsa Face watersheds to the amount of sediment that
may be delivered through the failure of unobliterated roads. Sediment rates of this magnitude would severely
degrade these streams, probably for a 100 years or more.
Table 4.11- TIaeoretieal Sediment Rates Assum.... l00% DeUvery ofFill FaUures on Proposed ObUtention
w.ten....
R_-·w.F11
{J~ z (1.35) =- THI
Na...... Sedilllat
Rate
CoapU"ape led.
rate oIl11l . .terial
(...,';',y.-)
Sedilllat levell to
aeeed ae-aorpWc
dares....
(ttIu/';'ly_r)
(",,';"y.-)
PeteKiu
CaDyOD
Deadman
FISh
21,991
21586
5,400
5.400
23
17
17
11
803
1125
273
309
40
3S
3S
26
It is clear from this data that the risk of leaving unstable, old roads is far greater than the relatively small risk of
sediment delivered during the obliteration process. Also, the timing of sediment delivery greatly favors the controlled
removal of an old road vs. the uncontrolled failure of that same section of road. When roads are obliterated, the work
is typically done during low flow periods, with specific cut-off dates based on salmonid use of the stream. When a
road fails, it does so almost exclusively during high flow periods when stream energy and erosive force is at its
height, and when potential damage to aquatic systems would be greatesL
Cumglatlyc ECrcds 0D WatKlhccls
Geop-aphle Boaadary: The North Lochsa Face analysis area. An increase in erosion and resulting sedimentation is
the main potential concern with the implementation of this project.
Time Fnme: The time frame considered is 15 years after timber harves~ the year 2025. An average of 15 years
after timber harvest is the time believed for slopes to stabilize and when planted trees begin to be effective in
providing shade to the stream and increased root strength in landslide prone terrain.
Past, Present, and Foreseeable Future Actions: Considered past actions include road building, landslides, fires,
and logging. Present actions include road maintenance, road obliteration, and active timber projects; and future
actions include prescribed fire, road obliteration, and District timber sales (mostly salvage).
Nortla LoclIsa Face EIS
112
C"pterFou
•I
I
•I
I
•
•
•
•
•I
•I
I
I
I
I
I
Altemadve 1: Except for the increased risk of wildfire, there are DO cumulative effects expected from the
selection of the "DO action" alternative. Without prescnDed fire, the risk of wildfire, and therefore sediment
delivered from surface erosion and landslides, would be greatest with the selection of this alternative. Also, having
to depend on other NEPA analyses and available funding for road obliteration projects would delay the benefits in
sediment reduction from those projects.
A1teraadves 2, 3, and 5: Each of these alternatives propose the same amount of prescribed fire of mixed severity.
Mitigation measures, such as multiple entries, no ignition in the riparian areas (pACFlSH buffers), and narrow burn
strips will minimize any large scale burning of the riparian overstory vegetation. However, an increase in sediment
and wood ash delivered to the headwater streams is expected due to increased water yield off the burned areas. The
same is expected due to timber harvest. Although, there should be a lesser increase in water yield due to the many
trees left in each harvest unit and the implementation of PACFlSH riparian buffers. Road activities, including the
new construction under Alternative 2, are expected to have no impact on the watersheds, since all new permanent
or temporary roads are located on ridge tops far away from any stream and are without any stream crossings. There
may be some sediment produced with proposed road reconstruction and road obliteration. However, the effects are
considered short-term and will be more than offset by the long-term benefits of decreased sedimentation resulting
from these projects. Considering all pas~ presen~ and foreseeable future actions, there is not expected a reversal of
the downward trend in stored sediment in the North Lochsa Face drainages.
Alternatives 3. and 4: Each of these alternatives propose little to no prescribed fire of mixed severity. Only four
areas along the Lochsa face are proposed for such bums under Alternative 3a. This alternative also proposes
underburning within the Fish Creek drainage, whereas, Alternative 4 proposes no burning of any kind in this
drainage. Therefore, Alternative 3a is expected to produce very little sediment or wood ash into the headwater
streams as a result of proposed burning, and Alternative 4 is similar to the "no action" alternative by having a
similar risk of wildfire in the Fish Creek drainage. The cumulative effects of timber harvest and road activities are
similar as those for the other action alternatives and are not expected to reverse the downward trend in stored
sediment in the North Lochsa Face drainages.
Cumgladve meets on the Lochsa Sgbbasin
A large part of the upper Lochsa River drainage is in 'checkerboard' ownership, with private ownership in
alternating sections. Plum Creek harvest and road building activities are ongoing in the Spruce, Broshy, Papoose,
Parachute, Sho~ Russian, Crooked Fork, and Walton Creek drainages. Additional road construction and timber
harvest on private lands are expected to occur for at least the next decade. We do not monitor activities on private
lands, so it is difficult to quantify sediment output from DOn-Federal land. Anecdotal evidence would suggest that
it is a considerable contributor of fine and coarse sediments to the Lochsa River.
The recovery trend within National Forest lands of the Lochsa River drainage from past wildfires, roading, and
timber harvest could be rated as a positive, but slow process due to the past road and timber harvest activities from
the early 1950's to 1994. The recent 1995-96 flood events set back recovery in a few drainages (i.e. Squaw,
Papoose and Pete King Creeks). Recovery of the riparian areas along most of the fish bearing tributaries is
positive, but a slow process. Minimal timber harvest within 100-150 feet of these streams have occurred within the
last ten years. However, DOne is planned in the future due to PACFlSH direction in the Forest Plan. Vegetative
conditions should improve along these streams and their non-fish bearing tributaries over the next 10-20 years. Full
recovery may take over 50-100 years for the smaller streams and much longer (i.e., western red cedar habitats)
along the wider riparian areas of the larger streams. Full recovery along streams with roads existing within 150300 feet is not expected, but vegetative conditions are expected to improve and provide additional streamside cover
and potential woody debris.
The overall recovery trend is most likely a positive one over the last 10 years, due to new road construction and
timber harvest activities being relatively minor compared to preceding years. However, the drainage still shows
evidence of delayed aquatic recovery due to past activities that continue to contribute to riparian degradation and
stream channel alterations. The recent amendment to the Forest Plan to include more refined riparian management
objectives (pACFISH) will maintain and/or accelerate the attainment of improved instream and riparian conditions
within the National Forest lands. In addition, the upgraded road maintenance program and intensive road
obliteration program within the Lochsa River drainage will accelerate recovery.
Nortla LoeIIIa Face £IS
113
CllapterFo..-
I
Only road obliteration aDd broadcast buming are expected to deliver a small aDd temporary amount of sediment to the
Lochsa River. The quantity of sediment delivered is expected to be far less than that delivered to the river during the
1995-96 flood events. Wolman pebble count data gathered in the Lochsa River before aDd after these events revealed
DO meaningful change in riffle sediment levels (Wolman Pebble Count Data for Selected Stations on the Lochsa
River, Powell and Lochsa Ranger Districts, 1994 aDd 1996. Oeuwater BioStudies, Inc. September 1996). The
Lochsa River apparently has sufficient energy to handle even very large sediment events, such as the Noseeum
landslide. We therefore conclude there will be no cumulative sediment effects on the Lochsa River from proposed
activities.
2. Fish and Deir Habitat
Alternative 1: With the selection of the No Action Alternative, fish habitat in the analysis area would slowly
continue to recover from past management and wildfire. Parameters expected to slowly recover include sediment
loading, riparian vegetation, instream wood, and water temperature. Management actions proposed to accelerate the
recovery of aquatic and riparian habitat, such as riparian planting, underbuming, and road obliteration, would have to
be analyzed through separate NEPA analyses prior to implementation. Selection of the No Action Alternative, in
combination with continued tire suppression, has the potential to result in increased fuel loading and risk of extreme
fire intensity over the long term. If extreme wildfires were to incinerate trees over a large area, similar to what
occurred during the 1929 and 1934 wildfires, there would be increased surface erosion, mass wasting, and surface and
channelized delivery of sediment to streams. Fish habitat would be affected by increases in fine sediment, water
temperature, and peak flows.
AU Action A1teraatives: All action alternatives include 1,290 acres of precommercial thinning, 600 acres of riparian
planting, DOxious weed treatment, 9S miles of road obliteration, and 59 miles of road put into long term maintenance.
Also, two sediment traps would be removed and reclaimed in Walde Creek. All of these activities would have
beneficial effects upon aquatic and riparian habitat, as follows:
Precommercial thinning accelerates the growth of young trees by decreasing competition, producing larger trees
sooner. Larger trees are better sources for instream wood and stream/riparian area shading.
Some riparian areas have not fully recovered from past logging, grazing, and the intense fires that occurred earlier
this century. Planting quick growing hardwoods to provide shade (over the short term) and conifers to provide large
instream wood (over the long term) benefits streams and fish habitat.
Treatment of noxious weeds benefits riparian areas by decreasing competition between preferred vegetation, such as
conifers during early seral stages.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
il
Road obliteration benefits aquatic habitat by decreasing sediment sources. Road obliteration may produce some short
term sediment to headwater streams, when stream crossings are removed, and during spring nmoff. However, this
short term, slight increase in sediment delivery to streams would be far less than sediment delivered by eventual roadcaused landslides, if the roads were not obliterated.
In addition
to the above described activities, default PACFlSH riparian buffers will be maintained during timber
harvest to maintain large instream wood supplies, stream temperatures, instream sediment quantities from surface
delivery, and bank stability. Ignition points for prescribed fire will occur outside of the riparian areas. Field reviews
will be conducted prior to harvest unit layout to avoid highly unstable areas indicated by moist site indicator plants
and areas with thin soils and/or mixing of the Mazama ashcap, and management openings will be created recognizing
the historic fire disturbance patterns on these landforms.
1
1
Nortla LodIsa Face ElS
114
1
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
A1teraadves 2 aDd 3: The effects upon aquatic habitat from prescribed tire (6,130 acres of mixed severity and
6,510 acres of underburning) are expected to be minimal due to multiple entries and multiple years of treatment
The multiple entries include up to 4 treatments per year, from a moist Spring bum (a less intense bum) to a dry
Fall burn (a more intense bum). This approach will remove fuels incrementally, decreasing the potential for
extensive fire damage to soil and residual trees. Scheduling burns through a five year period will also limit the
amount of newly burned areas per year. This will decrease both the potential sediment produced and effects upon
peak flows. Although ignition points for prescribed fire are to be located outside the riparian zones, some burning
may be allowed to back down into these areas. This should result in an underbum, encouraging riparian
vegetation growth and decreasing fuels and the potential for future, more intense, damaging wildfires. Prescribed
fire may result in surface transportation of sediment downslope, because burning surface vegetation exposes soil
to erosion from precipitation, wind, gravity, and freezing. However, the intensity of proposed prescribed fire is
considered within the natural range of variability, and the interception of sediment by riparian vegetation is
expected to result in no measured sediment delivered to the streams. Mixed severity bums may result in mass
wasting or landslides, if large openings are created on unstable ground. Mass wasting and landslides have the
potential to deposit sediment and debris into streams and their floodplains, affecting aquatic and riparian habitat
However, the areas proposed for treatment are within natural disturbance patch sizes, and the potential for creating
large openings is expected to be minimized with the implementation of multiple and seasonal entries. If the
prescribed bmns do result in measurable sediment delivered to streams and/or large openings, monitoring of
treatments will allow for adaptive management opportunities to decrease effects. Prescribed fire is designed to
mimic natural events, creating mosaic vegetative patterns, and are expected to have minimal effects on fish
habitat
The effects from the timber harvest (8,980 acres for Alternative 2 and 7,870 acres for Alternative 3) are expected
to be minimal due to the maintenance of PACFlSH riparian buffers and project design. Timber harvest may cause
some erosion, but surface delivery to streams is expected to be minimized by PACFlSH buffers. Minimal
increases in peak flows are estimated to occur, and the short term landslide hazard may increase in treatment units
on steep (>60%) slopes due to the removal of dying trees impacted by root diseases and insects. The potential for
harvest-generated mass wasting and landslides has been minimized through project design, in which areas prone
to landslides have been avoided and live trees are retained in all harvest units. There will be at least 50% retention
of live trees on breaklands; at least 35% retention on colluvial midslopes; and at least 25% retention on rolling
hills. There will be at least 66% retention of live trees on all commercial thinning units. Oearcut openings on
unstable land types will be limited to twice the tree height As a result of these precautions, sediment delivery to
streams is not expected to be measurable.
Alternative 2 proposes the construction of one system road (1.1 miles in length), reconstruction of Roads 453, 481,
483, and 5545 (12.9 miles total length), and the construction of nine temporary roads (4.5 miles total length) that
are to be obliterated (returned to contour) after use. Alternative 3, which uses existing road systems, only
proposes the road reconstruction, as in Alternative 2. There are no stream crossings associated with the proposed
system and temporary roads, so additional sediment delivery to streams is not likely. Stream crossings do occur
on the last 3/4 mile of Road 5545, proposed for reconstruction. Although this creates the potential for additional
sediment delivery to Bimerick Creek during this action, sediment delivered is expected to be minimal and not
measurable. Roads proposed for reconstruction will benefit affected streams by being upgraded to PACFlSH road
design standards, including replacing inadequate culverts with those designed with the capacity for a 100 year
flood event and the ability to pass upstream migrating fish.
Each of these alternatives is consistent with the management considerations described in Chapter Three. Stream
temperatures would be maintained using PACFlSH riparian buffers. The riparian planting proposed along Pete
King Creek and Fish Creek will accelerate the riparian recovery, and the long-term re-establishment of conifers in
the riparian areas may increase large instream wood and stream bank stability.
Alteraative 3.: The precautions and general effects of prescribed fire (930 acres of mixed severity and 6,900
acres of underburning) in this alternative are similar to those described for Alternatives 2 and 3. However, the
5,200 acres of mixed severity bums in the Fish Creek drainage are not included with this alternative. As a resul~
there is less risk of burning large openings on unstable ground; less risk of sediment delivered to streams and
floodplains by mass wasting or landslides; and less risk to fish habitaL
NortII LoeIIIa Face ElS
lIS
The effects from the timber harvest upon aquatic habitat is about equal to that of Altemative 2, since only 700
acres less are proposed for timber harvest under Alternative 3a.
Alternative 3a proposes the reconstruction of Roads 453, 481, 483, and 5S45 (12.9 miles total length) aDd the
construction of eight temporary roads (4.0 miles) that are to be obliterated after use. There are no stream crossings
associated with the proposed temporary roads, so additional sediment delivery to streams is DOt likely. Stream
crossings do occur on the last 3/4 mile of Road 5545, proposed for reconstruction, but the potential for additional
sediment delivery to Bimerick Creek during this action is expected to be minimal aDd not measurable. Roads
proposed for reconstruction will benefit affected streams by being upgraded to PACFlSH road design standards,
including replacing inadequate culverts with those designed with the capacity for a 100 year flood event and the
ability to pass upstream migrating fish.
This alternative is consistent with the management considerations described in O1apter Three. Stream
temperatures would be maintained using PACFISH riparian buffen. The riparian planting proposed along Pete
King Creek and Fish Creek will accelerate the riparian recovery, aDd the long-term re-establishment of conifers in
the riparian areas may increase large instleam wood and stream bank stability.
A1teraadves 4 aDd 5: Alternative 4 proposes DO activities (prescribed fire or timber harvest) in the North Lochsa
Slope Roadless Alea. In regards to fire, the effects under this alternative would be the same as those described for
Alternative 1 (DO action). Over the long term, fuels would continue to build up in this area, increasing the
possibility for an intense wildfire with potential negative effects upon riparian and aquatic habitat, including
increases in sedimentation and water temperature. Alternative 4 does propose 1,040 acres of underbuming outside
of the roadless area, where surface traDsport of sediment may occur after underbums clear ground vegetation.
However, riparian vegetation would likely filter this sediment prior to measurable quantities reaching the streams.
Alternative 5 proposes the same amount of prescnDed fire as Alternatives 2 and 3 and would have the same effects
to fish habitaL
Alternatives 4 and 5 have the least acres proposed for timber harvest (5,190 acres), and the effects, although
similar, should be less than those descnDed for the other action alternatives.
Alternatives 4 and 5 propose 1.5 miles of reconstruction (Road 453) and the construction of eight temporary roads
(4.0 miles) that are to be obliterated after use. There are no stream crossings associated with the proposed road
reconstruction or temporary roads, so additional sediment delivery to streams is not likely.
Each of these alternatives is consistent with the management considerations described in Chapter Three. Stream
temperatures would be maintained using PACFlSH riparian buffers. The riparian planting proposed along Pete
King Creek and Fish Creek will accelerate the riparian recovery, and the long-term re-establishment of conifers in
the riparian areas may increase large instream wood and stream bank stability.
Nortla LoclIsa Face £IS
116
C...terFou
j
J
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
B. Biota
This section discusses the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of the alternatives on wildlife habitat and vegetation
(including sensitive plants).
1. Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Wildlife Species
There would be no direct adverse impacts to threatened, endangered, and sensitive species under any of the
alternatives. However, the existing high risk of intense wildfire associated with Alternative 1 could have an
adverse impact on wildlife habitat, should a catastrophic wildfire occur. A Biological Assessment/Biological
Evaluation has been prepared and sent to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for their concurrence. A copy is
located in Appendix h. Table 4.12 summarizes the effects on threatened, endangered, and sensitive species, and isfollowed by a cumulative effects discussion for each specie(s).
Table 4.12 • Effects OD TbreateDed, Endangered and Seasidve Sped es
Species
Altl
Alt2
Alt3
Ranle or Effects
Bald Eagle
Grizzly Bear
Gray Wolf
North
American Lynx
Black-backed
Woodpecker
Coeur d'Alene
Salamander
Fisher
Flammulated
Owl
Harlequin
Duck
Northern
leopard 002
Townsend's
Big-eared Bat
Western toad
Wolverine
NoEffecL
No Effect.
Would DOt jeopardize the
continued existence or
recovery.
Would not affect the
viability or jeopardize
the continued existence.
No impact.
Beneficial ImpacL
No Impact.
No ImpacL
May Impact.
No Impact.
Beneficial ImpacL
No ImpacL
May Impact
No ImpacL
Beneficial Impact.
No Impact.
Beneficial Impact.
NoImpacL
May ImpacL
NoImpacL
May ImpacL
Alt3a
Alt4
Alt5
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Summarizing Table 4.12, there would be no direct or indirect effects expected on the bald eagle, grizzly bear, gray
wolf, North American lynx, Coeur d'Alene salamander, Northern Leopard Frog, or Townsend's Big-Eared Bat
with the implementation of any of the alternatives, including the access options.
Primarily prescribed fire and to a lesser extent timber harvest would directly improve habitat for the black-backed
woodpecker and tlammulated owl. However, both activities may impact habitat for the fisher, western toad, and
wolverine.
Possible impacts to harlequin ducks would be access related, in which Access Options 1,3, and 4 allow existing or
reduced levels of motorized access on Fish Creek Trail 224. This could impact harlequin duck breeding, nesting,
and brood rearing. However, current motorized access is probably having little affect, and the potential for
disturbance to harlequin duck rearing would be the same as occurs now.
Nortll LoeIIsa Face EIS
117
eu.... Fo...
I
C. .pIaUye
'''.<BaId Ellie)
Geo....phle BoUDdary: Their winter habitat in the aearwater River basin.
IlIDe Fnme: Year 2012 (last timber harvest + 2 years to complete slash burning).
Past, Present, aDd Foreseeable Future Actions: East Bridge timber sale; Increased dispersed recreation use
(associated with increasing human population aDd the celebration of the bi-centennial Lewis aDd aark Expedition
aDd Highway 12 traffic); big game hunting aDd fishing regulations; highway maintenance; aDd off-Forest
residential/commercial developmenL
PlaDDed Forest Service management practices are not expected to affect bald eagle habitaL The potential to affect
habitat for wintering bald eagles is expected to be minimal, as the heavy tourist season aDd winter bald eagle
presence do DOt over-lap their respective use seasons. Private laDd development immediately adjacent to the
aearwater River is increasing significantly, although, within the bounds specified in scenic easements
administered by the Forest Service. This could affect bald eagle prey availability (primarily "road-killed" deer) by
reducing deer habitat. There is, however, little evidence that deer populations, sufficient to provide winter carrion,
are being affected by residential developmenL
Cgmgladye
m.
(GrIr.zIy Bear aM WoIO
Geo....phle BoUDdary: Respective recovery areas for grizzly bear and wolf.
TIme Fnaae: Year 2012 (last timber harvest + 2 years to complete slash burning).
Past, Present, aDd Foreseeable Future Actions: Timber management programs (harvest, reforestation and
thinning); access management (new roads, road oblitera~on and/or changes in current access prescriptions);
increased dispersed recreation use (associated with increasing human population and the celebration of the bicentennial uwis and Oark Expedition); and big game hunting and fishing regulations.
PlaDDed Forest Service management practices are not expected to affect denning habitat or prey availability within
the recovery area for these species. Timber harvest is currently limited to developed (roaded) portions of the
Forest. No road development of designated roadless areas is being considered or implemented. Planned trail
management practices are directed at maintaining existing trails and not constructing new trails. Motorized trail
access may increase in some areas, due to improved maintenance and Forest Service administrative decisions to
approve this use on some trails. Likewise, as with some portions of the NLF, motorized access may be restricted
due to resource conflicts and trail suitability for safe motorized travel. Road obliteration, though largely outside
of suitable grizzly bear and wolf habitat, will continue to benefit the restoration of Forest health (via improved
water quality, reforestation and decreased motorized access).
The potential to affect habitat for both grizzly bears and wolves, due to the Lewis and Oark Trail Bicentennial
celebration is unclear at this time. The Forest is considering limiting access along this route for safety and
resource protection. It is anticipated that increased human disturbance from this activity will be limited to the
immediate trail conidor from July through September. Changes in big game hunting and fish regulations could
either be beneficial or detrimental to the wolf aDd grizzly bear, depending on influences on prey availability.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
1
·1
1
NortIl LoclIsa Face £IS
118
1
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Cgmglatlyc mccts fLypJ)
Geop-aphlc BoUDdary: Oearwater National Forest.
Time Frame: Year 2012 (last timber harvest + 2 years to complete slash burning).
Past, Present, and Foreseeable Future Actioas: Timber management programs (harves~ reforestation and
thinning); access management (new roads, road obliteration and/or changes in current access prescriptions); winter
recreation (primarily snowmobiling) within suitable habitat; increased dispersed recreation use (associated with
increasing human population and the celebration of the bi-centennial uwis and aark Expedition); and changes in
trapping regulations.
Planned Forest Service management practices are not expected to significantly affect denning habitat or prey
availability on the CNF. Timber harvest is currently limited to developed (roaded) portions of the Forest. No
road development of designated roadless areas is being considered or implemented. Planned trail management
practices are directed at maintaining existing trails and not constructing new trails. Motorized and snowmobile
trail access may increase in some areas, due to improved maintenance and Forest Service administrative decisions
to approve these uses on some trails. Likewise, as with some portions of the NLF, motorized access may be
restricted due to resource conflicts and trail suitability for safe motorized travel. Road obliteration, though largely
outside of suitable lynx habita~ will continue to benefit the restoration of Forest health (via improved water
quality, reforestation and decreased motorized access).
The potential to affect lynx habitat, due to the uwis and Oark Trail bi-centennial celebration is unclear at this
time. The Forest is considering limiting access along this route for safety and resource protection. It is
anticipated that increased human disturbance from this activity will be limited to the immediate trail conidor from
July through September. The effect of current or future snowmobile access and winter recreation on lynx and lynx
habitat on the Forest is unclear at this time. Actions within the NLF will not alter current conditions or
management actions related to snowmobiling and other winter recreation on the ForesL Changes in trapping
regulations could impact lynx either through additional protection or increased vulnerability.
CgmglaUve Elfccts <Black-.eW Woodpcc;kcr. Cocgr d'Alcpc SaII.egeler. Osher. Ilemmulatcd Owlapd
Dgck. Northern Leopard Fmc, Westcrg Toad)
Bam.
Geographic BoUDdary: North Lochsa Face (NLF) analysis area.
Time Frame: Year 2012 (last timber harvest + 2 years to complete slash burning).
Past, Present, and Foreseeable Future Actions: Salvage harvest implemented through the Ranger District small
timber sale program.
Habitat for each of these species is expected to maintain or improve within the NLF through the period 2012. The
District timber salvage program is not expected to degrade habitat for any of these species. Unplanned wi1dfire~
could degrade habitat availability for fisher, while benefitting black·backed Woodpecker. Habitat availability for
harlequin ducks, northern leopard frogs, western toads, and Coeur d' Alene salamanders are expected to be
unaltered by activities within the NLF through year 2012.
Cgmgladve meets <WolveriDel
Geographic Boundary: Oearwater National ForesL
Time Frame: Year 2012 (last timber harvest + 2 years to complete slash burning).
Past, Present, and Foreseeable Future Actions: Timber management programs (harvest, reforestation and
thinning); access management (new roads, road obliteration and/or changes in current access prescriptions); winter
recreation (primarily snowmobiling) within suitable habitat; increased dispersed recreation use (associated with
increasing human population and the celebration of the bi-centennial uwis and aark Expedition); and changes in
trapping regulations.
119
I
Planned Forest Service management practices are not expected to significantly affect denning habitat or prey
availability on the ForesL Timber harvest is currently limited to developed (roaded) portions of the Forest. No
road development of designated roadless areas is being considered or implemented. PlaDDed trail management
practices are directed at maintaining existing trails and not constructing new trails. Motorized and snowmobile
trail access may increase in some areas, due to improved maintenance and Forest Service administrative decisions
to approve these uses on some trails. Likewise, as with some portions of the NLF, motorized access may be
restricted due to resource conflicts and trail suitability for safe motorized travel. Road obliteration, though largely
outside of suitable wolverine habitat, will continue to benefit the restoration of forest health (via improved water
quality, reforestation aDd decreased motorized access).
The potential to affect wolverine habitat, due to the Lewis and Oark Trail bi-centennial celebration is unclear at
this time. The Forest is considering limiting access along this route for safety and resource protection. It is
anticipated that increased human disturbance from this activity will be limited to the immediate trail corridor from
July through September. The effect of current or future snowmobile access and winter recreation on wolverine
aDd wolverine habitat on the Forest is unclear at this time. Actions within the NLF will not alter current
CODditiODS or management actions related to snowmobiling and other winter recreation on the ForesL Changes in
trapping regulations could impact wolverine either through additional protection or increased vulnerability.
Short·Term Use VI. MalDteDaDee aDd E_aeemeat of Lo...·Term Produetlvlty: Impacts to habitat are
unavoidable with most of the planned silvicultural prescriptions. In the long-term, lynx habitat would minor
advancing forest succession. Prescribed silvicultural practices would promote more rapid tree growth (diameter
and height) in younger stands of dense forest. In the long-term, vertical diversity (multi-storied canopy, snags,
down logs, etc.) would increase and provide denning, resting, nesting. and foraging habitat for prey species. The
action alternatives would decrease lynx habitat potential in the NLF very slightly. No detectable effect on lynx
populations or its respective habitat is expected.
In the long-term, fisher habitat would mirror advancing forest succession. Prescribed silvicultural practices would
promote more rapid tree growth (diameter and height) in younger stands of dense forest. In the long-term, vertical
diversity (multi-storied canopy, snags, down logs, etc.) would increase and provide denning, resting, nesting and
foraging habitat for prey species. The action altematives would decrease fisher habitat potential in the NLF very
slightly. No detectable effect on fisher populations or its respective habitats is expected.
Irrevenlble and Irretrievable CoDUDitmeat of Resourees: The level of planned action within the analysis area,
by itself or in combination with other Forest Service management practices, would not diminish habitat value or
populations of sensitive wildlife or plant species. The project would have "no impact" on the recovery or
viability of harlequin duck, Coeur d'Alene salamander, northern leopard frog, Townsend's big-eared bat, aDd
wolverine. For fisher aDd the westem toad, the project "may impact iDdividuals, but is not likely to cause a
downward trend towards federal listing". No extraordinary circumstances exist that would cause this project to
have significant adverse effects on the human environment related to sensitive species.
Adverse meets Which CaDDOt Be Avoided: None known or suspected.
2. Management Indicator Species
Alternative 1: No habitat would be harvested. Natural disturbance factors (insects, disease, wind, and fire)
would continue to influence and shape the distribution and abundance of management indicator species (MIS)
habitats. Previously harvested areas would eventually develop as forest succession progresses, providing rearing
and foraging habitats. Older forest stands would increase fuel loading as forest succession advances, trees die, and
wildfires are suppressed. The risk of larger patches of older trees being lost as MIS habitats, due to wildfire,
would increase with time.
AU AcdoD Alternatives: Less than 3% of current estimated pileated woodpecker habitat is harvested in the NLF,
with Alternative 4 being the least impactive. Group sheltetwood, improvement cuts, and salvage harvest
prescriptions are expected to have minimal effect on current pileated woodpecker habitaL The rationale for this
conclusion is based on the retention of a substantial amount of live mature trees, large snags, and down deadwood
Nortla Loe'" Face E1S
120
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
,
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
I
within the stand. Other silvicultural prescriptions, though also retaining live, mature trees, would significantly
open the forest canopy. Although snags would be retained in these stands, the value of these stands to pileated
woodpeckers would be reduced from current conditions.
Less than 7% of current estimated northern goshawk habitat is lwvested, with Alternative 4 being the least
impactive, harvesting less than 3%. All silvicultural prescriptions, with the possible exception of salvage, are
expected to open the forest canopy below 60% crown closure. Although live trees and snags would be retained in
all these stands, their value to goshawk for nesting and rearing would be reduced from current conditions. Most of
these stands, however, are expected to be suitable for hunting, with numerous perches in staDds with an open
understory.
Less than 11 % of current estimated pine marten habitat is harvested, with Alternative 4 being the least impactive,
harvesting less than 4% of current estimated pine marten habitat. All silvicultural prescriptions, with the
possible exception of salvage, are expected to open the forest canopy. Although live trees and sDags would be
retained in all these staDels, their value to pine marten for denning and hunting would be reduced from current
conditions. However, most of these stands are expected to be suitable for hunting (with habitat for some rodent
species improved).
Geographic BouDdary: North Lochsa Face (NLF) analysis area.
Time Frame: Year 2012 (last timber harvest + 2 years to complete slash burning).
Past, Present, aDd Foreseeable Future Aetioas: Salvage harvest implemented through the Ranger District small
timber sale program.
Available habitat for pileated woodpecker is expecte4 to increase as forest ecosystem management practices
encourage the increase of larger patches of older forest on old surfaces. Goshawk nesting habitat and pine marten
habitat are expected to remain suitable (immature, mature, and old forest stands), abundant, and well distributed
across the landscape. Cumulative effects to moose and white-tailed deer habitat are expected to be similar to
those described for elk summer range. There are no expected cumulative effects (beneficial or detrimental) to the
belted kingfisher.
Short-Term Use vs. MaiDtelUlnee and EabaaeemeDt or Long-Term Producdvlty:
Impacts to habitat are unavoidable with most of the planned silvicultural prescriptions. In the long-term, MIS
habitat would mirror advancing forest succession. The action alternatives would decrease MIS habitat potential in
the NLF very slightly. No detectable effect on these MIS populations or their respective habitats is expected. In
our professional opinion, all alternatives meet the Forest Plan Standards for snag habitaL
Prescribed silvicultural practices would promote more rapid tree growth (diameter and height) in younger stands
of dense forest. In the long-term, vertical diversity (multi-storied canopy, snags, down logs, etc.) would increase
and provide denning, resting, nesting, and foraging habitat for wildlife species.
Irrevenible and irretrievable Commitment or Resources: None known or suspected.
Adverse meets Which Cannot Be Avoided: None known or suspected.
NoJ1Jl LocIIsa Face ElS
121
3. Elk Habitat
Elk Sammer Rapce
Calculations to estimate elk summer habitat effectiveness were done for all North l.ochsa Face elk analysis areas
(EAAs) by alternative and are displayed on the following table:
Table 4.13 • Elk Summer Habitat Efrec:dveDess
FAIt ADalysis
AIt 1
Alt2
Area
Alder Creek
95
90
Bimerick Mdws
82
90
Boundary Peak
93
93
Bowl Butte
95
95
Brid2e Creek
CanvonEast
CanvonWest
Ceanothus Creek
Deadman East
Deadman West
Fish Butte
Frenchman Creek
GassCreek
Glade Creek
ObiaCreek
UDDer Fish Creek
Walde Creek
W. F. Pete King
Willow Rid2e
AltJa
90
95
95
82
98
100
98
100
54
40
54
40
40
48
90
S5
48
86
76
57
84
54
53
90
90
76
70
76
70
90
80
90
80
74
48
86
46
74
45
78
42
43
100
78
45
42
100
51
S6
2S
40
39
48
86
86
80
76
42
90
86
74
30
86
86
30
26
100
Alt4
Alt3
82
93
48
86
86
86
46
42
100
95
86
48
49
90
84
86
86
42
38
100
AltS
j
59
49
S5
I
I
I
I
86
80
82
90
76
70
6S
86
78
49
45
100
m
Elk Wlgtcr Bapg
Desired vegetation conditions on elk winter range indicate that 20 to 30 percent of the landscape should be in
shrub dominated stages. Currently, about 10% of North l.ochsa Face's 36,000 acres of winter range is younger
than 20 years old. Table 4.14 depicts the estimated amount of winter forage created with each alternative.
T a ble 414
• - Acres 0 fElkW'mter F ora2e createdb»yeachAl temative
Pete King
CanyonlDeadman
Fish and Hungery
Face
Total Acrea2e Treated
% Winter Ran2e in Fora2e
I Alt! I Alt2 I Alt3 I Alt3a I Alt4 I
0
0
0
0
0
10%
Alt5
1900
475
250
<100
1 750
475
250
0
1,700
475
250
0
150
475
250
<100
1,550
2,725
18%
2.575
17%
2,425
17%
875
13%
2.375
17%
475
250
<100
~
1
95
86
93
95
All action alternatives improve elk summer habitat effectiveness in most of the BAAs, plus, significantly increase
elk security during the hunting season. In regards to the Forest Plan, all alternatives meet the standards for elk
summer habitat effectiveness in Management Areas El and C8S and maintain the existing 90% elk habitat
in the Forest Plan for a description of each
effectiveness in Management Area C6. (Refer to Chapter
management area.)
I Major Watershed
I
I
I
J
I
I
I
1
I
I
Alternative 1 would not implement any projects on elk winter range. Barring a catastrophic wildfire, forage
production would continue to decline as current browse vegetation is over-topped by competing conifers. It is
anticipated that forage areas on winter range, less than 20 years old, would decline by 1/3 to 112 by year 2003.
~
122
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Alternatives 2, 3, 38, and S would treat the largest percentage of elk winter range for browse improvement. In
addition, approximately 4,400 acres of underburning would occur on elk winter range. The most winter range
improvement would occur in the Face and Pete King drainages, with the least in the Fish Creek drainage
(especially with Alt 3a).
Alternative 4 would treat the least elk winter range of all action alternatives, with no winter range improvement
occurring in Fish Creek.
No alternative achieves 20 to 30 percent forage area across the winter range. Alternatives 2, 3, 38, and 5 provide
the most winter range. This degree of forage area, in combination with the extensive underbuming, would, in all
likelihood, achieve the desired (and sustainable) level of browse production.
Cn.glltjye Elrec;ts OR Elk Habitat
Geographic Boundary: The geographic boundary for assessing cumulative effects of each alternative on elk
summer and winter ranges is the North Lochsa Face (NLF) analysis area.
Time Frame: Year 2012 (last timber harvest + 2 years to complete slash burning).
Past, Present, and Foreseeable Future Actions: District salvage sales, changes in hunting regulations, and
reintroduction of predators.
The District timber salvage harvest program is not expected to significantly affect large expanses of hiding cover.
Elk summer habitat will continue to improve as large patches of cover are restored on the landscape. Elk
populations are not expected to be directly or indirectly influenced by other Forest Service management actions.
The trend in winter forage, though boosted by any of the action alternatives, will continue to decline with
advancing plant succession. The District small timber sale program would provide no substantial opportunity to
stabilize or reverse this trend. Elk populations are expected to be limited by the future availability of winter
browse.
Changes in hunting regulations are controlled by the Idaho DeparbDent of Fish and Game. Increased restrictions
on the numberof hunters could benefit elk populations. However, improvements in current elk habitat, as
proposed in this project, would be needed to sustain healthy populations.
The potential impact on winter elk populations due to wolf re-introduction, is unclear. Inter-specific competition
between wolf, black bear, and cougar could decrease current predator populations, and possibly benefit elk.
However, wolf populations may be sufficient to maintain or increase current elk predation.
Sbort-term Use vs. MaiDtenance and E_neelDeDt or Long-term Productivity: Alternative 1 requires
additional management actions within the West Canyon and W;F. Pete King EAAs to achieve Forest Plan
objectives for elk summer habitat effectiveness.
Winter range productivity (soil and water) would be retained with all alternatives. The amount of winter browse,
however, would decline if action is not taken soon, and so would the elk population dependent upon winter browse
forage.
Although Alternatives 2, 3 and 5, would improve winter range in Fish Creek, winter forage production would
continue to decline with all alternatives. The extensive and intense fires occurring in Fish Creek in the early
19005, in combination with the winter range improvement practices between 1950 and 1975, have severely
retarded the regrowth of coniferous forest on this winter range. The SOO acres of winter range in the Fish Creek
watershed planned for underburning, though relatively inconsequential in producing browse (compared to
prescribed fire), would result in some increased browse production. However, in the majority of Fish Creek,
browse production would continue to decline as shrobs age and reforestation advances.
Irreversible aDd Irretrievable Commitment of Re50urees: None known or suspected.
Adverse meets Which CaDDOt Be Avoided: None known or suspected.
N.... LocIIsa Face ElS
123
,j
4. VegetatiOD
This analysis measured the effects of each alternative on species composition, age class distribution (including
mature and late mature forest habitats), patch size, standing dead (snags) and woody debris, tree density,
functions, and sensitive plants. The "no action" alternative (All. 1) assumes an ongoing salvage program aDd tire
suppression. Alternatives 2, 3, and 5 are grouped due to little measurable difference in vegetation changes
between them. The differences of Alternative 4 are due to the exclusion of vegetative treatments in the North
I..ochsa Slope Roadless Area.
a. Species Composition
1
Alteraadve 1: Little change in species composition is expected in the short term under Alternative 1. Seral
species would continue to be replaced by late seral and climax species. Over a 30 to 50 year time period,
this would make an important difference in species composition. In the long term, a major wildfire is likely.
The more time that passes before a wildfire, the fewer seral species would remain. Since these are the trees
that survive a wildfire and produce the seed for reforestation, the likelihood rises that there would be a
limited seed source after a wildfire.
Repeated salvage can lead to species conversion to sbrobs. Insects and disease (especially root rot) teuds to
lead to a climax plant community, though at very high inoculum levels, shrubs could dominate. The mo~
tolerant species would dominate staDels as the serals die out and disturbances (windthrow, root rot pockets,
etc.) are on such a small scale that they do DOt provide opportunities for repopulation. These disturbances
also do not remove competing shrubs, which results in limited seral conifer regeneration.
Alteraatlves 2, 3, 3a, aDd 5: All treatments would shift species composition toward seral species.
Thinnings (both precommercial and commercial) would favor the seral component, most removals would be
climax or late seral species, leaving a staDel with a higher percentage of seral species in the mix. Stand
replacement harvests would provide the disturbance that favors seral species, and those would be featured in
the planting mixes. Understory bums would kill small climax species trees in the understory, leaving a
higher percentage of fire-resistant seral species in the stand. Stand replacing tires would provide the
disturbance and environmental conditions that would favor the seral species.
Alteraadve 4: Except within Fish Creek, this alternative would have the same effects as Alternative 2.
Within Fish Creek, most of the breaklands aDd midslopes are currently forested with seral species because
most of this area burned in 1910, 1919, or 1934. In contrast, the mosaic old surfaces (LTA 81B) in upper
Fish Creek are primarily composed of late seral (Douglas-fir, Engelmann spruce) and climax species (grand
fir and subalpine fir), as are the frost-chumed uplaDds (subalpine fir). Much of the proposed burning in other
alternatives focuses on the old surfaces and frost-churned uplands. Under this alternative, the climax species
would continue to dominate the frost-chumed uplands. However, on LTA 81B, root rot is killing the
Douglas-fir and grand fir, leaving a more open stand, and dominance by shrubs such as menziesia and alder
is increasing. Little tree reproduction is occurring. Subalpine fir would continue to dominate the frostchurned uplands, rather than the more desirable lodgepole pine. As subalpine fir is killed by balsam woolly
adelgid, these stands would gradually convert to shrubs unless a wildfire provides for seral reproduction.
b. Age Class Distribution
A1tenadve 1: There would be little change in the short-term. In the long-term (10 to 2S years), stands
would age, and begin to enter the older age classes that are in short supply now, as long as there is no major
wildfire. In the very long term (25 to 50 years), age distribution would be more simple, mostly very young
stands, with some low level in other age classes, as stands at high risk to wildfire succumb.
Much of the Canyon, Apgar, and Glade drainages are currently at high risk of wildfire. Forest stroetures and
densities are such that fire would carry very well both horizontally and vertically, creating a large patch
(1000s of acres) of deforested landscape. The result would be large acreages of the same age class. This
would be similar to the current skewed age classes (skewed to the 60 year old class) created by the 1934 fire.
A large wildfire would cause a decline in wildlife species utilizing mature and late mature forest habitats and
an increase in those utilizing early successional habitats.
NortII LoclIsa Face EIS
124
J
I
I
t
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
I
Table 4.15 • Aa4 Class DlstrlbUtioD (%) by ADaJysis Area • AIts 2 tbro.... 5
Desired
EsistiDl
Alt2
Alt3
A1t3.
AaeCiass
A1t4
Alt5
LTA lOA7,
0-40
40-60
60-100
100-160
160+
5-20
5-10
5-15
5-15
55-75
20
14
23
23
20
20
23
14
31
13
19
14
31
13
19
14
35
13
19
14
35
13
19
14
31
13
19
46
44
44
14
24
13
3
14
24
14
3
14
24
15
3
33
16
25
43
14
24
16
3
30
12
30
30
30
30
19
9
19
9
29
12
30
19
9
53
5
30
8
4
52
5
27
8
27
8
30
8
44
44
5
16
4
16
4
48
48
11
19
18
3
11
19
18
3
37
12
21
27
3
48
11
19
18
3
38
26
2S
10
0.3
25
10
0.3
34
13
19
LTA21A
0-40
40-60
60-100
100-160
160+
15-30
8-15
15-25
25-35
15-30
31
16
25
25-45
10-20
20-30
8-15
7-15
28
25
4
23
3
LTA21B
0-40
40-60
60-100
100-160
160+
12
33
20
6
12
29
12
19
9
30
12
30
19
9
LTA21C
0-40
40-60
60-100
100-160
160+
20-40
10-20
15-30
10-20
5-10
21
8
44
22
5
53
5
30
8
4
LTA23A
0-40
40-60
60-100
100-160
160+
15-30
8-15
15-25
25-35
15-30
36
12
22
26
3
48
11
19
18
3
LTA23B
0-40
40-60
60-100
100-160
160+
25-45
10-20
20-30
8-15
7-15
38
38
26
25
10
0.3
38
38
38
26
25
26
2S
26
10
0.3
10
0.3
25
10
0.3
9
2S
25
25
23
40
23
40
25
23
40
2S
23
23
40
23
11
1
11
1
11
1
11
1
35
46
38
8
46
7
46
7
38
8
28
22
22
28
22
18
10
15
10
15
10
28
16
10
16
10
15
10
26
LTA23C
0-40
40-60
60-100
100-160
160+
20-40
10-20
15-30
10-20
5-10
42
24
1
40
11
1
LTA61
0-40
40-60
60-100
100-160
160+
30-55
10-20
10-20
15-25
10-30
8
7
2 LTA lOA is only fouDd in the Pete King Creek and FISh Creek draiDages ad makes up 1~ of the aaalysis area. There would be DO effect 00 i1S
current age class distribution. since DO treabDen1S, other thaD the planting of trees are proposed within this LTA.
125
Claapter FOIIr
Table 4.15 • AD CIa. Dlstrlbadoa (~) b ' Aaalylis Area • Alta 2
Alt2
Alt3
DesIred
AaeClass
-
e
.e
dan_
5 (coDdDaed)
Alt3a
Alt4
AltS
LTA63
4
48
6
10
32
4
19
12
62
10
60-100
SO
100-160
14
6
21
8
43
15
12
40-60
60-100
100-160
160+
LTA 71B:1
30-55
10-20
10-20
15-25
10-30
27
6
18
6
10
30
4
()..4()
()..4()
40-60
SO-70
160+
LTA 71C
()..4()
40-60
50-70
60-100
100-160
160+
LTA81A
0-40
40-60
60-100
100-160
160+
LTA81B
2S-45
5-15
10-20
20-35
20-40
()..4()
30-50
40-60
5-15
10-20
20-35
20-40
60-100
106-160
160+
LTA8JA
()..4()
2S-45
40-60
5-15
10-20
20-35
20-40
60-100
100-160
160+
LTAB«
0-40
40-60
60-100
100-160
160+
2S-45
5-15
10-20
20-35
20-40
44
4
47
6
11
33
4
6
10
30
4
62
10
19
12
19
12
62
10
23
23
SO
SO
23
2
3
2
3
14
6
14
6
2
3
61
3
70
1
17
5
27
21
8
43
15
12
61
6
20
5
7
41
4
21
49
4
17
16
13
SO
23
SO
6
10
30
5
40
SO
7
15
12
59
3
10
14
13
52
3
14
18
13
29
2
24
21
2
28
2
24
26
28
2S
10
35
11
37
10
38
11
35
10
47
9
SO
SO
SO
SO
9
9
9
9
50
9
23
23
23
23
23
23
16
5
13
5
13
5
13
5
13
5
13
5
61
8
12
18
0.4
61
8
12
18
0.4
61
8
12
18
0.4
61
8
12
18
0.4
61
8
12
18
0.4
61
8
12
18
0.4
38
5
22
21
14
17
2
29
39
13
5
7
60
3
10
14
13
30
2
24
34
20
13
2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
~
3 The perceDtaps dilplayed iD the table are for the F'lSbIHuagery Cteet draiDaps, die only area wbere LTA 718 is found within die aaalysis area.
Cllapter Fou
l
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The following table shows the direct impact of each "action" alternative on the mature and late mature forest
habitats within each major drainage:
Table 4.16 - Effects on Mature and Late Mature Forest Habitats 4
Drama e
Habitat
Existing
Acrea e
Acres
Treated
Alt2
Acres
Treated
Acres
Treated Alt3a
Acres
Treated
Acres
Treate-
Alt3
Alt4
d AltS
~~~~.~~~ :~=:.:~~= '~~~:7~j ~~ ·_~--,~~:I=?~.~·; _~;~_~~5;~~_'~=: ~:;,::':i:...~i.~::~~::~:ZZ:::~~:·~~ :=.;~:=~~~:~~~
Mature
4,146
Pete King
581
503
581
568
569
Late Mature
751
108
108
90
108
108
Tota]
4,897
689
593
689
676
677
Mature
8,527
587
562
562
Canyoo/
398
563
Late Mature
4,348
119
76
119
94
119
Deadman
Total
12,875
474
706
681
656
682
Mature
7,790
1,456
1,321
1,321
Face
1
325
Late Mature
61
1,240
146
146
146
61
Total
1,602
9,030
1,467
1,467
62
386
Mature
Fish/
10,939
1,875
1,875
352
352
1,875
Late
Mature
4,990
481
126
126
Hungery
469
481
Total
15,929
2,356
2,344
478
478
2,356
?~~ 7; ·i~~~~~~~'.:~. :~; ~~ ~--~~~~~~~_~~_~ ..-~;'.~~~. :'_~'~d~~~ ~ __ ~~::2~~~~-=~~-~~~~~
Mature
4,146
Pete King
518
493
518
492
Late Mature
'249
751
249
249
250
Total
4,897
742
741
767
768
Mature
8,527
796
Canyoo/
796
796
368
Late Mature
4,348
622
622
622
Deadman
558
1,418
1,418
Total
12,875
1,418
926
Mature
7,790
1,039
Face
1,039
759
111
Late Mature
1,240
196
153
201
153
Total
9,030
1,235
1,192
264
960
Mature
10,939
350
234
350
60
Fish! Late Mature
4,990
62
62
235
Hungery
0
Total
15,929
412
412
469
60
Co
Patch Size
Altemadve 1: There would be little effect in the short-term. However, as the expected large wildfires occur
over the next decades, patch sizes will move to 1000+ acres in size. This is the typical size for old surfaces,
but for other LTAs, 100 to 500 acres in size is the expected range.
Altemadves 2, 3, 38, and 5: Treatments are proposed and designed to match historical patch sizes in each
LTA. In the long-term, treatments would enable us to maintain patches at historical sizes. There would still
be some patches that are less homogeneous than desired, due to past harvest and our need to maintain the
desired levels of older age classes. For example, there are several patches that are mostly mature or late
mature forest, but have one to three 0 to 2S year old clearcuts within them. To keep a fairly similar
age/structure within the patch, the only treatment option is to regenerate the remainder (with fire or timber
harvest). Instead, we propose to maintain these older age classes, which are in short supply, in a patch with
a mixed age and structure.
Within Fish Creek, Alternatives 3a and 4 would have little effect in the short-term. In the long-term, effects
would be similar to those expected with Alternative 1.
4 Malllre stands are 100 to 160 years old. Late MalUJe stands are lbose over 160 years old.
127
CUal!rFoar
I
d. Standing Dead (Snags) and Woody Debris
Altenuatlve 1: The existing snag habitat would be influenced by natural processes. Expect increases in
standing and down trees as insects, disease, wind, and fire continue to influence and shape the distribution
and abundance of snag habitaL Expect extensive standing dead if a major wildfire starts and cannot be
controlled due to extremely high fuel loads. This would be fonowed by a long period of very low snag/down
wood densities, such as we are seeing now in the areas that burned in 1934. Areas currently lacking in snag
habitat (young stands) would provide habitat in the long-term as they grow larger and are influenced by
disturbance processes, such as insects, disease, and wildfire.
AU AetioD A1terudves: Snags are in short supply where fires burned extensively in 1910, 1919, and 1934,
and in existing clearcuts. Down wood is also low in the old burns, but at adequate levels in old clearcuts
where prescribed slash burning removed finer fuels but not large logs. Prescriptions for all treatments, both
harvest and burning, address the need for standing and down wood to meet the desired conditions for that
particular LTA. Prescriptions for harvest are designed to Cleate enough SDags to meet desired levels with
the prescribed burning after harvest. There are sample prescriptions in Appendix B. Some dead wood will
remain after harvest, and of course, prescribed burning will create more dead trees.
e. Tree Density
AlterDative 1: Stands with little disease would become more and more dense. Stands that are very dense
now would have increased incidence of disease and insects with reduced stand densities.
Alteraadves 2, 3, 38, aDd 5: Stands that have excessive density for the site on which they are growing are
high priority for thinning. Some of these stands could not be treated because of poor access. We expect
elevated levels of insect and disease actiVity and increased fire risk in these stands.
Precommercial thinning would result in reduced stand density, and increased long-term health of the stands.
Moisture and nutrients would not be so limiting. and trees would be more vigorous, with more resistance to
insects and diseases, particularly the root rot cycle.
Salvage and stocking control would reduce stand densities so that trees can be more vigorous and resist
insects or diseases. If stands are already infected with root rot, this treatment risks facilitating the root rot
spread.
Prescribed bums designed to mimic stand replacing fire (either lethal or mixed severity) would also reduce
stand densities. Not all of these burns are planned in areas that have high densities, most were planned to
manage age class distribution.
Regeneration harvests would also effectively reduce excess stand densities outside of the riparian habitat
areas. Canopies left would range from 10% to 50% of the existing forest cover.
AlterDadve 4: Within Fish Creek, many stands on the breaklands and midslopes, especially the southerly
aspects, have low stocking levels. This is due to slow reforestation after major wildfires. Fire suppression
and time would allow these stands to become more dense and fully occupy the growing space. Shrubs would
be displaced.
In the upper portions of the drainage, on the old surfaces and frost-chumed uplands, stands with little disease
would become more and more dense, and disease and insects would then move in and reduce stand density
in the long-term. Stands that are very dense now would have increased incidence of disease and insects with
reduced stand densities.
J
~
I
I
I
J
I
I
I
1
~
J
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
f. Functions
Alternative 1: As stocking levels increase, trees would be stressed and more susceptible to insects and
disease. As insects and diseases increase, highly flammable materials would increase, making any fire starts
more and more difficult to control. As stocking levels increase, multiple stand stories would increase the
risk of lethal fires that bum in the crowns of trees. LTAs that should experience underbums or mixed
severity fires, would instead be susceptible to stand replacing. lethal fires.
Alternadves 2, 3, 38, and 5: Endemic levels of insects and disease would be maintained, with elevated
levels where we cannot reduce excess stocking or where higher levels already exist. Fire would be returned
as a low intensity function on appropriate LTAs and as a mixed severity fire or lethal fire on some LTAs in
the Fish Creek and the face watersheds.
Alternative 4: Within Fish Creek, succession would continue in stands that still have few trees as a result of
the large wildfires in 1910, 1919, and 1934. These stands would gradually recruit more conifers, and the
existing trees would more fully occupy the growing space. Those stands that did not bum in the earlier fire
would gradually increase densities, causing trees to be stressed and more susceptible to insects and disease.
As insects and diseases increase, flammable materials would increase, making any fire starts more and more
difficult to control. In the very long-term, as stands enter the young forest, multi-storied structural stage,
there would be an increased risk of lethal fires that burn in the tree crowns.
g. Sensitive Plants
Altenadve 1: There would be no direct impacts on any sensitive plant populations. Natural disturbance
factors (insects, disease, wind, and fire) would continue to influence and shape the distribution and
abundance of sensitive plant habitats.
Action Alternatives: The following table describes the expected direct and indirect effects of planned
activities on sensitive plants known or suspected to occur within the North lDchsa Face area:
Table 4.17· Direct/IDdirect meets on Sensidve Plants
Estimated meets
Plalit Species!
BlecJrIuun spictmt
(Deerfem)
BII%btuunia viTUlis
(Green buR-oD-a4ict)
CalochortllS lIitUbu
(Broad fruit mariposa)
No p1aDDed adivities ill known populations. Known or suspected populations
would be protected bv aoolication of default PACFISH buffers.
No Impact. 1bis species is fouDd at higher elevatioDS on mineral soil. and on
disturbed surfaces. It is tolerant of the kiDd of disturbaD~ plaDDed in this project.
Alternatives 2, 3, aDd 3a include a plaDDed underbum adjacent to the only knOWD
population witbiD the aaalysis area. The b1U'll is expected to promote the retentioD
of grassy opeDiDgs, with a sparse ovelStory of ponderosa pine aad Douglas-fir aDd
associated Idaho fescue aod bluebuDcb wbeatgrass, that are favored habitat for this
species.
Cartlilmine constancei
(CODStaDCe'S bittercress)
Carex 1te1uIers000ii
(Henderson's sedge)
Cetraria subolpiIuJ
(IcelaDdmoss)
No p1aDDed adivities ill known or suspected populations.
P1aaDed prescribed fire ill the Locbsa RNA may impact ODe populatioD located in
a riparian area. However, the application of default PACFISH buffers aad the
unlikeliness of fire carryina throuab this area should minimize any impacts.
PlaDDed disturbances (regeoeration harvest and low/mixed severity fire) may
improve habitat coDditioDS for this species by opening the forest canopy aDd
iIlcreasiaa shrub deDsity.
5 Effects Wele not estimated for threateDed plants Water howelia (HoweIIUl tJqlUltilis) aDd Ute Ladies'-tresses (Spirtlllllta dilllvialis) or sensitive
pla.1S Mingan moonwort (BotrycIWun mingtlltDlSe), Lance-leafed mooawort (BotridIUIm ItlllceoltIIIUII), Brisde-stalked sedge (Cuex leptalea),
Cladmtia tllldereggii (ADderegg's cladoDia), BotryeJrillm cren",latum (CreDU1ate lIlOOIIWort), BIDCbtuImUI aplrylla (Leafless bug-on-a-stick).
Haplopappus hirtllS Yar. sonclUfoliMs (Sticky goldenweed), 1AnuItiIIm $d/moniflDnUft (Salmon-flowered desert-parsley), Mimwus alsinoides
(Chidtweed monkeyflower), MinulJlU amplimus (Sp8Cious monkeyflower), PellttlgrtIIftIIUI tritmpltlrU ssp. tritlngwllrU (Gold-bact fem), or
Petasiles frigidus var. pal11UUllS (Sweet COltsfoot) since nODe of these plant species are Down or suspected within the analysis area.
NortIl LoeIIIa Faee E1S
129
I
Table 4.17· Dlreet/lDdirect meets on SeDsldve PlaDts (contIDaed)
Plant Species
Estimated meets
COt'JUIS 1UIlItJllii
(P8Cific dogwood)
PlaaDed ctistDrbaDces (regeneration harvest IDd low/mixed severity fire) are
apecIed to improve habitat COIlCtitions for this species by opeaiDl die forest
canopy. reduciDs veptative competition IDd improviDl prmiDaIioD success.
Altematives 2, 3. 3a. IDd 5 propose road reconstruction to access a helicopter log
1aDdiIlg Deal'the mouth of Bimerick Creek. Approximately 12 Pacific dogwood
plaDts occur alonl this access I08d. The site bas been reviewed, aad it is feasible
to JeCODStn1d the road without removiDg lIlese plaDts. Beoefi1l similar to buDinl
may be derived from die plaaed road recoIIIInIcliOlL These altelDalives also
propose prescribed file within the Locbsa RNA to rehabilitate Pacific dogwood
populations. RedaciDs competition from odler shrubs IDd partially opeaiDg of die
tree caDOpy may reduce mic:ro-site Immiclity which may improve local Ubitat
coDditioDS for es1ab1isbed PKific dogwood, tbeleby reduciDs tbeir susceptibility to
root IDd leaf diseases. nus acDOD is coasiS1ellt with die C...,.."".. PIiuI ftw
CtJrIIIU NIIIIIIlIii (Ptldlk Dopootl), ill 1"', 1991, PI 12 aDd 13. UDder all
acDOD altenlatives. die prescribed fire plaD would be joilldy developed (as a
miDimum) by a qaalified Pacific dogwood botaDist, forest ecologist, aDd fire
CypripediMm ~1IUIa
(ClusteJecllady's slipper)
PIamaed regeaeratioa harvest aad prac:ribed fire are expected to maiataiD habitat
coDditioDS for this species by maiataiDiDa Iarp.Iive 1IeeS within the patdl.
Surface disturbaDce that retaiDs some live 1IeeS that are associated willi the
pereDDial rbizomatous root system is expected to maiataiD iDclividuls within
oooulatiODS.
All acaion alternatives iDdude timber harvest practices within die historical raDge
of Dasyaotus. nus species is expected to benefit from both caDOpy aDd soil
clis1wbaDces, iDcIudiD2 o1aDDed limber salvqe ooeratioas.
No Impact. The preferred habitat for this species is ripariaD or wet forest. It will
be PIOteeted by appljcaDoa of default PACFlSH buffetS.
FOWld ill ripariaD area, moist draws aad seeps, this species will be proteded by
applicatiOD of standard PACFISH buffers aDd maiateDaD~ of old forest.
The Vu Camp population is located withiD a p1aDDed underbum. The Idaa1
effect of developmeDt (i.e., caDOpy opeDing, reduced competitioD from
sbnabslbees, aDd soil dis1a1baDce) is uDkDowD. The olber two popu1aIioDs would
DOt be affeded by any p1aDDed acbon.
Grows below seasoaal high-water liDe aloog large streams aDd rivetS. Application
of staDdanI PACFISH buffas will PlOteea this species.
DtU)'IIotIU
tlabenmirei
(DasyDoIos)
HooIteritl lMceIU
(Light hookeria)
~1IIUlum
(naked mnimn)
Syndryris plGtyCfl'Pfl
(Evergreen kitteDtail)
TriantJul brevistylfl
ssp. brevUtyltl
(Sbort-sIYled triaDtha)
Waltl.tteinUJ ~
(Idaho strawberry)
mauaer·
FouDd ill ripariaD areas aDd adjacellt up1aDds. Respoods favorably to iDcreased
lipt after barYat aDd lipt to IDOdeIate bam&. PlaaDed activities should favor this
sPeCies.
None of the access options are expected to have any effects on sensitive plant populations.
Nortla LocIIsa Face EIS
130
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Table 4.18 - Selllltlve Plant Soedes PotendaDy Impacted by Alternatives
Species
ADderea's Cladoma
Broad-fruit MariP0S8
Brisde-stalted Sedae
Chickweed MODkcv6ower
Clustered Lady'S Slipper
Constance's Bittercress
Crenulate Mooowort
Dasynotus
DeerFem
Everareen KitteDtail
Gold-Back Fern
Green Bu2-Qn-A-SticX
HeDderson's Sedae
Icelandmoss
i
Idaho Strawberry
Lanoe-Leaved Moonwort
Leafless Bu2-QO-A-SticX
Lipt Hookeria
Mio2an Mooowart
NakedMnium
!
Salmon-Rower Desert-Parslev I
:
Short-Stvled Triantha
!
Soacious Monkeyflower
Stielev GoldeDweed
Sweet Coltsfoot
~
Alt 1
Alt2
Alt3
Alt3A
!
Alt4
I
Alts
NotinNLF
NoImoad
Not in NLF
NotillNLF
Nolmoad
No Imoact
NotiDNLF
No Imoact
NoImoad
Nolmoad
NotiDNLF
NoImoad
NoImoad
Nolmoaet
NoImoad
NotiDNLF
Not iD NLF
NolmDad
NotiDNLF
No Imoad
Not in NLF
NoImoaet
NotiDNLF
Not in NLF
NotiDNLF
nla
MIlHlBI
nla
nla
Dla
MIlHlBI
Dla
Dla
MIIH
NoImoact
Dla
MIlHlBI
nla
MIIHlBI
nla
nla
I
Dla
NolmDact
nla
Dla
No Imoact
No Imoact
nla
MIIHIBI
NoImoact
NolmDact
Dla
No Impact
MIIH
No Impact
MIlHlBI
Dla
nla
NoImoact
Dla
NoImoact
nla
No Impact
Dla
Dla
nla
I
nla
No Impact
nla
nla
MIIH
I
No Impact
Dla
MIlHlBI
No Impact
No Impact
MIIH
I
nla
NolmDact
,
MIIH
I
!
I
i
[
I
:
I
I
I
MIlHlBI
MIlHlBI
nla
nla
NolmDact
nla
NoImoact
nla
No Impact
Dla
nla
nla
I
I
t
I
I
MIIH
Dla
NoImoact
MIIH
MIlHlBI
MIlHlBI
Dla
Dla
NoImoact
Dla
NoImoact
Dla
NoImoact
Dla
Dla
Dla
MIIH
NoImoaet
nla
MIlH1BI
NoImoad
MIIH
nla
Nolmoad
i
MIIH
MIlH1BI
MIIHlBI
nla
nla
Nolmoact
Dla
Nolmoaet
nla
No Impaet
nla
nla
nla
I
I
l
MIIH
I
No Impact
nla
MIIHlBI
No Impact
MIIH
:
nla
No Impact
!
NolmDact
MIlHlBI
nla
nla
No Impact
nla
No Impact
nla
No Impact
Dla
nla
nJa
MIIH
I
I
I
i
Cgmplative meets OR V"eladog
Geographic Boundary: The cumulative effects of the North Lochsa Face Project on vegetation need to be seen
in the broad geographic context. Those geographic boundaries vary for different aspects of vegetation character.
Old Forest, ~es composition, and processes such as insect and disease activity, should be considered as a part
of the entire landscape Section, M333D6, used in the Upper Columbia River Basin assessmenL The planning area
itself is the area of cumulative effects for sensitive plants, standing and down dead wood, forest density, and patch
sizes.
Time Frame: The time frame considered was up to 15 years after the last North Lochsa Face project related
timber harvest, the year 2025. By that time, new forests will be established and growing rapidly where
regeneration harvest was completed. Many of the stands that are now approaching the old forest (160 years and
more) age, will be there, and many of the stands regenerated after the Pete King fire in 1934 will be in the next
age class also, changing the overall age class distribution dramatically.
Foreseeable Future Actions: Past actions considered include timber sales, fire suppression, and extensive fires
in the early part of the century. Present actions considered include district salvage sales and ongoing fire
suppression. Future activities th.at are likely to occur are district salvage sales.
Within ecoregion section M333D, moist forests are dominated by shade-tolerant species at three times the historic
level. Conditions in the North Lochsa Face area are consistent with the section conditions. Section M333D is
also dominated by mid-sera! forest types at twice the historic level, also true of the North Lochsa Face area. With
the dominance of the mid-sera! forests, early and late seral forests are below the historic levels.
Alternadve 1: Little change in species composition is expected by 2025. Early sera! species will continue
to be slowly replaced by late sera! and climax species. The North Lochsa Face area will continue to be
outside the historic range with no treatmenL
6 A section is a hierarchy of landmass defmed ill the Upper Columbia River BasiD S1Ddy. SediOD M333D is a large area occupying the ceutral
Idaho aod WesteI'D Montana. It lies between the Locbsa River north to Coeur d'Alene aad from die Palouse Prairie east to the Clark
portiOD of north
Fork River in Montana.
NortIa Lodsa Face £IS
131
OapterFou
No change in seral stage structure is expected with Alternative 1. As trees age over the next .10 to 2S years,
stands will begin to enter the older age classes that are in short supply now, as long as there is no major
wildfire. Stands in Canyon, Apgar, and Glade Creeks that are approaching the late seral stage have been
classed as high risk for major wildfire.
Insect and disease activity levels will continue to rise and fall with stocking levels, stand structures, and
moisture conditions. Intermediate harvest treatments (salvage) will have little effect on infestation and
infection levels for most of the insects and diseases currently present.
A salvage program, one that continually removes the dead and dying trees in accessible areas, could result in
conversion of some stands to shrubfields.
Patch sizes will change little in the short term.
Under this alternative, current dead wood conditions will be maintained for the short term. In the Canyon,
Apgar, and Glade Creek drainages, many stands have more dead standing wood than needed, due to
extensive insect and disease activity. Dead wood is lacking where multiple fires burned in the early 19005.
Lower Pete King Creek, the east half of the Deadman drainage, the face of the Lochsa from Deadman to
Fish Creek, and the lower Fish and Hungery drainages are in this condition.
Forested lands, including forested riparian habitats, would increase in forest fire fuel loading as forest
succession advances, trees die, and wildfires are suppressed. 1be risk of sensitive plant populations being
impacted due to severe wildfire would be greatest with this alternative.
i
J
I
AetioD Altenatlves: Cumulative effects are expected to be similar for all action alternatives. On such a
broad scale, the differences between alternatives are not significant.
By 2025, species composition is expected to shift toward more early sera! species. This will move the North
Lochsa Face area as well as Ecoregion Section M333D closer to historic forest composition.
!
As trees age over the next 10 to 25 years, stands will begin to enter the older age classes that are in short
supply.. DOW, as long as there is DO major wildfire. Stands in Canyon, Apgar, and Glade Creeks that are
approaching the late seral stage have been classed as high risk for major wildfire, which could occur in the
next 25 years.
Insect and disease activity levels will continue to rise and fall with stocking levels, stand structures, and
moisture conditions. 1be ongoing forest salvage program will have little effect on infestation and infection
levels for most of the insects and diseases currently present. Regeneration harvests followed by reforestation
with a mix of sera] species will reduce susceptibility to insects and diseases on those acres. Thinning will
also reduce the risk of a spruce budworm epidemic by reducing the number of stands with multi-layers of
shade tolerant species.
Patch sizes will show the results of correction from small, fragmented openings to the larger patch sizes
typical on this landscape.
In the Canyon, Apgar, and Glade Creek drainages, many stands have more dead standing wood than needed,
due to extensive insect and disease activity. Dead wood is lacking where multiple fires burned in the early
1900s. Lower Pete King Creek, the east half of the Deadman drainage, the face of the Lochsa from
Deadman to Fish Creek, and the lower Fish and Hungery drainages are in this condition.
Habitat for each of the sensitive plant species is expected to be maintained within NLF through the period
2025. The District timber salvage program is not expected to degrade habitat for any of these species.
Intense, unplanned wildfires at lower elevations of riparian habitat conservation areas, however, could
impacts some populations. The effects on noxious weed control and invasiOn/expansion potential are largely
unknown. Expanding noxious weed invasion could threaten habitat suitability for some sensitive plant
populations. However, a successful noxious weed program would maintain habitat for these species.
Nortlt LodIa
F.~
ElS
,
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•I
•I
•
•
irreversible ad Irretrievable Collllllltment of Resourees: The level of planned action within the analysis
area, by itself or in combination with other Forest Service management practices, would not diminish habitat value
or populations of sensitive plant species. The project would have "no impact" on the recovery or viability bristlestalked sedge. For deer fern, the project "may impact individuals, but is not likely to cause a downward trend
towards federal listing". No extraordinary circumstances exist that would cause this project to have significant
adverse effects on the human environment related to sensitive species.
Adverse meets Whim CaDDOt Be Avoided: None known or suspected.
c.
Noxious Weeds
The following discussions summarize the environmental impacts on aquatic resources, wildlife, plant communities, and
human health due to the treatment of noxious weeds. Additional information is contained in the project file.
Alteraadve 1: Under the No-Action Alternative, those weeds known to occur within the project area would continue to
expand; reducing biodiversity, increasing sediment delivery to stream systems, reducing forage availability to big game
throughout the project area, impairing the scenic quality, and potentially reducing recreational opportunities. Selection
of this alternative would also weaken the collaborative position of the Oearwater Forest within the Oearwater Basin
Weed Coordinating Committee.
Ongoing, low level, biological control agent distribution would continue as agents ~me available as part of an
overall Forest program. A process to develop a list of plant species which may be susceptible to agent attack includes:
testing agents against species in same genus; related genera; related by family; unrelated but economically important;
plants attacked by related insects; plants with similar morphology or biochemistry; crop plants not previously exposed
to the candidate agents; and, as of 1995, plants within communities of listed threatened and endangered plants.
Solely battling the spread of noxious weeds within the project area by biological control agents (bioca) and mechanical
means would be a long and slow process. Currently, not all weeds known to occur within the project area have bioca's
cleared for release. Those weeds without available bioca's would continue to spread. Mechanical controls, including
handgrubbing, mowing, and cultivation, are labor intensive and somewhat ineffective at the scale of entire watersheds.
Treatments would be necessary for many consecutive years, and the current rates of spread and the long seed viability
displayed by these non-native invaders would likely prove mechanical controls futile throughout the project area.
Continued spread of non-native invaders would: (1) reduce forage availability to wildlife; (2) increase sediment
production from infested landscapes that would reduce water quality; (3) destroy rare and sensitive plant habitats; and
(4) cause an overall reduction in biodiversity which would reduce ecosystem health and scenic quality currently enjoyed
by many recreationists.
AlterDadves 2-5: All action alternatives propose the use of an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) system; utilizing
manual, chemical and biological control methods to implement weed management objectives as agreed upon by the
Clearwater Basin Weed Coordinating Committee. Herbicides considered under chemical control scenarios include
Clopyralid (fRANSLINE) and Dicamba (VETERAN lOG), with a maximum of 453 acres (16 sites), representing
0.035 percent of the 128,000 acre project area, being proposed for treatmenL It is anticipated that two consecutive years
of herbicide application would be a worst case scenario, as revegetation with desired species would reduce the
likelihood of reinfestation within these sites. The following discusses the risks associated with chemical control
methods under a worst case scenario:
1. Risks to Aquatic Resources
Risks to aquatic organism health have been documented in the Risk Assessment for Herbicide use in Forest
Service Regions 1, 2, 3, 4 and 10 and on Bonneville Power Administration Sites (1992). Those results are
represented by the concentration point at which fifty percent of the test organism die (LCSO). The LCSO is
typically expressed with an hourly exposure time which, represents the exposure of an organism to the amount of
chemical for the expressed number of hours (i.e. A 48 hour LCSO relates to exposure for 48 hours to a given
chemical concentration). The lower the LCSO, the more toxic the compound. The No ObselVable Effect Level
(NOEL) for these compounds are not available however, it is assumed that the NOEL is reasonable approximated
by ten percent of the LCSO. The US Environmental Protection Agency has recommended that the 96 hour LCSO
for fishes be divided by a safety factor of 10 because of the lack of information on long-term NOEL.
Nortla LocIasa Face E1S
133
Claapter FOal"
Table 4.19 • Toxic: level of Berbic:ides to Fish
HERBICIDE I TEST
SPECIES
Clopyralid I Trout
Dicamba I Trout
96 BourLCSO
(milligram/liter)
LCSO divided by 10
(milligram/liter)
Assumed NOEL
(milligram/liter)
103.5
>50
10.3
>5.0
10.3
>5.0
Herbicides can also indirectly affect fish populations by affecting populations of organisms which fish are
dependenL Generally, these compounds are less toxic to lower orders of organisms than to fish. The following
represents a list of organisms which are used as indicators for a wide range of aquatic organisms by the
Environmental Protection Agency and US Fish and Wildlife Service.
Table 4.20 • Toxic: level of Berblddes to Aquatic OrpDisDlS
HERBICIDE
Oopyralid
o opyralid
TEST SPECIES
Daphnids (Daphnia spp.)
Ram's hom snail (Helisoma trivolvis)
Clopyralid
Green algae (Selenastrum
capicomutum)
Daphnids Daphnia spp.)
Scuds (Grammarus fasciatus)
Scuds (Grammarus lacstris)
Dicamba
Dicamba
Dicamba
Nortla LoeIIIa Fue ElS
134
RESULTS
48 hour LCSO = 22S mWl
Zero mortality after 48 hours in 1
mgll solution
96 hour LCSO = 61 mg/l
96 hour LCSO =11 mgll
96 hour LCSO > 100 mgll
96 hour LCSO = 3.9 mw'}
J
~
J
~
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
In order to analyze the risk to aquatic species, maximum herbicide concentration in stream systems must be
determined. Instream compound concentrations are a function of factors including distances between treatment
areas and surface water, amounts of runoff from treated sites and precipitation levels following treatment. There
are two types of sites: infiltration sites and nmoff sites. Precipitation percolates through the soil on infiltration
sites and flows overland on runoff sites. Contamination of stream systems are more likely to occur on runoff sites
than infiltration sites.
The project area, in general, can be characterized as an infiltration site. However, there are isolated pockets of
nmoff sites that have been created by the invasion of spotted knapweed and orange hawkweed; desirable
vegetation has been drastically displaced by these weeds. An example of these microsites are road and trail sides.
Cumulatively, total treated acres are proposed at less than 1 percent of the project area.
In order to address the worst case scenario, herbicide application for all sites was calculated for each watershed as
if applied the same day which, is logistically unfeasible. It was assumed that a severe rainfall event could wash
ten percent of the active ingredient into the streams on nm-off sites and that an additional one percent of the active
ingredient would reach the stream in a six hour period. The average cubic feet per second water yield for the
month of July was used to calculate the litters of water produced during an average six hour period. The proposed
herbicide applications would be made from mid May to early July; stream flows would be higher than those
modeled so, average July flows show"the worst case scenario. The following table represents the results of this
effort.
Table 4.21· Worst Case Scenario: Herbidcle CoDeelltrations In mall
DRAINAGE
Bimerick Creek
Pete Kin2 Creek
Canyon Creek
Deadman Creek
Fish Creek
Lowell Creek
CLOPYRALID
0.0159
0.0032
0.0116
0.0021
0.0019
DICAMBA
0.0236
0.0091
na
na
na
na
na
Note: na = Herbicide use not planned within particular drainage
The results of ibis analysis show the levels of herbicide that could reach the stream systems within the project
area, under the worst case, are far less than those measured to be toxic to aquatic organisms.
2. Risks to Wildlife
Risks to terrestrial organism health have been documented in the Risk Assessment for Herbicide use in Forest
Service Regions 1, 2, 3, 4 tmd 10 and on Bonnevilk Power Administration Sites (1992) and Selected Commercial
Formulations ofTriclopyr - GilTlon 3A tmd Garlon 4 Risle ~SSlMnt Final Report (1996). Those results are
represented by the concentration point at which fifty percent of the test organism die (LDSO).
The lower the
LDSO, the more toxic the compound.
Table 4.22 • Toxic level or Herbicides to Mammals aDd Birds
HERBICIDE I TEST SPECIES
LD 50 (1Ilf/ka)
>5,000
1,465
1,189
1,750
Clopyralid I Mouse
Clopyralid I Duck
Dicamba I Mouse
Dicamba / Mallard
Proposed application rates, expressed as acid equivalent per acre, of the above compounds are: Oopyralid 0.375
Ibs/acre and Dicamba 4.36 lbs/aae. Under the worst case scenario the total amounts of herbicide applied to an
acre area are displayed in the following table.
Nortla , ......... Faee E1S
13§
Table 4.11· Wont Case CessioDaIre: IIerbIdde CoDeeDtrations In rar/aere
CONCENTRATION IACRE (m&>
HERBICIDE
Oopyralid
Dicamba
170.25
1,979
The results of this analysis show the levels of herbicide applied to the target plants within the project area are less
than those measured to be toxic to terrestrial organisms. Many assumptions taken here are conservative, for
example, no degradation of the herbicide was assumed to occur and all sprayed herbicide was assumed to be
biologically available. Analysis of chronic dosing was not dcme because the helbicides degrade relatively rapidly
and sites will be treated only once in a given year. These helbicides, proposed for use within the project area
show little tendency to bioaccumulate (USDA FS,I992) therefor, long term persistence in the food chain has not
been considered for this analysis.
3. Risks to Plant Communities
The use of an IPM approach in controlling the spread of invasive non-native plant species includes applications of
herbicides, distribution of biological control agents and cultural control methods. Invasive non-native plants are
rapidly displacing native plant species because of the lack of natural enemies within the ecosystem. The
distribution of biological control agents will have no negative effects to native species. There distribution will
decrease the competitive ability of the non-native invaders therefor, increase opportunities for native flora to
reestablish niches currently dominated by non-native invaders.
Herbicide application will affect certain family groups of native flora. Oopyralid affects members of three plant
families: composites (Compositae), legumes (Fabaceae) and buckwheats (polygonaceae). Dicamba affects most
broad-leaved species. Although some native flora would be affected by the application of these herbicides; all
sites treated with herbicides will be revegetated with seed mixes that consider filling soil horizon niches which
will reduce the risk of subsequent reiuvasion by non-native invasive species. Over time, those native plant species
adapted to the specific habitats will recolonize.
4. Risks to Human Health
There are many differences of opinion within the general population in regards to the safety of pesticide use.
Within the agricultural communities herbicides and pesticides are often viewed as necessary tools of the trade.
Safety protocols have been developed and herbicide labels denote many precautionary measures which are legally
required to be taken by applicators. However, many groups are questioning the safety of these compounds within
the enviromnenL
The Northern Region of the Forest Service has analyzed the risk of using Oopyralid and Dicamba to control
noxious weeds. Two documents address health and safety issues: RisIc AsseSSl'Mnt for Herbicide use in Forest
Service Regions 1, 2, 3, 4 and 10 tmd on Bonnevilk Power Administration S~s (USFS,I992) tmd Human Health
Risk Assessment for Herbicide Application to Control Noxious Weeds and Poisonous Plants in the Northun
Region (Monnig, 1988).
Toxicology data for chemical compounds are generally developed from animal testing. Extrapolation from results
on animals to humans is an uncertain process but, toxicologists compensate by using safety factors. The
Environmental Protection Agency reduces the NOEL from animal testing by one hundred (NOEL divided by 1(0)
when deciding allowable amounts of pesticides on foods. This adjusted amount (dose) is referred to as the
Acceptable Daily Intake (AD!) or Reference Dose (RID). This ADI is the amount assumed to be safe to consume
daily for a lifetime.
.
T a ble 4.24 AUowable DaDIy Inta ke (AD!)
HERBICIDE
Clopyralid
Dicamba
No....
~.... F.~
ElS
ADI (m&fk&lday)
0.5
0.03
136
I
I
t
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•I
•
•
•
The ADI may be met or exceeded if a person ate more than one-half poUDd of wild food immediately following
herbicide application. This situation will be avoided; areas of herbicide applications will be posted three days
prior to, during and one week following application procedures in order to avoid this scenario.
There is a possibility of hypersensitivity within a small pereentage of the population. These persons are generally
aware of their sensitivities and therefor avoid possible exposure situations. Areas of herbicide applications will be
posted in order to alert those that may be hypersensitive. Such persons will not be permitted to work on spray
crews. Risks to human health are assumed to be reasonable small given that all precautionary measures to ensure
human safety will be taken.
Cgm.Uyc mects 01 Noxious Weeds
Geograpbie Boundary: The boundary considered in this analysis was the NLF analysis area and the U.S. Highway 12
corridor.
Time Fnme: The time frame used was the same as for other vegetative treatments; the year 2025.
Past, Present, ad Foreseeable Future Actions: Past actions that contributed to the invasion and spread of noxious
weeds include road building. timber sales, prescribed fire, travel along roads and trails (motorized and non-motorized),
and contaminated feed for livestock. Since then, disturbed areas of soil are routinely grass seeded and fertilized to
reduce erosion and minimize weed infestations, and certified weed-free hay is required within the Forest boundary.
Present actions include the formation of the Oeuwater Basin Weed Coordinating Committee in 1995; the availability
and release of biological control agents (bioca's); and weed control efforts done annually along the highway corridor by
the State Transportation Department. Future actions include the effects of District salvage sales and new methods or
advances in control measures (i.e. new bioca's).
Alternative 1: This alternative does not propose the use of herbicides to control invasive non native plants therefor,
there would be no direct, indirect, or cumulative effects to human health. It does propose continuing the distribution of
biological control agents as part of an overall Forest weed management program. The risk of introduced agents
attacking native flora have been deemed acceptable (insignificant) or non existent.
Bioca's are availabl~ for Canada thistle, dalmatian toadflax, scotch broom, and spotted knapweed. However, biological
control is a slow process, often requiring ten to twenty years to be effective. Its purpose is not eradication, but a
reduction in weed density and rates of spread. The use of bioca's on spotted knapweed and Canada thistle will reduce
densities of these plants, but effects will not likely be timely enough to protect current weed free areas from being
infested.
Current infestation levels of Scotch broom and dalmatian toadflax do not warrant the use of bioca's; infestation levels
would not support agent establishment. Without treatment these species will continue to produce seed which can be
transported by wildlife, recreationists, and vehicular traffic. As additional infestations occur, there will be marked
reductions in floral biodiversity throughout the area.
Agents are not available for the control of orange hawkweed or scotch thistle. Without treatment, orange hawkweed
and scotch thistle will continue to spread into disturbed areas throughout the project area. Disturbance allowing
invasion would include any activity which removed existing vegetative cover; particularly areas within proximity to
existing infestation sites. Once established, these species would likely out-compete adjacent native vegetation for
resources (water, light, nutrients) and spread as a biological wildfire.
In the event of a catastrophic fire within the vicinity of a bioca release, it is unlikely that established agents would
survive. It is unlikely that any of these invasive species would be burned out from such an event; they all have deep
roots or seeds that remain viable for long periods of time. Also, a wildfire typically does not produce enough beat to
destroy seed viability. Under this scenario, these non-native species would have a window of opportunity to become
established over vast areas of newly disturbed soils. They could rapidly dominate certain areas, creating a biological
desert far more impactive than the fire itself.
The Highway 12 corridor is one of three east- west routes through Idaho and is heavily used. Vegetative communities
along this route are continually subjected to invasion by DOn-native plant species that have a potential to dominate
disturbed areas. New invaders including yellow startbistle (Cmtmuea solstititUis), rush skeletonweed (Chondrilltl
juncea), leafy spurge (Euphorbia emlll) and toothed spurge (EuphorbiJltk1JtQl/l) have been observed within northcentral Idaho. Disturbed habitats within the project area are susceptible to invasion by these species. Preventative
strategies, such as, (1) using weed-free forage; (2) washing ground based equipment used on Forest lands; and (3)
utilizing weed-free gravel to surface roads, can decrease the rate of invasion by these and other DOn native plants.
AlterDatives 2 • 5: All action alternative propose utilizing an integrated approach to reducing the extent of invasive
non native plants. An Integrated Weed Management (IPM) approach includes the use of biological, chemical and
manual control methods.
The risks associated with using herbicides to wildlife and affected non target native flora are insigoificant compared to
the benefits of eradicating small isolated infestations of these non native invasive species. The chemicals proposed for
use: Oopyralid and Dicamba, do not bioaccumulate and have fairly specific target botanical families. The benefits to
using these chemicals include inaeased site availability for native species to colonize, increased native species
diversity, increased forage for small and big game species.
The risk associated to human health can be categorized into three groups: worker exposure for those individuals
applying them, berry and wild plant harvesters and the generalized recreationist.
The risks to workers are minimized by the use of personal protective equipment while applying the chemical. Personal
protective equipment (masks, rubber boots and gloves, long sleeved shirts and pants or coveralls and job hazard
analysis information sheets) use is mandatory, applicators must be licensed by the State of Idaho, State restrictions
regarding weather conditions at the time of application will be adhered to and all label restrictions will be followed.
These measures are developed to reduce risks associated with worker exposure.
The risks to berry and wild plant collectors are minimjU-d by several factors: areas where herbicides will be applied will
be posted three days prior to, dming and one week following application. The 1992 Risk Assessment Report prepared
for herbicide use on Northern Region Forests addressed the accidental consumption of 2,4-0 applied to berries. The
analysis used 2,4-D because it would have the highest concentration based on application rates; both Oopyralid and
Dicamba rates w~uld be far less concentrated than those of 2,4-0. Based on this information, a 150 pound person
would have to consume one-half pounds of berries every day in order to reach the Environmental Protection Agency's
Acceptable Daily Intake rates for 2,4-0. The likelihood of an individual reaching the above dose is extremely low for
several reasons. It is unlikely that berry plants occupy the sites targeted for herbicide application within the analysis
area. It is unlikely that an individual would consume one-half pound of the same source of berries each day throughout
their life. Posting the spray area prior to, during and after treatments would likely deter the average individual from
those sites.
The risks to general recreationists are minimized by posting areas where herbicides will be applied prior to, during and
after applications. Those areas identified for herbicide treatment total less than one percent of the project area and
could be avoided by those individuals sensitive to the use of herbicides.
All sites proposed for herbicide treatment will be revegetated with seed mixes that consider filling soil horizon niches
which will reduce the risks of subsequent reinvasion by DOn native invaders. Certain infestation sites may require
multiple years of herbicide application; each year amounts of herbicide will be reduced. By revegetating, overtime
those species planted and native species adapted to site specific habitats will recolonize and should out-compete those
treated invaders. Biological control agents released within the project area, when established, will provide continual
stress to target plants reducing their competitiveness which, in tum should increase the ability of desirable plant species
to maintain healthy communities.
or
Short·term Use vs. MalnteDanee aad Enbaaeement LonK·te..... Producdvlty: Each of the action alternatives is
designed to improve the long-tenn productivity and sustainability of resources on the project area. Although there may
be short-tenn impacts on some resources, the deciding official would weigh the possible short-term impacts against the
long-term benefits of each alternative before making a decision.
NortIa LodIsa Fue E1S
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
or
irreversible aDd Irretrievable Com.ltment
Resources: All of the action alternatives involve an irretrievable
commitment of labor, fossil fuels, and economic resources. The no-action alternatives would not involve such
commitments, but could result in the unavoidable deterioration of the natural condition of the area.
Adverse meets Which CaDDot Be Avoided: Each of the action and no-action alternatives contemplated under this
EIS has environmental impacts that cannot be avoided. Herbicide applications, for example, are likely to affect some
non-target plants. Although mitigation measures would probably prevent environmentally meaningful concentrations of
herbicide from reaching surface water or groundwater, it is possible that minute amounts of herbicide could migrate
from the site. Under reasonably foreseeable circumstances this would not have a significant environmental impact.
The adoption of the no-action alternatives would not immediately result in unavoidable environmental impacts.
However, it is clear that alternatives which allow the continued spread of noxious weeds on these sites would eventually
result in unavoidable environmental effects to various resources.
D. Lochsa Research Natural Area
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
Altenatives 1 and 4: These alternatives do not propose any management activities within the lDchsa RNA. As
mentioned in Chapter 3, mixed, lethal and non-lethal fires with an average return intelVal of 26-50 years are the
dominant ecosystem proce~ in this area. Due to past fire suppression, fuels have built up above historic levels. Species
composition is advancing towards more late successional species such as grand fir and western redcedar rather than the
early seral species (ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, and western larch) that were maintained by frequent low-intensity fires.
Stand density is increasing without the thinning influence of low intensity fires. As plant succession in the RNA
proceeds, the likelihood of a lethal, stand-replacing fire would significantly increase due to higher fuel loadings, stand
densities, and increased ladder fuels. Such a high intensity wildfire could increase surface erosion and the likelihood of
landslides and other soil movements. The Establishment Report for lDchsa RNA states that "burning may be necessary
to maintain the vegetation that designation as a research natural area hopes to preserve." .
Alternatives 2, 3, 38, aDd 5: These alternatives propose prescribed burning activities which would be a combination of
mixed, lethal and non-lethal fires mimicking the natural role fire played in this area before fire suppression efforts were
initiated. These burning prescriptions, developed in coordination with a Botanist, would create a mosaic of vegetation
types of different species, ages, and densities across the landscape, more closely representing the natural conditions that
existed before European settlement. The prescnDed bums would reduce unnaturally high fuel loadings. Early seral
species would be favored due to their morphological adaptations to low to moderate intensity bums. Stand densities
would be reduced, decreasing moisture and nutrient stress, thereby reducing trees susceptibility to insects and diseases
above natural endemic levels. By proposing a combination of non-lethal and lethal prescnbed bums, surface erosion
and risk of landslides and other soil movements would be less than if no management action is taken and a lethal, standreplacement fire occurs in the RNA.
In summary, the vegetation in the lDchsa RNA has evolved with wildfire as a common disturbance process over time.
These mixed fires have served to recycle nutrients and biomass, maintain early successional species and low to
moderate fuel loadings, and reduce stand densities, while maintaining a mosaic of vegetation communities across the
landscape. To restore and maintain the integrity of the plant communities that the Locbsa RNA was established to
preselVe, it is necessary to allow fire to play its natural role. Due to past fire suppression, prescribed burning is a
practical restoration tool to accomplish this objective.
Cgmgladve Elects
I
l
I
Geographic Boundary: The geographical boundary used in this cumulative effects analysis are the lDchsa and Lower
Selway 4th Hydrologic Unit Code (HUe) watersheds. The lower portions of both of these 4th Code watersheds
contains climatic conditions conducive to the occurrence of an assemblage of plant species only commonly found west
of the Cascades in Washington, Oregon, and northern California. These species, referred to as coastal disjunct species,
are believed to have been more widespread across the Oearwater National Forest area when the climate was warmer
and wetter than present conditions. As climatic conditions became cooler and drier, the distribution of these coastal
disjunct species was reduced to isolated locations along the lower lDchsa and Selway Rivers Canyons. An area with
similar coastal vegetative/climatic conditions exists along the lower North Fork Oearwater River near Isabella Creek.
The lDchsa RNA was established to preselVe areas with this unique assemblage of plant/climatic conditions.
l~Q
I
TillIe Frame: The time frame considered for cumulative effects is 15-20 years after prescribed burning, approximately
the year 2025. It is believed that by this time young, early sera! trees will have grown in the burned areas developing
new root systems thereby reducing landslide hazard to more historical levels.
Foreseeable Future AetIoas: Past actions considered include floods, landslides, wildfires, wind throw, and fire
suppression for the past 60+ years. Present actions include continued fire suppression, density related tree mortality
from insects and disease, and an anthracnose disease of Pacific dogwood, one of the coastal disjUDCt species, future
actions include prescribed fire and noxious weed control.
The area occupied by the lDchsa RNA evolved with frequent, mixed intensity fires with an average return interval of
26-50 years across most of the area. The historic vegetation was adapted to this disturbance regime, including the
coastal disjUDCt species which were a principal reason for this area being designated an RNA. The Pacific dogwood is
currently declining from an anthracnose disease, both within the RNA and in nearby areas along the Selway River.
AlterDatives 1 aad 4: The cumulative effects expected from the selection of Alternative 1 or 4 are associated with the
lack of natural and/or management ignited fire within the RNA. This area evolved with frequent, mixed intensity fires
which would generally remove understory shrubs, forbs, and smaller trees. Fire suppression over the past 60+ years has
allowed plant succession, particularly among understory forbs, shrubs, and trees to continue more toward mid and late
seral species. Stand densities have also increased and the likelihood of lethal fires of higher intensity than historical
burns has increased. This change in stand conditions may have negative effects on species composition, including
coastal disjunct species. Continued fire suppression and/or the lack of management ignited fire would continue the
trend toward later successional species.
Continued exclusion of fire in the RNA will increase the likelihood of large, high-intensity fires due to greater fuel
loadings, the presence of ladder fuels, and increased stand densities. If a large, high intensity wildfire does occur in the
RNA, it is likely there will be increased risks of surface erosion, landslides, and debris torrents. Following these events,
noxious weed invasion may be a problem on freshly exposed soil surfaces. Coastal disjunct species populations may be
negatively impacted by these high-intensity fires which are outside the historic range of variability.
Alteraadves 2, 3, 38, aDd 5: These alternatives all include management ignited burns to restore the dominant natural
disturbance process to the RNA. These burns will be administered under more controlled conditions than a wildfire and
should closely mitpic the intensity of historical mixed non-lethalllethal bums. Fuel loadings and ladder fuels will be
reduced, stand densities will decrease, and mid to late seral species will be reduced. It is likely that there will be a short
term (5-15 years) increase in landslide hazard and risk of debris torrents, but surface erosion hazard will be inaeased
for only the season after the bum if it is carried out properly. The landslide hazard, risk of debris torrents, and levels of
surface erosion will be much less than would occur after a high intensity wildfire.
Coastal disjunct species should respond favorably to the reintroduction of fire in the RNA. This is important since
populations of these species, particularly Pacific dogwood, may be declining in other inland areas with coastal climatic
conditions. Invasion by noxious weeds may occur in some areas, but native species should still occupy most of the area
since they evolved with the low to moderate intensity burns being prescribed.
Short·te..... Use vs. MaiDteDanee aad EnbaDeement or Lonl·te..... Produetivlty: Alternatives 1 and 4, in the shortterm, would have little effect on current vegetation composition or soil erosional processes. Long-term productivity
could be substantially reduced if a wildfire of higher intensity than historically occurred. Landslide hazard and erosional
risk after a high intensity wildfire would be very high in this landscape. Species composition would change to later
sera! species, possibly detrimentally impacting populations of coastal disjunct plant species.
Alternatives 2, 3, 3a, and 5, in the short-term, would likely increase surface erosion and change the successional
composition of plant communities in the bum areas. The erosional impacts should be low to moderate, dependent on
climatic conditions the year following the bum. Long-term productivity would be maintained under these alternatives
and species composition would move toward the earlier seral species that historically dominated these sites. Coastal
disjunct species populations should benefit in the long-term from the proposed bums associated with these alternatives.
Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment or Resources: None known or suspected.
Adverse Effects Which CaDDot Be Avoided: None known or suspected.
NortIa LocIIsa Face EIS
140
I
,
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
Il
,
•
•II
-I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
E. North Loebsa Slope Roadless Area
The area that was used to analyze both direct and indirect effects of the alternatives on the NlSRA was confined to the
analysis area boundary because: (1) any direct and/or indirect effects to the roadless resource would be confined to that
area; (2) except for U.S. Highway 12 and the Lolo Motonvay, most associated road and trails providing access to that
portion of the area do not extend beyond the analysis area boundary; and (3) it includes the entire HR 1570 boundary
which is key to the Forest Plan lawsuit settlement agreemenL The entire NlSRA boundary was used to describe
cumulative effects.
The roadless characteristics and wilderness features described in Chapter Three were used in the analysis of effects.
The direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of proposed actions on the NlSRA follow:
1. Natural Integrity and Appearance
The following table displays proposed vegetative management activities that would affect the natural integrity and
appearance of the NlSRA:
Table 4.25 • Proposed Vel etadve MaulemeDt Acdvlties (Acres)
Mlsed
All.
1
2
3
3a
4
5
Regeneration
Harvest
Commercial
ThIn
Olr-Slte
Harvest
-0-
-0-
-0-
957
797
797
-0-
207
207
207
2,250
2.2S0
-0-
-0-
-0-
2,2S()
-0-0-
Severity
Burns
-06,130
6130
930
-06,130
UDderbams
-05470
5,470
5,860
-05,470
Total
Acreale
-015,014
14,854
10,044
-011,600
Alternadves 1 and 4: Existing roadless characteristics and wilderness features would be retained, leaving open
the option to recommend the entire 113,662 acre NlSRA for future inclusion in the National Wilderness
Preservation System.
Alternadves 2, 3, aDd 3a: These alternatives would have the greatest direct and indirect effects upon the area's
roadless characteristics and wilderness features due to proposed timber harvest and burning activities. Although
both the timber harvest and burning are designed to mimic natural disturbances, the absence of "sawed" stumps
with burning would lessen its effects on wilderness features. No timber harvest is proposed within the Fish Creek
area (HR 1570). The other vegetative activities proposed (prescribed burning, control of noxious weeds, and
riparian planting) would have little to no effect on roadless characteristics.
Altemadve 5: This alternative's proposed prescribed burning, control of noxious weeds, and riparian planting
would have little to no effect on roadless characteristics. No timber harvest within the NlSRA is proposed with
this alternative.
Access Options: Under Access Options 1, 2, and 4, the reconstruction/relocation of Trails 224 and 225 would be
reconstructed to the same specifications used in the adjacent Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness, which would not
effect possible wilderness designation of the NlSRA. Under Access Option 3, Trails 118, 224, and 225 would not
be reconstructed.
2. Remoteness and Solitude
Alternatives 1 aDd 4: Existing levels of remoteness and solitude would remain within the NlSRA.
NortIl LoeIIIa F~ EIS
141
Alternatives 2, 3, aDd 3a: The timber sale activities would disrupt the feeling of solitude during the short time
period the sales are active. The resulting openings, particularly after the proposed removal of the off-site trees in
the Bimerick area, would reduce the feeling of remoteness, until replanted trees attained some size.
Alteraatlve 5: Existing levels of solitude would remain, but the openings left after proposed burning may
increase site distances into the developed areas outside of the NLSRA, thus reducing its remoteness.
Acc:ess Options: Except for Access Option 2, existing levels of motorized use would remain the same or be
slightly reduced within the NLSRA. This would maintain the existing level of noise from motorized users.
Access Option 2 specifies non-motorized use in the Fish Creek area, which would benefit those recreationists
seeking an increased level of solitude. Increased trail use, resulting from proposed reconstruction of the Deadman
Trail system under Access Option 3, may lessen solitude in the Deadman-Bimerick area of the NLSRA.
3. Special Features
AU AlterDadves: Most of the area's unique geological, biological, ecological, cultura1, and scenic features would
remain UDChanged with implementation of any of the alternatives. The Lochsa RNA would benefit from the
prescribed burning proposed under Alternatives 2, 3, 3a, and
s.
Acc:ess Options: No impact.
4. Erred of Size and Shape on Wilderness Attributes
Alteraadves 1, 4, aDd 5: The current shape and size of the NLSRA would remain unchanged, although, the
n8nOW and irregular shape of those lands along the face of the Lochsa River would continue to severely detract
from many wilderness attributes, principally solitude.
Alternadves 2, 3, aDd 3.: These alternatives all propose timber harvest along the face drainages, primarily in
the Bimerick area. This would add to the existing detracting condition of this area. However, the Fish Creek area,
an enclosed landscape having wilderness attributes, would remain unaffected by proposed timber harvest
activities.
I
Acc:ess Options: No impacL
s.
Manageability and Boundaries
Alteraadves 1, 4, aDd 5: There would be no change in existing boundary and manageability factors, although
the wilderness qualities on the face are questionable, as noted above.
Alteraadves 2, 3, aDd 3a: Although the roadless characteristics and wilderness features would be lost in those
areas proposed for timber harvest and/or road activities, the NLSRA boundary could be relocated to easily
recognizable terrain features within the FishIHungery Creek drainages (same as the area proposed under HR
1570).
Acc:ess Options: Existing motorized use of trails or the further restriction of such use would DOt effect possible
wilderness designation of the entire NLSRA, especially since the current limited levels of motorized use have not
affected the wilderness character of the area.
CM.gladyc meets
Time Frame: Year 2025.
142
I
I
I
I
Geographic Boundary: North Lochsa Slope Roadless Area
NortII LodIsa Face EIS
I
CIIapter Fov
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Past, Present, and Foreseeable Future Actions: Past timber sale and road activities; exposure resulting from the
UC bicentennial; and possible Legislative action.
Past timber harvest and road construction activities implemented with the South Bend and Cabin Patch timber
sales have had direct effects on a continuous block of the roadless area south of Canyon Creek. This equates to
approximately 2,240 acres that has lost its roadless characteristics. Add to this the timber sale activities proposed
with this project, a continuous block west and south of Bimerick Creek (approximately 17,000 acres) would lose
its roadless characteristics.
Presently, there are DO timber harvest and/or road activities taking place within the NLSRA boundary, and there
are no other teaSOnably foreseeable future timber sales or road activities planned, outside of the North Lochsa
Face proposals.
The Fish Creek portion of this roadless area is described in HR 1570, or what is more commonly referred to as
LaRocco's proposed wilderness bill. This area of the North Lochsa Slope Roadless Area also contains the only
segment of the Lewis and Oarle travel route across the west that is still without trail tread. As the bicentennial
observance of the crossing of Lewis and Oarle draws closer (2005 to 2006), interest in this roadless area could
increase. It is possible that legislative action regarding wilderness or other land management designations could
result from the increase in exposure.
Irreversible aDd Irretrievable ComlllitllleDt of Resourees: Timber harvest and associated road activities
would have a long-term adverse effect on the roadless values in the affected area. However, the effects are not
irreversible or irretrievable, since road obliteration and reforestation could return the affected area back to its
natural state. This would also be true of proposed prescribed burning, which would detract from the natural
appearance of the area in the short-term, but shift towards restoring fire's natural role within the ecosystem.
Adverse Eft'ects Which CaJmot Be Avoided: Noise levels from harvest activities outside and adjacent to the
NLSRA would have a short-term effect on solitude. Current effects on solitude are caused from traffic noise
coming from U.S. Highway 12 and from motorized use of some of the area's trails.
F. Social Values
This section discusses the effects of the alternatives on recreational opportunities (including recreational values, road
and trail opportunities, seasonal use patterns, and bull elk wlnerability), scenic quality, Tribal treaty rights, heritage
resources, and community economics.
1. Recreational Opportunities
This analysis primarily focuses on the effects of the four access options. The recreational opportunities provided
by the access options are compared and summarized by the area's recreational values, road and trail opportunities,
seasonal use patterns, and effects on bull elk wlnerability.
a. Recreational ValDes
The North Lochsa Face area is highly valued by a diversity of people for many different reasons. These
values are often a result of people wanting to experience either motorized or DOn-motorized recreational
opportunities. Mitigating a desired recreational experience is extremely difficulL For example, nODmotorized enthusiasts desire an experience free of noise from motorized vehicles, and motorized enthusiasts
do not consider riding in very developed landscapes as the only available experience. They also desire to
experience the rugged, primitive character of the pristine backcountry. The following discussions describe
the effects of each access option on motorized and DOn-motorized recreationists:
1~1
Acc:ess Option 1: Since more than 75% of the roads and trails are open to motorized use, offering a
motorized experience in every drainage on the landscape, this option would have the most effect on those
desiring a non-motorized opportunity. Possible indirect and cumulative effects could include increased
sedimentation resulting from roads receiving heavy motorized recreational traffic during wet seasons,
especially when the road is located on a sensitive or unstable landform (it is important to remember these
roads were built to support timber harvesting traffic which occurred infrequently, DOt for constant, yearlong
recreational vehicle traffic).
Ac:eess Option 2: Adverse effects to the recreational experience of non-motorized users would occur in the
Pete King, Canyon, and to a lesser extent Deadman drainages, where motorized recreational opportunities
are presenL These drainages primarily support the 57% road and 43% trail miles open to motorized use.
Adverse effects to the recreational experience of motorized users would be concentrated in the Fish Creek,
Hungery Creek, and Willow Creek drainages, where Zone A implements a non-motorized area closure on all
but the primary forest access roads.
Ac:eess Option 3: With 57% of the roads providing motorized access, the effects are similar to Access
Option 2 for motorized use on roads. However, additional adverse effects to those desiring a DOn-motorized
experience could occur as a result of 52% of the trail system being open to motorized use. This effect is
most severe in the Fish Creek drainage, where a non-motorized experience or very limited motorized
experience is the accepted standard. The motorized closure area comprised of the Hungery and Willow
Creek drainages would also have an impact to those desiring a motorized experience. However, this area is
currently not accessible to motorized users.
Ac:eess OptioD 4: The effects are the same as Access Option 1 for the winter, spring, summer and early fall
use seasons. However, due to the bull elk vulnerability study road closures, only 30% of the roads are open
to motorized access in the fall from 10/1 to 11/3, while those trails open to motorized use would remain open
during this period.
b. Road and Trail Opportunities
The majority of trails located on the North Lochsa Face landscape were not desigDed or built to
accommodate motorized traffic. They evolved over time as a means for Forest Service personnel and pack
strings to access the Lochsa River canyon prior to the construction of Highway 12. Their primary use was
often to accommodate tire fighting personnel. Thus, the majority of the trail miles are poorly located, and
many are on unstable landforms (see Appendi% A; Trail Matrix for LTA information specific to each trail).
For motorized use, the majority of these trail miles accommodate only trailbikes as the tread width is 24" or
less. The Lochsa Face topography dictates a high degree of challenge, and experience is necessary for the
areas' trailbike riders. Due to all these factors and assuming funding is available, each access option
proposes a different amount of trail reconstruction aDdIor relocation as follows:
Ac:eess OptioDs 1 aDd 4: These options propose to reconstruct/relocate approximately 27 miles of trail and
have approximately 80% of the system open to motorized use. However, current conditions preclude actual
motorized use on all but approximately 15% of the trail miles. (Ibis assumes motorized riders are of
average skill level and desire an easy to moderately difficult riding experience.)
Ac:eess Option 2: This option proposes to reconstruct/relocate approximately 39 miles of trail and open
43% of the trails to motorized use, primarily in the developed Pete King and Canyon drainages. However,
this option does not address the desires of trailbike recreationists to have a high degree of riding challenge
and the opportunity to experience the areas' primitive character through motorized access.
Access Opdon 3: Addressing the desires of the trailbike recreationists, this option proposes to
reconstruct/relocate approximately 44 miles of trail and open 52% of the trails to motorized use.
Approximately 20 miles of the proposed reconstruction/relocation are located in the Deadman drainage
(noted on the Access Option 3 map in Dark Green). This would only be completed on stable landform
segments. Where stable landfonns cannot be found to accommodate relocation, these trail segments would
not be reconstructed. There is no reconstruction proposed on any trails within the HR 1570 area (Fish Creek
drainage).
Nortla LodIsa Face EIS
144
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Eft'eds due to Proposed Road ObliteratioD: There is some loss of motorized recreation, especially for
OHVs, due to the 94 miles of road obliteration proposed by this projecL However, the majority of the roads
obliterated on the Forest since 1992 were physically unusable by vehicles, prior to obliteration, due to an
abundance of brush or, in some cases, landslides. Only 5 percent were physically accessible to full sized
vehicles and 25 percent accessible to OHVs. In addition, many of the roads that were physically accessible
were restricted yearlong, as per the Forest's Access Guide. Although the swvey of the obliteration candidate
roads in this area is not yet complete, it appears that the trends will be similar to that of the program as a
whole.
c. Seasonal Use Patterns
CroWding, or the perception of crowding has led to conflict between users, particularly with regard to
hunting. Hunters often are possessive of the campsite they occupy and the surrounding area where they
hunt. Most of the hunters swveyed during a 1987-88 Idaho Rifle Elk Hunting Study said that encountering
other hunting groups, motorized vehicles on or off of roads, areas with many open roads, or areas currently
being logged detracted from the hunting quality of the area.
Another study of hunter opinion conducted from 1991 to 1995 found road access management to be either
"easily acceptable" or "not easy to accept but tolerable" as a management tool to maintain good numbers of
bull elk. Each access option offers a mix of motorized and non-motorized access to popular hunting areas as
follows:
Access Option 1: Considering both roads and trails, this option offers the most motorized opportunity.
However, this option does not include roads and trails specifically designated to provide access to hunters
with disabilities.
Access OptioD 2: This option concentrates motorized access to popular hunting areas in Pete King, Canyon,
and to a lesser extent Deadman Creek drainages; and non-motorized access in Fish, Hungery, and Willow
Creek drainages. It offers motorized access for fall hunting on designated roads to hunters with disabilities.
Additional indirect and cumulative effects may include increased hunter dissatisfaction, if hunters who are
hiking or traveling with stock on closed roads designated for motorized handicap access encounter motor
vehicles...
Access Option 3: This option also concentrates motorized access to popular hunting areas in Pete King,
Canyon, and to a lesser extent Deadman Creek drainages; and non-motorized access in Fish, Hungery, and
Willow Creek drainages. However, it increases opportunities to disabled hunters by extending disabled
access opportunities to a yearlong season and adding designated trails. Additional indirect and cumulative
effects may include increased hunter dissatisfaction, if hunters who are hiking or traveling with stock on
closed roads designated for motorized handicap access encounter motor vehicles.
Access Option 4: Because of the road closures during 10/1 to 1113, this option offers the most nonmotorized hunting opportunity. However it does not include roads and trails specifically designated to
provide access to hunters with disabilities.
d. Bull Elk Vulnerability
Bull elk vulnerability (the risk of harvest during the fall hunting season) influences the quality and quantity
of elk based recreation opportunities, such as, hunting, wildlife viewing, and photography, with fall hunting
being the most sought after opportunity. Indirect and cumulative effects of each access option could include
dissatisfaction of recreational users as elk mortality increases and elk herds decline.
NortII LoclIsa Face E1S
145
I
A reliable model exists to predict potential bull elk mol1ality as a function of motorized road aud trail access
aud hunter density. These models are appropriate as an analysis tool for the North Lochsa Face laudscape
because the area was used for model development research by Unsworth (1993) and Graben (1997). Of the
two variables, the Forest Service can ONI.,Y influence the effect of motorized road and trail access aud not
hunter density. Hunter density and elk population management are factors controlled by the Idaho
Department of Fish and Game. Thus, the bull elk vulnerability model indicates that controlling motorized
road or trail access dming hunting season may have the effect of decreasing hunting season mortality when
hunter density is held constanL Because hunter density is held constant, model results provide a
comparative tool for measuring relative changes between access options. Decisions cannot be based solely
on model results due to the assumption that hunter density is held constanL The following describes the
effects on elk based recreation and bull elk vulnerability attributed only to motorized road aud trail access
for each access option:
Access Optioa 1: This option provides the highest level of motorized hunting opportunity and the least
level of non-motorized opportunity of all the access options. Over 120 miles of trail would be open to
motorized use, even though the current condition of some of these trails make them inaccessible 'to
motorized use. One would expect a reduced level of elk based recreation under this option. The following
table displays by major drainage the motorized road aDd trail density and the predicted bull elk mortality
during the fall hunting season:
Table 4.26· BuD Elk ValDera~'SUIIlIIlary for Aceess Optioa 1
Motorized Road aDd ThD
~ -- .- aaft MOe)
~orDra""ae
- .
1.69
3.36
3.59
0.87
1.94
River Face
CanyonlDead man
Pete Kin2
FishlHungery
Total Analysis Area
FaD BaadDg SeuoD
BuD Elk Mortality
28%
53%
57%
19%
32%
Aeeess Option 2: This option restricts motorized access in the Fish Creek drainage (Zone A), thereby
providing intermediate levels of motorized and non-motorized hunting opportunities. Only 9 miles of trail
would be open to motorized use during the fall hunting season. There should be little to no noticeable
impact on elk based recreation.
Table 4.27· BuD Elk VulDerablH~'SUIIlIIlary for Aceess Option 2
Motorized Road aDd ThD
Deasity (MIIaISqaaft MOe)
~orDra""le
River Face
Canyon/Deadman
Pete King
FishlHungery
Total Analysis Area
0.87
0.88
0.96
0.34
0.67
FaD BaatiDg Seasoa
BuD Elk MortaUty
19%
19%
20%
14%
17%
Acc:ess Optioa 3: This option is similar to Access Option 2, except that in the Fish Creek drainage, it
provides motorized access during the summer, plus a motorized fall hunting opportunity for hunters with
disabilities. Slightly more than 14 miles of trail would be open to motorized use. There should be little to
no noticeable impact on elk based recreation.
I
I
j
J
t
NortII LoeIIIa Face EIS
146
C...... F...
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
--~
..
•
--..
•
•
•
•
•
I
I
I
I
Table 4.28 • BuD Elk VulllerablU~ SlIIIIIDary for Aeeess ODtioD 3
Motorized Road aDd ThU
Density (Miles/Square MOe)
~orDra""2e
River Face
0.86
Canyon/Deadman
1.24
1.08
Pete Kin2
FishIHungery
Total Analysis Area
0.37
0.77
FaD BUDtiDg Season
BuD Elk MortaUty
19%
23%
21%
15%
18%
Ac:eess Option 4: This option was developed specifically to address the issue of bull elk vulnerability. It
includes the same motorized road closures used during the bull elk vulnerability study. Compared to the
other options, it would provide the least level of motorized road hunting opportunity, but would have slightly
higher impacts than Access Options 2 and 3 on elk based recreation due to the larger number of trails open to
motorized use (120+ miles).
Table 4.29 • BuD Elk VulDerab. SDDUDary for Aeeess ODdoD 4
Motorized Road aDd ThO
Density
(Miles/SQuare MOe)
~lorDn""ae
River Face
1.28
1.22
Canvon/Deadman
Pete King
1.13
0.86
FishIHUDj!e1'Y
Total Analysis Area
1.08
FaD ButiDg SeaSOD
.BuD Elk MortaUty
23%
23%
22%
19%
21%
e. Effects Associated with the Vegetative Treatments
Direct effects include diminished recreational opportunity and increased recreational visitor dissatisfaction
due to increased traffic, human presence, and noise associated with vegetation treatments. This applies not
only to traditional opportunities such as camping and hunting, but to other recreational opportunities
including berry picking, wildlife viewing and photography, and firewood gathering. The opportunity to
gather firewood is also reduced when timber harvest removes dead trees along roadsides. Additional direct
effects include temporary displacement of recreational users to adjacent or different areas•
Cmpglative EUeets
Geographic BoUDdary: The boundary is the North Lochsa Face planning area, from the Lolo Trail Corridor to
the west end of the Highway 12 Corridor at Kooskia, including the Lochsa Wild and Scenic River Corridor, plus,
Forest and Regional Trends for OHV's.
Time Frame: Year 2005 (5 years from implementation for the public to experience and UDderstand the access
strategy).
Foreseeable Future Actions: UC bicentennial; other trail construction/reconstruction; and vegetative proposals
that could redistribute use.
The potential exists to dramatically increase recreational visitor use to the area during the Lewis and Oark
Bicentennial Observance period (1999 through 2008). Potential accommodations to meet the needs of these
additional visitors to the area may include facility improvements along the Lolo Motorway and Highway 12
Corridors, increased visitor services, and additional interpretive opportunities throughout the geographic boundary
described above. The strategic plan being developed by the Forest for the bicentennial observance period will
incorporate additional public input and analysis. Impacts resulting from visitor use associated with the Lewis and
Clark Bicentennial Observance have the potential to result in resource damage if visitors aren't appropriately
educated and use isn't adequately monitontd.
Nortla LocIasa Face £IS
147
Trail reconstruction is primarily proposed in the Pete King and Canyon Creek drainages where the trail system
network has been basically unusable for IeCl'eation for the past 10 to 15 years. Reconstruction of these trails has
the potential to redistribute both motorized aDd non-motorized use. It would be likely that motorized use on the
reconstructed trails would increase.
Vegetative treatments (i.e. timber harvest or prescribed burning) could relocate, either temporarily or permanently,
recreational users to different forest areas. This may increase the density of recreational users in some areas. The
effect of this may increase in proportion to the number of treatments occmring at anyone time. For example, user
displacement would increase where vegetation treatments, road or trail reconstruction/obliteration, and road
closures were implemented during the same IeCl'eational use season. A site specific example of this may be the
temporary displacement of campers using the Wild Goose Campground, when the campground parking lot is
being used as a helispot for the proposed East Bridge Salvage Sale.
meets
Adverse
Which CaaDot Be Avoided: The designation of non-motorized use ueas can have an adverse
effect on recreationists desiring a motorized opportunity, and the same is true for those desiring a non-motorized
experience in areas designated for motorized use.
2. Scenic Quality
The effects of each alternative are discussed in the following three subareas: (1) the U.S. Highway 12 Corridor
(Lewis and aark Highway); (2) the Central Portion - Trail Corridors for Trails #69 (West Fork Windy Saddle),
#224 (Fish Creek West), #237 (Willow Ridge); and (3) the Lolo Trail Corridor.
DO immediate affect on the scenic integrity of the area if this alternative was
selected. There is an increased chance of catastrophic wildfire if the current vegetative conditions continue.
Alternadve 1: There would be
Alternative 2: There would be harvesting activities which are visible from the highway and river corridor.
Concentrations of regeneration harvest are proposed for Pete King Creek, Rye Patch Creek, Tick Creek, and
Deadman Creek. The vegetation removal which would be visible from U.S. Highway 12 is designed to be small
patch openings of 1/4 acre to 1/2 acre in size interspersed with leave tree patches and riparian corridors. These
should mimic the appearance of existing openings in the conidor which are the result of rock outcrops and of
natural fires. A minimum of 25% of the existing stand structure would remain outside of the riparian corridors in
the rolling uplands, a minimum of 50% would remain on the breaklands, and a minimum of 70% of the existing
structure would remain in the 1/4 mile viewshed from the Lochsa wild aDd Scenic River.
Burning activities would be visible in Rye Patch Creek, Glade Creek, Tumble Creek, and Macaroni Creek. Both
the prescribed burns and the understory bums would leave a large percentage of the existing stand in place either
as an open park-like forest or as a mosaic of open areas with concentrations of vegetation in the riparian area.
The proposed harvesting and burning should result in a landscape character which appears "intact". Although it
would appear different from the current condition of a continuous forest canopy, it would repeat the form, line,
color, texture, and patterns which are commonly found in the river corridor breaklands. The activities should
reflect the natural patterns of the existing landscape so completely that the landscape appears intact and therefore
meets the scenic integrity objective of lUll (VQO of Retention). The road construction proposed along the ridge
above Tick Creek should not be visible, therefore having DO affect on the scenic quality of the area.
Within the central trail corridors, most of the proposed activities would occur in Low (modification) and Very
Low (maximum modification) areas that are unseen from any travel corridor. Harvesting activities would be
concentrated in the Mex Mountain area. Views from Trails 69, 237, and 224 are generally limited to the
immediate river corridor and adjacent brealdands. As with the activities in the breaklands of the highway corridor,
the proposed harvesting is designed to retain considerable portions of the existing stand. Activities which are
visible from the trail corridors would be found in middle and background views and should exceed the scenic
integrity objective of ~ (VQO of Modification) for these viewing zones.
Nortll Loe" Face EIS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The impact of burning would be obvious from the Lolo Trail, especially in the Bowl Butte and Weitas Meadows
area. Although burning activities do meet the visual requirement for retention in the foreground, there would be
an impact to scenery. Bowl butte is one of only two major vistas in this portion of the trail. The proposed burning
near Bowl Butte would modify the views from this area.
The second concentration of burning is near Weitas Meadows which is a site of concentrated use. It is an area
which is used for both camping and day hiking. Stand replacing fires in this area, while meeting the visual
objectives of a natural appearing event, may have both a long-term and short-term affect on how the site is
perceived.
Some of the harvesting activities in the central and southern portion of the analysis area would be visible from the
trail. In particular, the offsite species conversion in the headwaters of Bimerick Creek would be obvious from the
trail corridor, but the design of the activities should make them appear natural in the background viewshed. The
continuous forest canopy that is existing would be modified, but the resultant mosaic of openings interspersed
with riparian corridors and patches of remnant trees should borrow from existing attributes of size, shape, edge
effect and pattern of natural openings, and vegetative type found naturally in the analysis area.
Altenaadve 3: Same as Alternative 2, except for a slight reduction of the impact of harvesting activities near Tick
Creek in the U.S. Highway 12 Corridor and near the Mex Mountain Workcenter in the central portion of the
analysis area.
A1teraadve 3a: Timber harvest adjacent to U.S. Highway 12 is reduced in this alternative. The units located
within the Wild and Scenic River corridor have a maximum removal of 30% of the stand structure, so the visual
effects will be minimal. Timber harvesting in the central portion of the analysis area has been reduced also,
therefore the scenic integrity of the river corridor and central portion of the analysis area should meet or exceed
the Forest plan standard.
There are no harvesting or burning proposals adjacent to the Lola Trail corridor in this alternative, therefore the
scenic integrity of the are would remain the same. The underburns proposed in the central portion of the analysis
area should not be visually apparent from the Lolo Trail System There is an increased chance of catastrophic
wildfire if the current vegetative conditions continue.
4:
A1teraadve
Same affects within the highway corridor as with Alternatives 2 and 3 from Canyon Creek west.
Harvesting would be visible in the viewshed from the road and the river, but should mimic natural patterns so
completely that the natural appearing forest character is retained.
Harvesting activities near the central trail corridors would be reduced from Alternative 2 and 3. Harvesting
activities in the Mex Mountain area would still be visible, but should meet the scenic integrity objects of low and
moderate for this area. No burning is proposed, so there would be no change in the scenery other than from
natural events.
None of the proposed activities should be visible from the Lola Trail corridor.
Alternative 5: Visual affect of timber harvesting within the highway corridor would be limited to an area west of
Canyon Creek. There would be change in the appearance of the corridor from burning activities throughout the
corridor but they would appear as natural events. Concentrations of proposed burning are in the Lochsa RNA,
Tumble Creek, and Wildhorse Creek. All management activities are designed to appear natural in the river
corridor and mimic natural events so completely that the valued landscape character appears intact, meeting the
scenic integrity objective of high (VQO of Retention) in the river corridor.
Same as alternatives 2 and 3 in the central trail and Lolo Trail corridors, except for a reduction of activity in the
headwaters of Bimerick Creek.
All Actio. A1teraadves: Precommercial thinning, commercial thinning, salvage, and stocking control activities
may help to rehabilitate past harvesting activities. When these activities are located immediately adjacent to past
geometrically shaped harvest units it tends to soften hard edges and make these existing openings more natural
appearing in the background views. This would help improve the views of the face drainages from the Lolo Trail.
149
Riparian planting in the Pete King drainage would also help to return this area to its historical scenic condition. Road
obliteration projects proposed in all alternatives would improve the long term visual condition of the landscape in
both the short and long term.
Control of noxious weeds along roads and trails will improve the scenic quality of the roadside and trail corridors,
creating a more natura1 appearing condition.
Proposed prescribed burning and UDderstory burning foUDd in all alternatives would have an effect on the scenery of
the area, but would have the appearance of a natural event since the remnants of the fire (burnt trees and mosaic of
unburned trees) would remain in place. Proposed burning is desigDed to mimic natural tire patterns for each LTA and
therefore should be consistent with historical scenic character for the analysis area. Although the activity would
change the appearance of the area from what it is currently, it would meet the scenic integrity objective (VQO) for the
area and would help to achieve the desired future condition for scenery of a coniferous forest composed of a varied
mosaic of old and young forest.
Geop-apble Boaadary: The u.s. Highway 12 and Lolo Trail corridors are important components of the Lochsa
Face analysis area. Highway 12 makes up the southern aDd eastern border of the analysis area and the Lolo Trail
corridor forms the northern border of the area. Both corridors are critical travel corridors identified in the Oearwater
National Forest Plan (Appendix G). The highway corridor also follows, for the most part, the Lochsa and Middle
Fork of the Oearwater Wild and Scenic River. The scenic resource has been identified as an important element of
the outstanding resource values in the designation of this Wild and Scenic River. When analyzing the cumulative
effects of the actions proposed in the North Lochsa Face project, the western portions of these corridors form the
geographic scope of the analysis. Actions proposed in the area of the Lolo Trail corridor from Canyon JUDetion to
Saddle Camp were analyzed. Also actions proposed in the area of the highway corridor from Kooskia to milepost
140 were analyzed for both the highway corridor and the Lochsa and Middle Fork of the Oearwater Wild and Scenic
River.
TIme Frame: In general, timber harvesting activities which remove a large percentage of the standing timber are
visually evident until regeneration of the vegetation at the site reaches approximately 10 to 15 feet in height. When
vegetation reacbes this height, openings often are not apparent as unnatura1 occurrences. Proposed actions are
planned for completion in approximately ten years, with final site preparation adding an additional two years. Given
this time frame, the effects on scenery should DO longer be evident by the year 2025.
Past, PreseDt, aDd Foreseeable Future Actions: Outside of the analysis area, there are some sites along the
highway corridor in the area of Syringa and Lowell where the effects of past actions are apparent. TlDlber harvesting
activities from several timber sales, including the South Bend, Cabin Patch, Big Smith, Bridge Creek, and Syringa
Creek timber sales, are still visible, but are starting to revegetate. Rehabilitation of some of the units of the Bridge
Creek timber sale was accomplished in the Bridge Creek Salvage sale, completed during the summer of 1998.
There are some units from previous sales that are apparent in the background viewshed from viewpoints along the
Sherman Peak Trail, but these are also nearing the point where revegetation will create a more natura1 appearing
condition. Several salvage sales including Powerline Salvage aDd Deadman Salvage have recently been completed,
but are DOt visually evident.
Future projects include the Middle Fork timber sale on the Nez Perce National Forest located on the south side of the
river across from Lowell and the East Bridge Salvage sale located just east of Syringa. Harvesting activities in each
of these projects are desigDed to mimic existing natural openings found in the corridor, so neither of these sales are
expected to affect the scenic quality as viewed from the highway corridor. Other sales within the geographic area that
are planned in the foreseeable future include District salvage sales and the Lower Eldorado timber sale to the wesL
The harvesting activities for these sales will also be designed to meet adopted scenic quality objectives. Thus, it is
anticipated that the cumulative effects of past, present, and future actions will meet the adopted scenic quality
objectives for the U.S. Highway 12 and Lolo Trail corridors.
·
irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resoarees: None known or suspected.
Adverse Eft'ects Wbleh Cannot Be Avoided: None known or suspected.
NortIa LoeIIIa Face £IS
150
CMpterFou
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3. Tribal Treaty Rights
The Nez Perce Tribe has "the right of taking fish at all usual and accustomed places...together with the privilege
of hunting, gathering roots and berries..." The following estimates the effects of proposed treatments on these
tribal activities:
a. Fishing
Alternative 1: Current recovery trends would continue in the area's streams. However, some sediment
would continue to enter the streams due to the lesser amount of restoration projects (road obliterations and
riparian planting), as compared to the action alternatives. The risk of a catastrophic wildfire would continue
to increase which could have an impact on water quality and fish habitat.
Alternatives 2-5: Proposed activities are not likely to have an effect upon the ability of Nez Perce Tnoal
members to exercise their right to fish within aDd near the North Lochsa Face area. Any negative effects
upon fish habitat are expected to be minimal, not likely to affect fish populations. There are restoration
projects common to all alternatives that have the potential to benefit fish habitat. Prescn'bed burning,
although a potential short term sediment producer, may benefit aquatic and riparian habitat over the long
tenn by reducing the risk of catastrophic wildfires.
b. Hunting
Alternative 1: There would be DO impact on Tnoal hunting. However, the lack of activities that would
improve elk habitat (prescribed fire and timber harvest) would contribute to the continued decline in elk
populations over the long-term. Forage production would continue to decline as current browse vegetation
ages and is over-topped by competing conifers. It is anticipated that areas of browse forage on winter range
would decline by 1/3 to 112 by the year 2003.
Alternatives 2-5: There is currently an elk habitat initiative aimed at addressing the declining elk herds
within the Oearwater Basin. Treatments proposed for North Lochsa Face support this initiative by
improving elk habitat, with Alternatives 2, 3, and 5 treating the largest percentage of elk winter range for
browse improvement. This could in the long term benefit tribal hunting. Access Options 2-4 would limit
motorized access, with Access Option 4 being the most restrictive during the fall hunting season.
c. Gathering Activities
Alternative 1: Common gathering sites for camas are located outside of the analysis area, although camas
may exist in and around some of the area's meadows. The gathering of whitebark pine seeds occurs along
the Lolo Trail corridor, and berries, such as huckleberries and elderberries, are common throughout the
analysis area. All of these sites would remain in their current condition.
Alternatives 2-5: No activities, burning or timber harvest, would occur in the meadow areas. These
activities could have a short-term impact on berry bushes, although in the long-term, studies show enhanced
growth of berries after burning. Also, mushrooms flourish after a fire. Only Alternatives 2, 3, and 5 have
prescn1>ed fire proposed along the Lolo Trail Corridor, which would stimulate the regeneration of whitebark
pine. Overall, the impact on Tribal gathering activities from proposed vegetative management activities
should be minimal.
Cgmgladve Elrects on Treaty 81pts
Geographic Boundary: As agreed to in the 1855 Treaty, the Nez Perce Tribe still retains the treaty rights within
a 7.7 million acre boundary, which includes most of the Clearwater National Forest and all of the North Lochsa
Face area.
N..... I A8sa F~ EIS
lSI
I
TIlDe Frame: Proposed actions are planned for completion in approximately ten years, with final site preparation
adding an additional two years. Given this time frame, these sights should be fully revegetated by the year 2025.
Past, PraeDt, aDd Foreseeable Future ActloDS: District salvage sales, other Forest sales, special fo!eSt products
program, access restrictions, and the Lewis aDd Oark bicentennial.
I
I
District salvage sales and similar ones on the rest of the Forest are primarily targeting deteriorating stands along open
road systems in areas having few, if any, resource issues. This should result in DO additional effects on Tribal treaty
rights. Impacts could result from larger Forest sales, such as those proposed in close proximity to the Lolo Trail
corridor or popular Tribal use sites. However, consultation with the Tribe would be initiated with each sale proposal,
and appropriate design or mitigation measures would be implemented to minimize or eliminate any adverse effects.
I
I
Implementation of access options that limit motorized access could affect access of tribal members for fishing,
hunting, and gathering. However, access options include opportunities for disabled person access, and the more
traditional means of accessing areas by walking or riding stock are not limited in any of the access options.
I
Impacts resulting from visitor use associated with the Lewis and Oarle Bicentennial Observance have the potential to
result in resource damage to important tribal sites, such as historic trail corridors, cairns, and traditional gathering,
hunting and fishing areas. Currently, the Forest is working with the tribe on a strategic plan for the bicentennial
period which includes protection and monitoring of these sites.
I
I
Irrevenlble aDd Irretrievable CollUllltmeat of Resources: None known or suspected.
Adverse Eft'eets WhIch CaIlDot Be Avoided: None known or suspected.
4. Heritage Resources
The Lewis and Oarle and Nee-Mee-Poo National Historic Trail corridors partially fall within the Fish, Hungery, and
Willow Creek drainages. These travel corridors carry national significance and are designated as non-motorized
travel routes. The only remaining undeveloped segment of the original Lewis and aark route is found here in the
Hungery Creek drainage. This is the only place in the country where a person could choose to follow the historic
route without aid of a developed trail tread just as the original explorers did. These trail corridors and the primitive
nature of these three drainages aid in establishing an unique "sense of place" character for the areas recreationists.
Maintenance of this character is highly valued by the areas users.
AIte.....tlves 2, 3 aDd 5: These alternatives propose prescribed fire in the Lolo Trail area to accomplish ecosystem
restoration. No long-term direct, indirect, or cumulative effects are anticipated to either the Lewis aud Oark or NeeMee-Poo National Historic Trail corridors as a result of the burning. Vegetation along these trail corridors has been
historically rejuvenated using fire, and American Indian's historically burned the corridor to keep the trail clear for
passing to the traditional buffalo hunting grounds. However, short-term direct effects could include dissatisfaction of
recreational users who may wish to use the trails during burning or shortly thereafter. This dissatisfaction may be a
result of experiencing smoke and exclusion from the area during burning, or a blackened, landscape just after the
burning.
Short-term effects also include damage to the trail drainage structures (i.e. burned water bars) or to trail signs. These
effects are easily mitigated by incorporating a trail maintenance and restoration plan with the prescribed fire plan.
Visitor dissatisfaction, especially from those planning to experience the Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail
during the upcoming bicentennial celebrations, may also be mitigated by interpreting the use of fire along the trail
corridors prior to and after burning. Understanding the natural role of fire may lessen visitor dissatisfaction and help
mitigate the effects resulting from visitor dissatisfaction associated with the "sense of place" concept.
Nortla LodIsa Face ElS
152
I
I
~I
•I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ongoing research (Russell 1995) is attempting to establish evidence that the mapped location of the Lewis and Oark
National Historic Trail may not be the original travel route of the explorers. The evidence is fairly strong indicating
the original route and associated American Indian routes may not be in Hungery Creek but farther south in the
western portion of Fish Creek. Until the actual route is verified, protection of alternative routes is necessary. While
no vegetation treatments are proposed over the alternative route, the prescribed fire patch located north of Mex
Mountain Work Center in sections 28 and 33 comes very close to this route. The prescribed fire is reminiscent of
natural disturbance regimes and would have no long-term effects on the route. However, irreversible short-term
direct effects could occur if the tire burned the little remaining evidence needed to verify this route, and the same
would be true if mechanical or hand control lines were constructed over this location.
Access Options 1 aDd 4: These options may have the most effect on this character by not limiting development
of motorized use within these drainages.
Aeeess Option 2: This option best protects the primitive character by proposing an area closure to motorized use
in Zone A (Hungery, Willow, and Fish Creek drainages) except on primary forest roads (i.e. Lolo Motorway,
Boundary Peak, and Middle Butte Roads).
Aeeess OptioD 3: This option was developed to address motorized trail use within the area, using mitigation to
maintain the primitive character. This option proposes a motorized area closure for Hungery and Willow Creek
drainages, except for primary forest roads and snowmachine use within the Lolo Motonvay corridor. If
implemented, part of a monitoring plan that goes with Access Option 3 would ensure limited motorized use does
not exceed existing levels in the Fish, Hungery and Willow Creek drainages (see AppendixA).
Geograpble Boandary: NLF planning area, from the Lolo Trail corridor to the west end of the Highway 12
corridor at Kooskia, including the Lochsa Wild and Scenic River corridor.
Time Frame: Year 2012 (year of last activity including slash bums).
Past, Present, and Foreseeable Future Aetloas: Prescribed fire; District salvage sales; Pierce sales affecting
Lolo Trail coJ!idor; and the Lewis and aark bicentennial.
Prescribed fire treatments lessen the potential for catastrophic wildfires to occur. They would have an effect on
the scenery of the area surroUDding the National Historic Trail Corridors aud other historic trails and sites.
However, since proposed prescribed burning is designed to mimic natural fire patterns, the appearance would be
that of a natural evenL Catastrophic wildfires, on the other hand, may result in fire patterns and fire intensities
that could damage and/or destroy important cultural sites and landscapes.
District salvage sales, including the East Bridge Salvage east of Syringa, as well as the Upper Middle, Knoll
Camp, Dollar Lunch, and Lower Eldorado timber sales are planned through the year 2002. With the exception of
salvage sales, these future projects are designed as partial cuts to commercially thin existing timber stands, with
no associated site preparation treatments which could result in surface disturbance. Each of these sales would
have heritage resource swveys conducted and mitigation measures recommended to minimize or eliminate
impacts.
The potential exists to dramatically increase recreational visitor use to the area during the Lewis and Ouk
Bicentennial Observance period (1999 through 2008). Potential accommodations to meet visitor needs may
include: facility improvements along the Lolo Motorway and Highway 12 Corridors; increased visitor services;
and additional interpretive opportunities throughout the geographic boundary described above. The potential
exists for resource damage to important cultural sites such as historic trail corridors and tribal cairns, if visitors are
not appropriately educated, and use is not adequately monitored. The strategic plan for the bicentennial is being
developed by the Forest to incorporate additional public input aDd analysis for the protection and monitoring of
cultural sites.
irreversible aDd irretrievable Co_ltmeDt of Resourees: Escaped prescribed fire or wildfire is capable of
destroying certain archaeological sites (i.e. peeled trees, lookouts, and cabins).
NortIl LoellA Face EIS
153
meets
Adverse
WhIeh Camaot Be Avoided: Standard avoidance procedmes (see Otapter Two) would be
implemented to avoid adverse effects to heritage resource sites.
s.
Commonity Economics
Although amenity and commodity resource values are both important, trade-offs between them are difficult to
measure in monetary terms. This economic analysis focused on those values which could be quantified, thus it has a
timber management emphasis.
a. Economic Erreds
Employment and income within the market area are based on two timber-related sectors of the economy, those
being the timber industry and county roads and schools that receive funds from the 25% FUDd payments to
counties. In the timber industry sector, each million board feet that is harvested would require the direct
employment of loggers, truck drivers, mill owners and mill workers. Roads built to access timber require heavy
equipment operators. In the county road and school sector the 25% FUDd payment is sent to the counties from
where the timber was harvested (all proposed harvest is in Idaho County) to fund county road and school
programs. Thus, a portion of teaching and road jobs are tied to timber harvest on this project.
Road obliteration also provides jobs and income to the local economy. In addition to the heavy equipment
operators required to obliterate the roads, there are also jobs created for laborers preforming erosion control and
project inspection. In 1998, for example, 12 miles of road were obliterated in the Walde drainage of Pete King
Creek. A total of $200,000 was spent on the project, which at its peak employed 3 excavators, 2 dozers, 4
dumptrucks, 4 laborers, and 3 inspectors.
In addition there are indirect and induced economic effects, such as grocery stores, gas stations and equipment
suppliers to those individuals directly tied to timber harvest. Each dollar of income paid to a mill worker, for
example, travels through the local economy as it moves from one business to another until it finally leaves the
market area.
b. Estimated Economic Impacts
Basic informatioD utilizes the Forest Service MirocIMPLAN model, which tracks employment and income of the
counties identified as the market area. The coefficients used were developed from the 1997 Oearwater National
Forest Timber Sale Program Information Reporting System (fSPIRS), a reporting system developed jointly with
the General Accounting Office and the Forest Service. The coefficients used from TSPIRS were:
Related Jobs Generated
Income to Communities
26.9 per 1.0 mmbf
$1,091,190 per 1.0
mmbf
$50,194 per 1.0
mmbf
$163,690 per 1.0
mmbf
$239,930 per 1.0
mmbf
Payments to Counties
Federal Income Tax
Generated
Total Gross Receipts
The following table on Jobs and Income displays the economic consequences of implementing the alternatives of
timber harvest activities that are relative to local employment and income:
154
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 4.30 • Jobs and Inc:ome
Alt
Volume
(MMBF)
Related Jobs
Generated
10
79
72
269
2125
1937
2017
1345
1
2
3
3a
4/5
7S
SO
Income to
CoIDDlDDities
Paymeats
to Counties
$10,911900
$86,204,010
$78,565,680
$81,839,2S0
$54,559,500
$501,940
$3,965,326
$3,613,968
$3,764,550
$2,509,700
Federal
Income
Tax
Generated
$1,636,900
$12,931,510
$11,785,680
12,276,750
8,184,500
Total Gross
Receipts
$2,399,300
$18,954,470
$17,274,960
$17,994,750
$11,996,soo
c. Predicted Stompage and Present Net Value
Each Alternative produces a different level of benefits and costs associated with timber harvest, road work,
fuel treatment, reforestation, and other related timber harvest activities. This part of the economi~ analysis
focuses on the relative differences in these benefits and costs between altematives by displaying the
following:
Advertised Rate - the minimum dollar amount for which a timber offering can be sold.
Predicted High Bid - the amount the winning bidder is predicted to offer for a timber sale based on
Transaction Evidence Appraisal model.
Present Net Value - the benefits (market prices and nonmarket values) discounted to a specific point in time,
minus costs discounted to that same time. Present net value compresses values into an equivalent single
time period which allows comparison of altematives. Present net value is used in timber sales, because there
is a flow of costs and benefits over time. An altemative with a positive PNV is expected to be above costs
and not a below cost proposal.
A helicopter production and cost estimation program (HELIPACE) and a timber sale planning and analysis
system (XSPAS) were used in this analysis as follows:
HBI wACE - Since a substantial amount of each altemative would require helicopter yarding to met the
vegetative objectives, all proposed helicopter units were analyzed with the HEUPACE model to assess
economic feasibility and provide cost estimates for stumpage appraisal purposes.
Table 4.31 • BeHcopter Volume
-Mi-IVII;~i'j
All.
PeteKiDa
Face
CanyoD/Deaclman
FIsh Cr.
1
--
-
-
9.5
9.5
9.5
4.0
4.0
4.0
3.3
3.3
--
2
3
3.
4
S
3.9
3.9
3.5
3.6
3.6
-
--
-
-
Total
--
17.4
17.4
17.4
6.9
6.9
TSPAS - was developed by the Economics Research Unit of the Intermountain Research Station to help
planners design and evaluate timber sale altematives aDd to simultaneously accomplish the economic
requirements of a project-level analysis. It was used to appraise the altematives and assess the Present Net
Value of each.
Information provided by these economic models was used to understand the relative difference between
alternatives rather than predict actual "values" for each altemative. The following table displays the
predicted stumpage and present net value (PNV) by drainage for each altemative:
Nortla LocIasa Faee E1S
IS5
-
T 8 ble 4.32 Preel"IC ted S tumP82e an dPresent Net Va Iue
Alt
Volume
(MMBF)
1
2
3
3a
4/5
10.0
79.0
72.0
75.0
50.0
Volume
(CCF)
20,000
158,010
144000
150,000
100,000
Advertised
Rate ($tCCn
93.87
92.33
9133
93.59
103.74
Predicted High
Bid ($tCCI)
PNV
($1000)
112.78
111.24
110.24
112.50
122.29
1,609
6592
4,633
5,786
4,047
In summary, all of the alternatives have a positive PNV, and oooe are CODSideted a below cost proposal.
Alternative 1 bas the lowest PNV with $1.6 million. Alternatives 2 and 3a, with their large associated
volumes, have the highest PNVs and generate the greatest revenue (Table 4.32) to COUDty and federal
governments. Although Alternatives 4 and 5 harvest less volume than the other action alternatives, their
PNVs keep pace by eliminating two-thirds of the costly helicopter units.
Geop-apblc Boudary: Idaho, Oearwater, Lewis, and Nez Perce Counties.
TIme Fnme: Year 2012.
Pa~
Present, aDd Foreseeable Faaan Acdou: District salvage sales; Forest S-year timber sale plan; Lewis
and Clark bicentennial; and Forest Plan revision by year 2002.
The Forest S-year timber sale plan (1999-2003) averages 44 MMBF per year, with North I..ochaa Face sales
accounting for up to 30% of the volume offered each year. This is up from the 30 MMBF offeted on the Forest in
recent years, which should inaease payments to the counties and receipts to the National Treasury.
The Lewis and Clarke Bicentennial is expected to have a large economic impact on the SlD'IOunding communities.
Those communities located along U.S. Highway 12 (i.e. Lowell, Syringa, Kooskia, Kamiah, and Orofino) will
probably be.impacted the most, since most of the interpretation and bicentennial activities are planned to be
focused along the Highway 12 corridor. There will be some visitors who will want to travel the Lolo Trail
Corridor, which will benefit some of the more inland communities (i.e. Pierce and Weippe). The current number
of outfitter and guide businesses licensed to provide tours on the Lolo Trail will also benefit from the bicentennial,
and it may be determined that additional commelcial operators wi)) be Deeded during this time.
A catastrophic wildfire bas the potential to wipe out existing and future commelcial stands of timber. This is
especially true in the less developed areas (i.e. Fish Creek drainage), where years of successful fire suppression
have increased the risk of such an event. Currendy, most of the Fish Creek drainage is off limits to timber harvest
due to the Forest Plan lawsuit setdement agreement. The planned revision of the Forest Plan could change this
direction, in which a potential opening of this area would increase the economic base (related to timber outputs)
for the local area. However, in light of the upcoming Lewis and Clarke bicentennial, one might expect the
opposite, including legislative action to desigoate this area as wilderness.
irreversible ad Irretrievable Commltmellt of Reso1ll"ftS: None known or suspected.
Adverse
meets WhIch CaDDot Be Avoided:
None known or suspected.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
G. Fire Risk aDd Air Quality
The following discussion focuses on the environmental consequences of each alternative and its affect on the risk of
wildfire and resulting smoke production. Included in the discussion are the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of
vegetative treatments as related to large tire potential and smoke production. Direct impacts are those which directly
reduce the risk of a large tire (i.e. the burning of logging slash). Indirect impacts are those that alter the fire regime time
frame resulting in an increase in future large tire potential (i.e. continued fire suppression). Cumulative impacts are the
sum of the direct and indirect impacts from past and proposed activities which result in a vegetative pattern conducive
to catastrophic wildfire.
The principal factor affecting air quality is wood smoke. Dust generated from road construction, reconstruction, or
increased vehicle traffic may also temporarily affect air quality. Smoke particulate emissions were calculated using
guidelines of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Effects of the alternatives on air quality are measured by the
acres treated and emission produced, using the following formula:
(Total treatment acres) x (fuel load tons per acres) x (emission factor) x (consumption percent) = total PM-l0
emitted in pounds. PM-l0 is particulate matter less than or equal to 10 microns in diameter.
Predicted fuel loadings were estimated by use of professional judgment and by analyzing harvest methods, predicted
h8lVest volumes, stand diagnoses, and photo guides for appraising downed woody fuels.
Alteraadve 1: If fire could be excluded, other natural processes would continue to recycle biomass at a slow rate.
The~ would be increased mortality from insects and disease, plus the accumulation of fuels. The continued addition of
fuels to the system by successfu1 suppression of ti~ (delaying tire entry into an area) would iucrease the risk of large
stand-replacing fires (1,000 acres or greater in size) over the next 10 to 50 years. The exclusion of fire is a misnomer.
Fire suppression only delays the inevitable it does not remove fire from the system. Wildfires locations cannot be
predicted precisely because of the effects of random events (i.e. weather patterns, lightning occurrence, and fuel
moisture). Existing vegetation patterns, the primary result of large staDd-replacing fires, would likely continue to occur.
The current 5-year small sale program (primarily planned in the Pete King Creek drainage) would have no measurable
impact on the overall fuels picture.
Fire intensities wo~d increase over time as fuels continue to build up. The risk of a large staDd replacing tire would
continue to increase, with one or mo~ large fires being inevitable even with current tire suppression efforts.
The direct and indirect effects would be the potential risk of a large ti~ event Air quality would be affected by an
increase in the frequency and size of wildfires over time. Increased fuel loading and tire hazard are expected, since
more than 85% of the stands in this area have the potential for stand-replacing tires. Alternative 1 does not attempt to
reduce this risk by treating high risk stands or ~storing fire to the ecosystem.
Air quality could deteriorate significantly due to smoke from wildfires as more area becomes heavily fueled. If a
catastrophic fire ~~, the amount of particulates could be as high as 15,000 tons of PM-lO material from a single
event.
The volume of PM-l0 material produced from the burning of activity fuels (logging slash) should range from 5 to 8.9
tons per acre. All burning activity would be done in accordance with ~guIatory guidelines on air quality.
Cumulative effects would be the increased effects on air quality, resulting from the cumulative buildup of forest fuels
and the eventual fire disturbance process. There would be a continued increase in the risk of catastrophic wildtire.
Alternatives 2-5: Fire would be reintroduced through ecosystem underburning and burning to produce a mosaic of
mixed-severity fires along with activity fuel treatment. Although this is an attempt to modify the impact of future
wildfires, allowing natural fire cycles to return to the ecosystem is not a feasible option, siBCe the current threat of
uncontrolled fire supported by unnatural accumulations of fuels is unacceptable. Thus, the reintroduction of tire would
be done on a very limited and controlled basis.
Nortla LoellA FMe EIS
157
Cllapter Fou
Direct effects would result from 6,130 acres of mixed severity bums and 6,510 acres of potential UDderbums with
Alternatives 2, 3, and 5; approximately 930 acres of mixed severity bums and 6,900 acres of potential underburns with
Alternative 3a; and 1,040 acres (all underburns) with Alternative 4. Activity fuel treatment (slash burning) would treat the
fuel associated with the various amounts of logging proposed under each alternative.
There would be a reduction in fuel loading and fire hazard for some of the higher risk portions of the landscape. There
would be short-term impacts on air quality and visibility. A small amount of merchantable quality timber would be lost as
a result of burning under Alternatives 2, 3, and 5. This would occur in the Fish Creek drainage, where timber harvest is not
an option.
An accurate accounting of smoke particulate production is not possible for the ecosystem burns. These bums would
require multiple entries that reduce the fuel load in stages. 'The efficiency of combustion along with the amount of fuel
consumed would vary with each entry. The volume of PM-l0 material produced should range from 5 to 20 tons per acre.
Due to the controlled nature of these burns, particulate emissions should be less than those expected from wildfires in the
same area.
An indirect effect of burning would be a temporary reduction of public use of adjacent roads because of safety closures and
smoke production.
Effects on the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness Oass 1 Airshed are very unlikely, due to the distance from the bum areas and
the normal weather patterns that would transport smoke away from the Wilderness. This potential impact should be further
limited by following smoke management procedures identified in the North Idaho Smoke Management Agreement.
The action alternatives (especially Alternative 2, 3, and 5) would lessen the potential for large fires (spread and intensities)
and the cumulative effects on air quality below that identified for Alternative 1. Wildfires would continue to occur within
these areas but the suppression opportunity would be enhanced by the treatment over time, which would decrease spread
and intensities in these high risk areas. Because of current technological limitations, it is not possible to accurately
complete a comp~hensive, numerical-based assessment of cumulative effects of fire risk. Implementation of harvest and
ecosystem burning would partially reduce the risk of a large-scale fire in the planning area. However, given the unnatmal
high accumulation of fuels, due to historical fire suppression, a large-scale fire may still occur. Alternatives 2, 3, and 5
treat the most acreage so therefore would have the greatest impact in decreasing the risk of large, high-intensity wildfires.
Alternatives 3a and 4 restrict ecosystem burning in the Fish Creek drainage, and the risk of catastrophic fire would continue
to increase in this are&.
The cost of wildfire suppression would be modified with implementation of the action alternatives. Current cost for
wildfi~ supp~ssion, including resource loss, range from $300 to $1,800 per acre. Prescribed burning cost range from $25
to $200 per acre. The prevention or size limitation of even one large wildfire would be an economic plus. Also, firefighter
safety would be enhanced with implementation of the action alternatives due to the reduction in risk of high intensity, fast
spreading wildfire.
Geop-aphlc Boaadary: North Idaho Airshed 12B and 13 and Montana Airshed 3A-Oark Fork. The North Idaho
Airsheds cover the state of Idaho from the Salmon River to the northern St. Joe River divide, excluding an area west of
Kamiah, Craigmont, aDd Ahsahka. The North Idaho Airshed 13 includes the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness Oass 1
Airshed, and the Montana Airshed 3A- Oarle Fork covers Mineral and Missoula counties.
TIme Frame: Year 2012.
Past, Preseat, aDd Foreseeable Future AetioDs: Changes in wildland fire policy; similar prescribed fire in adjacent
airsheds, and Powell and N. Fork timber sales.
Nortll LoeIIIa FMe ElS
158
C..pterF....
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Changes in Federal fire policy will allow a wide range of suppression responses to wildland fires. 'The new policy
directs federal agencies to achieve a balance between suppression (to protect life, property, and resources) and fire use
(to regulate fuels and maintain healthy ecosystems). Aggressive fire suppression will remain an essential cornerstone of
the Forest Service mission. However, the appropriate suppression response to some wildland fires will only be
monitoring fire activity to insure that prestated resource benefit objectives are being meL Implementation of this policy
will be incremental, with the development of fire management plans. The end result may be an additional increase in
wildland fire acreages.
Prescribed burning (management ignited fire) in the geographic area is expected to increase ten fold in the analysis time
frame. This is in response to the absence of periodic low intensity burning in short interval fire adapted forests and the
absence of mosaic pattern burning in long interval fire adapted forests. This exclusion of natural tire regimes has been a
major factor in the increased severity and number of wildland fires. Prescribed burning will involve the treatment of
activity generated fuels (logging slash) and ecosystem burning (the reintroduction of fire for resource benefit). The
acres of slash burning will decrease as logging activity decreases across the National Forest system. 1be acres of
prescribed burning for resource benefit will dramatically increase with the completion of new fire management plans for
Federal lands.
Air quality in general will be negatively impacted by the increase in both wildland and prescribed fire smoke. 1be
negative impacts should not exceed the Environmental Protection Agency's federal ambient air quality standards, except
possibly in very isolated incidences under the most severe circumstances. Federal air quality standards have never been
exceeded in this geographic area from prescribed or wildland fire smoke. There may be times when burning will
approach these standards due to unforeseeable conditions, but monitoring will take place to prevent such oc.currences.
Particulate emission regulations are under review and may be tightened, significantly affecting prescribed burning. Air
quality standards do not currently regulate wildland fire smoke. Regulatory changes may include strategies to protect air
quality by trading increased prescribed burning for uncontrolled wildland fi~ emissions
The air quality in the Oass 1 Airshed over the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness should not be significantly impacted by
the NLF prescribed burning, due to the prevailing winds and the controlled manner and timing of ignition. Wildland
tires in the NLF area may have some minor impacts on the Northern boundary of the Wilderness Airshed. These
impacts will be considered when selecting the appropriate management response to the wildland fire.
The north end of North Idaho Airshed 13, the majority of North Idaho Airshed 12B, and occasionally Montana Airshed
3A all will have some long term uegative impacts from the increasing number and severity of wildland fires. The
suppression response to a wildland fire will take into consideration the potential smoke to be generated by that fire
along with consideration of the cumulative effects of smoke from other fires burning in the geographic area. Prescribed
burning, due to the increasing acreages across the geographic area, will have some short term impacts on these airsheds.
The prescribed burns will be ignited when weather and fuel conditions minimize emission impacts on populated areas.
In the long term, prescribed burning will reduce overall smoke impacts compared to the same acres burning under
wildland fire conditions. To reach this condition there will be periods of smoke and hazy skies. It is important to
remember that in the western landscape, tire and its attendant smoke has been with the planet from the beginning.
Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment or Resources: None known or suspected.
Adverse meets Which Cannot Be Avoided: Smoke from prescribed fire would temporarily reduce air quality,
which could have short-term effects on recreation, visual quality, and Wilderness characteristics.
Nortll LoellA FMe £IS
159
C)aapler Fow
H. Other Required Disclosures
meets or Alteraadves on PrIme Farm Laud, RaqelaDd, and Forest Laud:
All alternatives are in keeping with the
intent of Secretary of Agriculture Memorandum 1827 for prime land. The analysis area does not contain any prime farm
lands or rangelands. "Prime" forest land does not apply to lands within the National Forest system. In all alternatives,
Forest Service lands would be managed with a sensitivity to the effects on adjacent lands.
Energy Requirements or Alternatives: There are no unusual energy requirements for implementing any of the
alternatives.
Elrects or A1ternadves on Mlnorldes and Women: 'There are no differences among the alternatives in effects on
American Indians, women, other minorities, or the Civil Rights of any American citizen.
Impaets on MInority and Low-lDeome CommDDitles: In regards to Environmental Justice Executive Order 12898, the
human health and environmental effects of proposed activities will not disproportionately impact minority and low income
populations. The effects of proposed activities on the treaty rights of the Nez Perce Tribe and local communities are
discussed in other sections of this chapter.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
•I
I
•
•
NorIIa LocIIIa FMe ElS
160
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
•I
•I
"II
[
I
I
II
-II
CHAPTER FIVE
LIST OF PREPARERS
De Interdisciplinary Team:
George Harbaugh -- NEPA Coordinator (Team Leader) -- 20 years in silviculture, timber managemen~ and
NEPA, including 2 years in wild & scenic river administration.
Jerry Beard - Timber Management Assistant (recently retired) -- 31 years in timber management.
Dennis Talbert -- Wildlife Biologist -- 2S years in wildlife and fisheries, including 9 years in watershed
management and 8 years in range management.
Kris Hazelbaker -- Forester, Ecologist/Silviculturist -- 22 years in silviculture, ecology, timber management,
recreation and wilderness management, and NEPA.
Charlie Elliott -- Zone Fire Management Officer - 20 years in wildland
fi~
and aviation.
Jim Mital -- Soil Scientist/Forest Ecologist -- 19 years of research and management experience in forest
pathology, ecologyt soils, and silviculture, including 3 years teaching at the University of Idaho.
Debbie Martin - Zone Fish Biologist (recently transfered to National Marine Fisheries Service) - 3 years as
a fisheries biologist.
Jim Capurso -- Fisheries Biologist -- 12 years as Fisheries Biologist
Stephanie Grubb -- Zone GIS Coordinator (Maps) - 10 years in silviculture, including 3 years database
management, 2 years in timber presaJe, and 5 years in GIS.
Carol Hennessey.- Recreation Specialist -- 20 years with the Forest Service, working in timber, silviculture,
and recreation, including 5 years in developed recreation and trails.
Doug Shaller -- NEPA/Planner (recently retired) -- 26 years in silviculture, timber management, recreation,
cultural resources, and NEPA, including 18 years in the treatment of noxious weeds.
Cynthia Lane -- Lochsa District Ranger -- 19 years with the Forest Se~ce, including 8 years as a District
Ranger.
Technical Support:
Dick Jones -- Forest Hydrologist
Jed Simon -- District Hydrologist
Dave Schoen -- Biological Technician
Deanna Riebe -- Public Information Officer
Steve Bess and John Case -- Logging Systems/Economic Modelling
Chris Kuykendall -- Noxious WeedslWildlife
Norm Schluessler -- Transportation Planner
Dan Davis -- Forest Wildlife Biologist
Pat Murphy -- Forest Fisheries Biologist
Diana Jones -- Landscape Architect
Lisa Klinger -- Scenic Easement Administrator
Robbin Johnston -- Archaeologist
Allen Pinkham -- Nez Perce Tribal Government Liaison, Northern Region
North Lodlsa Faee EIS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CHAPTER SIX
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
This chapter discusses public involvement obtained during the North Lochsa Face analysis. Included are:
public participation opportunities; a list of those who commented on the Draft ElS; comments received and our
response; and a distribution list for the Final ElS.
Public involvement was encouraged throughout the planning process. There were several opportunities for
public participation during this analysis: 1) through press releases and public meetings about the proposal; 2)
after filing the Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS; and 3) during two 45-day comment periods on the Draft EIS.
Public Participation Opportonities
Many opportunities were used to inform and involve the public throughout this analysis. The following is a
chronology of public involvement activities:
5(25/95
A letter introducing the North Lochsa Face project and providing information about future
workshops was mailed out to a large Forest mailing list.
6/22,27/95
Two public workshops (Kooskia and Moscow) were held to discuss ecosystem
management and the North Lochsa Face project. They drew a total of 30 participants.
A social assessment was completed as part of the North Lochsa Face landscape
assessment.
9/5,6/95
Interviews were conducted of 15 people living near the analysis area to learn their ideas
and concerns. They represented a wide spectrum of viewpoints.
4/22/96
- A Scoping Letter on the recreation and access management strategy for North Lochsa Face
was mailed to interested publics, generating a total of 54 responses.
5/13/96
A public meeting, hosted by the Concerned Sportsman of Idaho, was held in Moscow,
Idaho on May 13, 1996. Approximately 50 people attended to hear our presentation on the
proposed recreation and access management strategy for North Lochsa Face.
5/14/96
A similar public meeting, hosted by the High Mountain Trail Association, was held in
Kooskia, Idaho on May 14, 1996. Approximately 60 people attended this meeting. A
public working group began meeting two months later to address comments and issues
brought forth by attendees at this meeting.
5/20/96
An interdisciplinary team was formed to conduct a NEPA analysis of vegetative and
aquatic management proposals for the North Lochsa Face area, using the philosophy of
ecosystem management.
6(27/96
The NFMA analysis for North Lochsa Face, initiated in 1/95 and the basis for the NEPA
analysis, was completed and documented in a draft assessment and made available to the
public.
7/11/96
Overview and background information on the proposed recreation and access management
strategy, requested by the public, was mailed out on July 11, 1996.
7/12/96
As part of the Forest's NEPA ~view process, a meeting was held at the Forest Supervisor's
Office (S.O.) to present the "vegetative and aquatic management" proposed actions,
purpose and need, preliminary issues, and the public involvement plan. Acceptance was
given by the Forest Supervisor and his staff.
7/17/96
A public working group was formed to consider different options for access management.
Attendees represented different, often opposing, points of view, but they worked together
in a collaborative learning environment, often coming to agreement on access options.
The Forest Service was a member of this group, and information generated from working
group meetings was used to further the range of alternatives to the proposed recreation and
access management strategy. Group participants were aware that any management options
they proposed would be considered and analyzed along with comments from any other
groups or individual citizens.
7/22/96
A Scoping Letter describing vegetative management proposals was mailed to interested
publics.
8/9/96
A Notice of Intent was published in the Federal Register. The initial 4S-day public
comment period ended on September 23, 1996.
8/17,18/96
A combination field trip and working session was held at the Mex Mountain workcenter
for the access working group. The objective of this session was to spend informal time
talking to each other, exploring concerns and ideas, and gaining understanding.
8/18/96 &
9n/96
Public field trips were conducted that depicted proposed vegetative actions out on the
ground. Although attendance was low, a lot of good ideas were shared during these trips.
8(28/96
An access working group meeting was held in Orofino, Idaho. The purpose of this
meeting was to review those points that all parties were in agreement with, further discuss
those where there was disagreement, and provide input on a monitoring plan.
9/96
A content analysis was used to summarize public responses to the vegetative management
-proposals. A total of 22 responses were received from other Federal and State agencies,
environmental interests, organizations, timber industry, private individuals, and Forest
Service employees.
1213/96
An access working group meeting was held in Orofino, Idaho. At this meeting the access
lOT presented an alternative (described as Access Option 3 in this document) to the
proposed recreation and access management strategy (described as Access Option 2). This
alternative combined Forest Service input with some of that generated from previous
working group meetings. Also at this meeting, the working group was informed that the
access alternatives would be analyzed along with the vegetative management proposals as
part of the North Lochsa Face EIS. However, there would be separate decisions made for
the access and vegetative proposals.
12/10/96
A "Status Report" (the first of three) that highlighted ecosystem terminology and reported
on the progress of the analysis was mailed to those publics that had expressed interest in
the project. This report also initiated the 6O-day public comment period on creating
openings greater than 40 acres in size, which some of the proposed treatments will do in
mimicking natural disturbance events.
North LoeIIsa Face EIS
164
CbaplerSix
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
An access working group meeting was held in Lewiston, Idaho at the Idaho Department of
12119/96
Fish and Game. At this meeting, members of the IDT and the access working group
discussed the specifics of the monitoring plan for Access Option 3.
1/9/97
A meeting was held at the S.O. to present final issues, the range of alternatives, and the
description of the existing conditions. Concurrence was obtained from the Forest
SupeIVisor and his staff.
1/28/97
Members of the lOT were invited to a "citizens group" meeting held at the Three Rivers
Timber Company in Kamiah, Idaho, to give a short presentation on the background of the
project and proposed alternatives. This group was self-formed, without Forest Service
representation. The presentation was followed by a question and answer period.
2/27/97
During a Forest meeting with the Nez Perce Tribe, ranger Cindy Lane gave a brief
presentation on the North Lochsa Face analysis.
2128/97
A second Status Report was mailed out to the public. This report highlighted: (1) the
addition of the recreation and access management strategy to the analysis; (2) the range of
alternatives; (3) analyses of water quality, fish, and economic feasibility; and (4) the
revised schedule of events.
3/17/97
The IDT met with the "citizens group" to answer their questions about the analysis.
4/28/97
A meeting was held at the S.O. to review the Draft EIS and select the preferred
alternatives. The Forest Supexvisor selected Alternative 3 as the preferred vegetative and
aquatics management alternative, and the District Ranger selected Access Option 3 as the
preferred recreation and access management strategy.
6/13/97
The Notice of Availability for the Draft EIS was published in the Federal Register.
6/16/97
A legal advertisement for review and request for comments on the Draft EIS appeared in
the Lewiston Morning Tribune (our paper of record). This started the 4S-day public
. comment period which ended on August 1, 1997.
7/8,10/97
Open house meetings were held in Kooskia and Moscow, where IDT members staffed
information booths detailing different aspects of the project. A total of 34 people attended
these meetings. Our final Status Report, highlighting the preferred vegetative and aquatics
management alternative and the preferred access option, was handed out at these meetings.
9/11/97
A field trip with timber industry representatives and Forest engineers was conducted in the
Frenchman Butte and Bimerick Meadows areas to assess reconstruction needs on Forest
Roads 481,483, and 5545.
9/13/97
The District Ranger and Recreation Forester were invited to Wallace, Idaho to speak at an
annual symposium put on by the Idaho Trails Council. They gave a presentation regarding
the proposed recreation and access management strategy.
10/23/97
At the request of timber industry representatives, a field trip was organized to view proposed
burning areas below the Lola MotolWay to discuss their issue about burning commercial size
timber in areas currently not accessible to logging. Instead of the field trip, a group discussion
took place at the Kamiah Ranger Station.
Norda LoeIIIa Face EIS
165
Cu,krSix
1/9/98
In light of public concern about proposed burning in the Fish Creek drainage, the public comment
period on the DEIS was extended to March 2, 1998.
2/12/98
A public hearing that focused on the prescribed fire proposal was held on February 12, 1998, at the
Orofino High School. More than 300 people attended, and over 140 comments were recorded and
later analyzed.
3/98
Members of the IDT met twice this spring with timber industry representatives to further discuss
proposed burning in the Fish Creek drainage. Results from these meetings and the comments
generated at a public hearing were key in the development of burning proposals under Alternative
3a.
List of Dose Who have Commented on the DEIS
The public was given two time periods in which to provide comment on the DEIS; those being June 16 - August
1, 1997, and January 9 - March 2, 1998. Over 200 letters, comment sheets, or documented oral comments were
received from individuals, Federal and State agencies, Nez Perce Tribe, timber industry, and environmental
organizations. Also, numerous phone contacts were made throughout the process with persons calling for
information on the projecL AIl letters or other documented public contacts are located in the project file.
Copies of letters received from federal and State agencies are included at the end of this chapter. Comments on
the DEIS were received from the following sources:
City/State
State aDd Federal AgeDcies
Idaho DepL of rab aod Game (Calvin Groen)
Idaho Dept of Health aDd Welfare - DEQ (Dan Stewart)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Ridwd Partin)
Lewiston, ID
Grangeville, ID
Seattle, WA
State aDd County Government
Boise, ID
Boise, ID
State Senator Judi Danielson
State Senator Marperite McLaughlin
State Representative Cbarles Cuddy
Clearwater County Commissioners (Earl Pickett)
Orofino, 10
Orofino, ID
Nez Peree Tribe
Lapwai, ID
Tribal Exealtive Committee (Samuel Peu.o.ey)
Timber Industry or Interests
Empire Lumber Company (Greg DaDly)
KonlolviUe Lumber CompaDy (Alex lIby)
Podateb Corporation (David Pritdwd)
Three Rivers TlDlber, Inc. (Bill Mulligan)
Weyerhaeuser (Michael FISh)
IndepeDdent Forest Products Association (AI Kington)
IDtermounwn Forest Industry Association (Greg Schildwacbter)
Resource Organization OD Timber Supply (Dan Johnson)
Valley Helicopter Service (James Pope)
Kamiah, ID
Orofino, ID
Lewiston, ID
Kamiah,ID
Coeur d'Alene, ID
Beavenon . OR
Missoula, MT
Nezperce. ID
Clarkston. WA
Environmental Organizations
Missoula. MT
Grangeville, ID
Troy.ID
MaDbanan. KS
Orofino.ID
Viola, ID
Washington D.C.
Missoula, MT
Moscow.1D
Alliance for the Wl1d Rockies (Katherine Deuel)
Back-Couotry Horsemen (Laurena Crabtree)
Clearwater Biodiversity Project (Chuck Pezesbki)
Cleanvater Forest Watcb Coalition (Gerry Synder)
Clearwater Road and Trail Committee (Wendell Stark)
Concerned Spol1Smen of Idaho (Brent DeMeerleer)
Defenders of Wildlife (David Zaber)
The Ecology Center (Jeff Juel)
Friends of the Clearwater (Steve Paulson)
North Locllsa Fam ElS
166
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Environmental OrpDizatioas (continued)
I
Higb Mountain Trail Machine Assoc. (Jack Wllson)
Idaho Conservation League (Larry McLaud)
Idaho Environmental Council (Denais Baird)
Idaho RivelS UDited (Liz Paul)
Idabo Trails Council (Don McPherson)
Inland Empire Public Lands Council (Sara Folger)
Kootenai Environmental Alliance (J .M. Mihelich)
Latah Wildlife Association (Everett Hagen)
The Wilderness Society (Craig Geluke)
Grangeville. ID
Moscow, ID
Moscow,1D
Boise, ID
Boise, ID
Spokane, WA
Coeur d'Alene
Moscow,ID
Boise, ID
Individuals
Michael Steiger
Bob Einhaus
James Fazio
J.GospodDetich
Mary Jackson
Gary Macfarlane
Paul Norstog
Diane Prorak
M. Ratchford
John Swanson
Elwin Hutchins
Dick Willhite
Larry BiDder
Pete Ellsworth
D. GalantuomiDi
Jim Hagedom
Ralph Jackson
J. Moore
Julie Pickrell
AI Poplawsky
B. Schonefeld
Sioux Westervelt
Mike HanDa
Richard Tuck
Skipper Brandl
JoaDie Fauci
Ellen Glaccum
Dick Hallisy
BobLamm
Harvey Neese
Kent Pressman
Craig Rabe
Natalie Shapiro
Roger Williams
John Swanson
Verne Foreman
RonWJSe
MooaDotson
Charles Wood
John MuDigan
Tom Warden
JoDi Kelley
Lyle ErlewiDe
Bob Smeltz
Chuck Weddle
Jack Callen
David Paddison
Walt Shearard
Roger Martinson
Ron Hartig
Lynn Card
WeDdyWedum
JoCoon
T. Moreland
Randy Eller
Roger Inghram
Don Morrow
Lyle Maynard
Charles Hall
Bow comments were identified:
Letters received, including documented face-to-face or phone
conversations, were distributed among IDT members, who highlighted the comments contained in each
document. Opinions were not highlighted. The comments were then grouped by resource issues, and those that
were similar were only listed once.
Many comments claimed that the Draft EIS did not "adequately" disclose scientific data or other information
supporting the conclusions made in the document. In the regulations for implementing NEPA, there is emphasis
that NEPA documents concentrate on the issues that are truly significant to the action in question, rather than
amassing needless detail [40 CFR 1500.1(b)]. The NFMA Assessmen~ located in the project file, provided
much of the scientific data and information for the NEPA analysis. As was stated in the Draft EIS, brief
abstracts of this information were provided for the purposes of reducing the length of the document and
providing the reader with a "plain" english document. This is clearly in line with "reducing paperwork"
direction outlined in 40 CFR 1500.4. Most of the scientific data and other information was incorporated by
reference to the project file [40 CFR 1500.40)]. This document provides the decision maker enough
information to make a reasoned decision, and if needed, the project file is available for further scientific data or
information. Thus, as those types of comments are displayed below, our response will reference location of that
data or information in the project file.
Following the comments that affected the writing of the Final EIS are the rest of the public comments grouped
by resource issues. Each comment is in bold print, followed by our response.
COMMENTS RESULTING IN ADDITIONS OR CHANGES TO THE FEIS
1. You should harvest trees, not bum them_ you should harvest first and thea burn_. it is totaDy illogical not to
harvest all useful products before burning, if burning is necessary••• we are opposed to the burning of
merchaatable timber which is close to existing roads.•• I cannot beUeve that the agency responsible for managiag
the aational forests would propose that they bum commercial timber.
The North Lochsa Face area is a fire-dependent ecosystem, where fire is natural and a necessary force in maintaining
forest health. Decades of successful fire suppression have altered fire patterns and have caused a dramatic change in the
condition of the ecosystem. By mimicking the effects of fire, we are first proposing timber harvest where there is
access and no allocations or legal agreements prohibiting such practices. Prescribed fire is only being proposed where
timber harvest is not permitted or feasible (Alternatives 2, 3, and 5). In response to public comment, we have developed
several alternatives that propose no burning in areas having trees of potential commercial value (Alternatives 3a and 4).
North Locbsa Face £IS
167
CbapterSis
2. RecoDsider a mocllftcadoD of Alternadve 3 that restores the temporary roads described in All. 2.
Alternative 3a has been developed that restores the all but one of the temporary roads described under All. 2.
The temporary road near Van Camp was not included due to the Chiefs anticipated road policy. This
modification was suggested by timber industry with the support of several environmental groups, since the
obliteration of the temporary roads after use would result in minimal to no environmental impacts. All of the
other activities proposed under All. 3 remain unchanged in All. 3a. This alternative is described in detail in
Chapter Two.
3. Option 3 IIlight have some promise if there were really some trigen that kept motorized use at a
reladvely low leveL
monitoring plan has been reworked to include "definitive" trigger language. The plan will allow only
seasonal motorized trailbike use in the Fish Creek drainage at the existing use levels which are relatively low.
]be
4. The moDitoring plaD of Appe,'" A could be made into a soud plaD by: (1) including a wider range
of triger IaDguage; (2) ftxiDg a 33 % the level of permissible ellaDge or deviadon from the Dorm; aDd (3)
stating in clear laaguage what when this norm is exceeded, machine use will be stopped.
Trigger language in the monitoring plan has been expanded to include monitoring of "tread in excess of the 24
inch standard, or noting the occurrence of dual wheel tracks". Also, it DOW includes monitoring of user
complaints.
The variance of the 3-year data average would be used as the level of permissible change or deviation from the
norm after the initial 3-year baseline period. If the permissible change or deviation is exceeded for two
consecutive years, motorized use will be restricted. Restrictions could include additional limiting of use season,
reducing the miles available for motorized trailbike use, limiting the motorized use through a permit system, or
eliminating the motorized use.
s. The trigger secdOD lacks aDY meDtioD of trail width or the arrival of a dual track as causes for
coDcern or analysis..
Trigger #1 now measures treadwear changes, including widening of the tread in excess of the 24 inch standard,
or noting the occurrence of dual wheel tracks. This is defined as a change from the existing maintenance level.-
6. The maps for the vegetative managemeDt are so poor that we reaDy can't tell what will happeD where.
The pubUc DeedS better maps. .
The new maps in the FEIS are an improvement over those in the DEIS. Labeled landmarks and creeks have
been added, as well as other topographic features. However, due to the large size of the analysis area,
imperfections due to scale are unavoidable. Large scale maps are kept at the District and are available for
public viewing.
7. The FEIS should include a map that shows existiDg OpeDings (Le. places cut less thaD 10 yean ago) in
relatioD to the maDy Dew openiDgs that are being plaDned.
This map is located in the project file and is available for public viewing. A landsat color photo of the analysis
area, which includes past management activities, has been added to the FEIS.
FIRE AND AIR QUALITY
8. AD actioD plan is Deeded for lire.
All management ignited prescribed fire is scheduled using the TSMRS data base. Exact dates for the execution
of the bums is impossible to predict due to the variability of the weather. Ignition will not take place until bum
prescriptions are mel. Comprehensive burn plans are prepared and approved well in advance of any ignition.
Nortla l..orha F.... EI~
168
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Also, prior to ignition, contact would be initiated with concerned publics and those likely to be impacted by the
bum.
9. Burning SS MMBF of commercial timber would have aD effect OD jobs and the ecoDomy_ the counties lose
their 2S % of receipts, and that direcdy impacts sdlools and roads in the area_ the best, highest paying jobs in
our local communities depend OD the maaapd timber resouree from federallaDds... the public does Dot waDt to
see timber burned that could supply raw material and jobs to a converting facility in our area.
Burning 55 MMBF of commercial timber would have an effect on jobs and the economy, provided that this timber was
in an area where timber harvest was permitted and/or feasible. However, this area (Fish Creek drainage) is off limits to
timber harvest due to the Forest Plan lawsuit settlement agreement. Even before implementation of the settlement
agreement, a majority of this area was classified as "unsuitable for timber production". Where timber harvest is
permitted, we are proposing alternatives that harvest between 50 and 79 MMBF of commercial timber, which will have
a beneficial effect on jobs and the economy. Also, two of these alternatives (Alternatives 3a and 4) propose no stand
lethal burning in the Fish and Hungery Creeks drainage.
10. Bow can the F.S. state with certainty what the results ofburniDI wUl be?.. there is a risk of aD escaped fire•••
there is risk of losing coDtrol of the prescribed fires and bumiDg a huge area that would leave no security cover
for elk and would DO doubt bum through aDd damage stream bders... logging desired areas before burning can
make fire easier to manage.
The results and risks associated with prescribed burning can never be 100% predicted due to the wide range of
variables associated with weather, topography and fuels. However years of practical burning experience and advances
in fire science and computer modeling have taught us how to limit the risk of escape and obtain a range of desirable
results. An unwanted event is still a possibility but every precaution will be taken to limit this possibility from
happening. It is important to remember that the North Lochsa Face area is a fire dependent ecosystem and that a course
of no action will only eventually result in a catastrophic wildfire that will burn out of control producing many unwanted
results. Prescribed fire is the only tool that is currently available for managing the timber resource in the Fish and
Hungry Creek settlement agreement area.
11. Prescribed buming would eause air poUutioD and associated health risks_ these types of fires smolder a10Dg
for weeks and som~times months... Idaho is DOW under fire to implemeDt Dew air quaUty staDdards.•• emissioDs
could be controUed and reduced by decreasing fuel consumptioD (I.e. prelogglng IarRe fuels).
All prescribed burning will meet air quality standards as directed by the EPA and the North Idaho Smoke Management
Agreement. Smoke from the prescribed burning will temporarily reduce air quality however these negative impacts will
not exceed health quality standards outside of the burn area. Ignition will only take place at times of good air dispersion
and when duff moisture is high enough to insure that no long term smoldering ( incomplete combustion) takes place.
Most of the areas where prescribed burning is proposed are not part of the Forest's suitable timber base, with the
remaining areas in suitable lands within the HR 1570 boundary. Therefore logging is not an option for decreasing fuel
loads and the resulting emissions from burning
12. Burning would have aD elrect OD recreadon_ prescribed fire caDDot duplicate the precisioD with which we
can log the dmber while protecting aU other resource values.
Areas that are proposed for prescribed fire support dispersed recreation. These areas have very few structures that could
be effected by fires. The effect of prescribed fire on recreational activities would be short-term, involving temporary
displacement of individuals wishing to use the area during the burning period. There would be some change in the
scenic character, but the effects would also be short term. This change would be perceived as a natural event that is in
keeping with natural processes found in the area. Because prescribed fire is designed to mimic natural fire patterns for
each LTA, it should maintain the consistent historic scenic character of the area. However, should an uncontrolled
wildfire occur instead of a controlled prescribed fire, the potential severity of these events could adversely effect
hunting, fishing, and other recreational activities for a much longer period of time.
Nortll LocIasa FMe £IS
169
13. The decision to barD seems to occur in the month of AulUst. If ever there was a time not to bum It's AulUst.
'The proposed prescribed burning would be staged over a 5 - 7 year period. Ignition of the bum units would occur with
multiple entries ( 2 - 6 ) at various seasons when conditions are favorable to meet burn prescriptions. The first
prescribed burn entries would take place at times of high fuel moisture in the spring or late fall. Subsequent entries
would take place under drier fuel conditions in order to slowly reduce fuel loads. The last entry into a burn unit may
take place under dry conditions in August, when the area burned under natural conditions, only if fuel loads have been
reduced to a point that there is a low risk of fire escape and if burn prescriptions can be met.
14. LogiDg also dupllc:ates fire in the creation of big game habitat... we can do It OD a much more controlled
..sis in order to maIDtaID pop*tions (elk) at the highest possible level
It is true that logging, followed by fire, can create excellent foraging areas for big game. Where logging is a legal
option for us (i.e. outside of the HR 1570 boundary), that mode of treatment is being proposed on 5,230 to 9,020 acres.
The specific harvest prescriptions determine how closely logging imitates fire.
or
IS. lbere is the risk rebams... when a staDd of trees bams It leaves a staDd of dead snags aDd many scorched
trees that make a teDder box ready for the DeD UPtDlng strike... some of the most destruedve and DOtorious
fires or the west were a result of fuel build-up after a previous lire.
The risk of reburn does exist if the stands were only burned one time. This could result in a situation that created the
destructive 1934 fi~. Young trees create a thick fuel bed within a patch of down and standing snags and scorched
trees. Under very dry and windy conditions the young stand of uniform age trees act as ladder fuels carrying the flames
into the standing snags and the result is a destructive wildfire. If no action is taken in these stands wildfires would
recreate this natural fire cycle of a stand lethal event. 'The proposed prescribed burning is intended to keep this
situation from happening. The mixed severity prescribed burning would create a mosaic of burned and unburned areas
effectively breaking up large patches of uniform age trees thus reducing the possibility of a wind driven crown fire
being sustained. The multiple entries into the burn units will slowly reduce the fuel load of down snags which will
reduce the availability of a heat energy source for a wildfire therefore reducing the fires destructive potential.
16. We are coaeemed that the b.......... of commercial timber in a Don-wilderness area Is eoDSklered within the
bounds of ecosystem maDaFmeDt.- with soeial coDslclendons being part of ecosystem maaageDIeDt, it appears
your approach to burning lOud timber wID have very Utde sodaIaeceptance.
Ecosystem management involves applying scientific knowledge of the natural resource with social needs, desires, and
values. Fire has been identified as the dominant historical disturbance process that has been operating across the NLF
landscape for thousands of years. It will continue to operate across the landscape, either in a controlled manner under
our direction, or else in the form of a large catastrophic wildfire.
The application of prescribed fire to reduce fuel loadings and the risk of catastrophic wildfire is well within the scope of
ecosystem management when other social concerns limit the use of timber harvest for this purpose. The maintenance of
long-term site productivity, healthy watersheds, and areas of historical importance are all important social aspects of
ecosystem management that have been voiced by the public. Two alternatives (3a and 4) propose no burning of
commercial timber.
17. There Is still mueh to learn about the role of lire in the ecosystem, before committing too much land and
timber_ the use of fire needs to be assessed OD aD oD-going, thorough and scleDtlftcaUy honest basis before
coDllDitting too much land aDd timber.
Research in fire ecology and management uses, conducted for many years, has dramatically increased in the last 15
years in the United States and throughout the world. Historical fire regimes have been identified for each LTA within
the NLF area. Current vegetation information has been summarized to detennine if it is still within natural ranges of
variation for fire history. Fire suppression on certain LTAs has resulted in vegetation composition and structures that
are significantly outside these natural ranges. The application of management ignited bums recognizes fire as the
dominant historical disturbance factor on this landscape and uses it, along with timber harves~ to shape the future
landscape in patterns that have existed for thousands of years.
170
II
f
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
18. Is prescribed burDiDg as proposedlepl?.. a lovenuaent alency should not be allowed to barn when private
sector businesses cannot... I recommend that the F.s. reconsider the burning portion of the EIS and begin to
take a sclentifte approach as required by law.
The proposed prescribed burning is legal as per Forest Service manual direction. The stated objective of prescribed fire
is to use prescribed fires, from either management ignitions or natural ignitions, in a safe, carefully controlled, costeffective manner as a means of achieving management objectives defined in the Forest Plan. The smoke emissions
produced by the prescribed burning must meet the standards as established by the Oean Air Act of 1977. The burning
restrictions placed on private sector businesses regarding smoke emissions are beyond the scope of the North Lochsa
analysis. The prescribed burning is only one of the many management options that were scientifically analyzed in the
preparation of the North U>chsa Face EIS.
19. Does your bumlng plans meet Forest Plan standards?.. what do you plan to do to honor tbe part of the
Forest Plan pertainiDl to jobs?
The Forest Plan was designed "to ensure multiple use and provide a sustained yield of goods and services from the
Forest to maximize long-term net public benefits and address public issues in an environmentally sound manner." The
North Lochsa Face alternatives have timber harvest proposals ranging from 50 MMBF to 79 MMBF over the next 5
years, which will assist with community stability through jobs, while producing good land management. Burning is
only proposed where logging is not currently feasible or permitted.
ZOe The law requires the best science available be used and that cumulative efreets be considered fl.e. elrects of
bumlnl on gIo..1warminland timber supply).
At this scale of analysis, effects on global warming and overall timber supply are far beyond the scope of the project.
The harvest and burning that we have proposed are far below the potential effects, demonstrated here in 1910, 1919, and
1934, of the kind of wildfire that could occur here. The purpose of the proposal is to modify conditions so that those
kinds of wildfire are much less likely. Historical fire regimes have been identified for each LTA and management
activities, including prescribed fire and timber harvest, have been designed to mimic the natural, non-catastrophic fire
activity on the landscape.
21. Your plans for.prescribed lire are poUtieaUy driven... tbe CIIIftIIt poUtical climate will dwlge and the
current infatuation with fire will pass. We need to preserve our options for the future, and bumlnl timber will
not do that.
While there may be political support for prescribed fire, our proposals are firmly based on the scientific assessment
completed as part of the NFMA analysis. We do, indeed, want to presetve our options for the future, rather than
allowing nature to take its course, and result in widespread fires such as occurred in 1910, 1919, and 1934.
The bum proposals that we made for the Fish Creek drainage would have much lighter effects than even the first of the
early fires. The 1921 timber survey of the Pete King drainage said:
"There are about 4000 acres or 20% of total drainage area burned, as is shown on map, 3600 acres
of which were burned in 1919 and 400 acres in about 1890. It is estimated that the timber killed by
fire amounts to 24 million board feet.
The 1919 fire destroyed the reproduction over most of this drainage. The areas marked on the
map as burned areas were burned clean, leaving very few widely scattered trees. No new
reproduction was noted on the 1919 bums. Ground fire covered a good deal of the remainder of the
drainage, killing the reproduction and young growth."
But even those early fires, more intense (a higher percentage of trees killed in the stand replacing fire) and
widespread (about 20,000 acres of underburning, the entire Pete King drainage) than what we have proposed, did not
preclude our options today.
Nortb Locbsa Face EIS
171
22. We recommend that the FEIS and forest plan amendment tier to a IaDdscape lire maDapment plan.
The FEIS and the forest plan amendment do address fire on a limited landscape level. Legal requirements restrict any
proposed action in the FEIS be limited to the analysis area. Federal wildland fire management policy is currently
changing. These changes will give us direction in developing new fire management plans that will view wildland and
prescribed tire on a landscape level.
23. We sagest the plan amendment state that site specific ....Iysis of lire iDclude the benefits related to early
seral habitats (shrubftelds) and big pme winter range iD addition to NLF desired future conditions, suppressioD
costs, resource dama., and public and lire safety.
The proposed amendment to the forest plan deals with wildland fires that are considered unwanted events and require an
initial attack suppression response. Current Forest Setvice policy does not allow us to analyze the benefits associated
with wildland fires where a fire management plan has not been approved. A fire management plan will be developed for
the NLF. When this plan is approved the resource benefits related to fire will be considered when implementing the
appropriate management response to a wildland fire.
24. State within the FEIS that riparian area proteedve prescriptions (pACFISB buffers) wiD be validated and
rdIDecI as part or prescribed lire maDaKement implementation.
Fire has historically played a role in the health of riparian forest communities, in which low intensity fires backed down
into the cooler riparian areas, burning the understory vegetation and creating relatively small openings. Its effect upon
aquatic and riparian habitat is dependent upon the quality/quantity of fuels, the weather, and the topography. Many
years of successful fire suppression in these areas may have caused a build-up of fuels, increasing the potential for a
more intense burn that would consume the large wood and cause an increase in water temperatures and soil erosion.
PACFlSH allows the use of prescribed burning in riparian reserves in contributing to attainment of riparian
management objectives. There are objectives for pool frequency, water temperature, large instream wood, bank
stability, and width:depth ratios. Under controlled conditions, tire can be used as a tool to maintain and improve these
parameters.
Prescribed fire, as proposed, will attempt to emulate historic fire patterns and intensity. Areas outside the riparian
buffers would be burned as many as four times at varying intensities to minimize the negative effects produced by a
single hot bum. The fire would be allowed to back into the riparian areas. After treatment, monitoring would occur to
determine the effectiveness of the bums and to provide opportunities for adaptive management.
25. Show scientHlcaUy vaUd reasons why prescribed banliDg is recommended for the forest.
Fire is historically the major disturbance factor affecting forests in the western United States. Fire suppression
efforts over the past 60+ years altered the natural fire regimes in the North Lochsa Face assessment area. This
has resulted in an increase in fuel loading. It would not be prudent at this time to allow all wildfires to ron their
natural course due to the increased fuel loads. The continuation of wildfire suppression will only delay in the
short term the inevitable catastrophic wildfire evenL The increasing number and frequency of large destructive·
wildfires over the past 10 years, even with the most aggressive suppression efforts, is evidence of a fuels
problem in the western states. Prescribed burning is the only tool remaining to bring the fire regimes back into
their natural cycle. The Upper Columbia River Basin (UCRB) study supports prescribed burning as one of the
recommended actions for maintaining forest health. Fire regimes are discussed in detail in Chapter Four..
26. Burning in the upper Bungery Creek area is poor timiDg, considering the approaching Lewis and
Clark bicentenniaL
The time frame of the EIS does run concurrent with the Lewis and Clark bicentennial. The burning will present
an interpretive opportunity regarding the role of fire in the ecosystem. Efforts will be made to limit the negative
impacts of the burning to time periods of lower use.
Nortla Locbsa Face EIS
172
CIa.pler Six
•I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•I
•I
27. There should be • plaD to re-iDtroduee the role or aatunl lire. 1bIs is mlsslq from the doc:umeDt.
The Draft EIS states that a prescribed natural fire (PNF) plan will be prepared for the North Lochsa Face
assessment area. The purpose of this plan will be to re-introduce the role of natural fire to the ecosystem. At
the present time, there will be some delay in the implementation of this plan until a larger area, including the
Weitas and Great Bum roadless areas, can be analyzed for inclusion into the PNF program area. A successful
PNF program requires a large land base to insure that the fires remain within the approved plan area. Current
changes in fire policy have replaced the term prescribed natural fire. A fire management plan (FMP) will now
be prepared for the NLF. The FMP will be a strategic plan that defines a program to manage wildland and
prescribed fires and documents the Fire Management Program in the approved land use plan. The approved
FMP will allow a wide range of appropriate management responses to a wildland fire when prescriptive criteria
are meL The appropriate management response can range from monitoring with minimal on the ground actions
to intense suppression actions on all portions of the fire perimeter. The new Federal wildland fire management
policy will allow fire to be re-introduced into the ecosystem through wildland fire use and prescribed fire.
28. What is the proa.bWty of. staDd replaciDllIre In each cWrereDt landtype over the DeD 50 years?
Fire science has not evolved to the point that a numerical value can be given to the probability of a stand
replacement fire over a period of time. The random nature of lightning and the wide range of weather conditions
over the fire season along with other management activities creates too many variables. A rating of high,
medium, or low is as close a probability as can be reasonably stated. A short interval 26-50 year non-lethal fire
regime (breaklands) that has not had a non-lethal fire for 50 years due to fire suppression would be considered at
high risk for a stand replacement event. A long term 150 to 300 year fire regime (old surfaces) that has not had
a lethal fire for SO years could be considered at low risk. The colluvial midslopes and frost-churned uplands
with lethal fire intetvals of 7S to 150 years would generally be considered at moderate risk after SO years of fire
suppression. Each piece of ground would need to be looked at individually. A comparison of past tire history
and the fire regime for that landtype would give a general probability of risk of a stand replacing fire.
29. What is lost in the whole ecological picture if there is no stand replacing lire iD the nest 50 years?
Fire is part of the ecological system; the catalyst that brings about new life. Fire has always played the
prominent role in the fire dependent ecosystems of the western United States. The NLF ecosystem is what it is
today as a direct result of stand replacing fires. Some landtypes and associated fire regimes will not have stand
replacing fires in the next SO years, and they will progress along on their own path in their own unique ways,
while other landtypes will have stand replacing tires. Each will develop and progress differently. The whole
ecological picture is too vast to comprehend, and we are only beginning to understand the concept of
ecosystems. We do know that fire is part of the ecosystem and that we can not exclude fire. Even if we tried,
we could not exclude all stand replacing fires for the next SO years.
30. What is your IoDK-term lire plan for this area? Do you plaD to do controUed barns on • regular
schedule for SO or 100 yean.
lDoking 50 to 100 years into the future is beyond the scope of this analysis. At the present time and into the
foreseeable future, fire will playa major role in North Lochsa Face. Depending on the alternative selected, we
anticipate burning over the next 5 years 930 to 6,510 acres with mixed severity bums, with another 1,040 to
6,900 acres having the potential for understory bums. A PNF plan will be used to manage some of the wildfire
starts in the roadless area. Alternative suppression strategies will be used where appropriate to keep suppression
costs and firefighter safety in line with resource values at risk. Full suppression tactics will be implemented
where unacceptable resource loss is anticipated from a wildfire start. Management ignited fire will be used to
treat hazard fuels and meet other management objectives.
I
I
I
Nortla Locl:::: F:ce EIS
173
CIlaDterSix
31. The EIS should describe lDeteorolopeaJ eoDdidou and eDstiD. air quaUty . . . . specific data
applleable to the project site.
The general climate of the NLF assessment area is transitional between a north Pacific coastal type and a
continental type. See the project file for specific meteorological data. Air quality is excellent due to the limited
population in the area and the proximity to the Selway Bitterroot Oass I Airshed. Historically the smoke from
wildfires would be in the analysis area from mid June through mid October. With the advent of modem fire
suppression, the air has become less smokey over the past 60 years. A smoke free environment is an unnatural
concHtion for this area.
32. The EIS sbould explain with greater specUIclty why the air quaUty iD the nearby Selway-Bitterroot
WlIderaess wUI DOt be impacted by the prescribed/slash bumiD. iD the LoclIsa regioa, III spite or its
proDmity to the analysis area.
The air quality in the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness will only suffer minor impacts from the prescribed/slash
burning in the North Lochsa face assessment area due to the prevailing winds. Summer and fall afternoon
winds tend to blow up canyon. Thus winds are most frequently from the southwest blowing away from the
wilderness at the bum locations. On the mountain tops away from the main canyon, winds are predominantly
from the west or southwest, in line with the larger-scale airflow. In the free atmosphere, above the effects of
surface friction and local topography, the average wind flow is normally from the west-southwest in summer.
The windspeed at 10,000 ft. averages 14 mi/h in July and August. Fire weather data show that summer
afternoon winds in or near the SBW are generally from the southwest or wesL Windspeeds at this time average
generally between 5 and 7 mi/h in the canyons and near 10 milh at mountain-top levels. Under normal weather
condition the smoke created from burning will move away from the wilderness. Some smoke events may
impact the wilderness if unusual wind events occur.
The burning of logging slash creates only short term smoke events generally lasting less then 24 hours. Some
residual smoke remains in the canyon bottoms following the burn. 1be bum units are only ignited when the
prevailing winds are from the west southwest and there is slight instability and good upper level dispersion. No
negative impacts on the wilderness airsbed are anticipated from this activity.
The ecosystem prescrjbed management ignited bums may be of longer duration lasting up to several weeks. The
smoke generated from this activity may impact the wilderness due to the increased probability of an unplanned
weather event. Prior to any management ignited ecosystem bum, an analysis of the weather patterns, fire
duration, and the probability of a rare weather event will be conducted. Ignition will take place only when
weather and fuel conditions allow for minimized smoke impacts.
The smoke created by a relatively short duration limited prescribed tire must be weighed against the smoke
generated by a large uncontrolled wildfire. The prescribed tires can decrease the increasing threats that large
wildfires pose to our air quality and public health. We do know that all of the land within the NLF assessment
area will bum at sometime. We believe that the use of management ignited fire will decrease the overall
negative impacts from smoke generated by uncontrolled events.
33. The EIS should clarity ltIbow participation iD the North Idaho Smoke Maaqement Agreement
provides assurance that smoke impacts will be miDimized during the spring and early summer periods.
If participation in the agreement does Dot midpte air quaUty impacts durin. these periods, the EIS
should specify other actions which do so.
The North Idaho Smoke Management Agreement does not regulate smoke production in the spring and early
summer. Air quality impacts are mitigated in the spring and early summer by weather patterns of strong winds,
good dispersion, and lack of inversions. These natural weather agents, along with self regulation, aids in
minimizing the negative impacts of smoke associated with burning at this time of year. Historical burning in
spring and early summer has had the least impact to the airshed of any other season.
NOI1II LodIsa Faee £IS
174
CIaapterSb
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
34. The EIS sbould diseuss methods to miDimize or elimiDate smoke emissions aad those paJ1ieugte
matter emissions from logging and road acdvities•
The smoke management objective during burning is to minimize or prevent the accumulation of smoke to such a
degree as is necessary to protect State and federal ambient air quality standards when prescribed burning is
necessary for the conduct of accepted forest practices such as hazard reduction. Smoke emissions cannot be
eliminated, but they can be minimized by burning on the "hot" end of the burn prescription. Fuel moistures are
monitored prior to ignition to insure that combustion will be complete. Duff moisture is monitored to insure
that it is high enough that there will not be a smoldering duff burn after ignition is complete. Dust abatement on
log hauling roads is used as needed to reduce particulate emissions from road use.
35. The EIS does not examlDe altemadves to slash burning•
Determining the method of fuel treatment involves a coordinated effort by all disciplines at the beginning of a
project proposal. Project objectives (i.e. hazard reduction, site preparation for regeneration, wildlife habitat
improvement, or converting cover types) dictate the fuel treatmenL Consideration is given to all the methods
that are practical to accomplish the objectives. Other factors considered include soil structure, wildlife food
production, and whether or not overall environmental quality will be enhanced through debris treatmenL Years
of experience in slash disposal in the study area indicates that slash burning has the most positive effect on plant
regeneration and the least negative environmental impacts, compared to other slash disposal methods.
The timber sale slash appraisal plans will address the hazard reduction plans for every sale. These plans will be
prepared prior to the sales being offered for bid. When these plans are prepared, alternatives to slash burning
including natural abatement will be reviewed. To date, the burning of logging slash has been the only
economical method to deal with the potential fire hazard. New slash disposal methods are constantly being
developed and improved. Fire/fuels management reviews current literature and attends training to take
advantage of technological advancements.
36. Why is the a.ency so amid or the large ftres the EIS admits are the dominant/necessary part or this
landscape?
Large fires are a part of the ecosystem, particularly on the old surfaces. Natural stand-replacing tires that
occurred there ran~ in size from 1000 acres to more than 100,000 acres. The interdisciplinary team chose to
propose management activities at the lower end of that range, but still within the natural range of disturbances.
We did not feel that very large fires would allow us to meet other desired conditions or Forest Plan direction,
particularly for late mature forest cover, big game habitat, watershed condition, fish habitat, or sustained
production of forest products.
37. A separate discussion is needed
role or fire today.
OD
the elrects or past fire suppression OD natural processes, and the
Fire suppression efforts over the past 50 years have altered natural processes. Fire has not been excluded from
the ecosystem; it has only been delayed. This delay has resulted in an increase in catastrophic wildfires. The
wildland fire regime is much different than it was historically; 58% of the wildfires now bum with lethal
intensity, compared to 19% historically. The historic presence of frequent fire disturbances on the breaklands
precluded the development of dense mature forests and the accumulation of large dead wood. The stands on
these LTAs are now dominated by shade tolerant undergrowth, where fire suppression has been successful.
Loadings of both live and dead fuels have increased on all landtypes as a result of successful fire suppression.
The result is hotter wildfires causing more significant impacts to water, soil, and air resources.
The role of fire today is slowly changing. Fire is beginning to be recognized as essential to forest health, rather
than an unwanted event that destroys the forest. Many ecosystems depend on fire to renew the landscape by
releasing nutrients and stimulating new life. In time, fire creates a healthy diversity of plant and animal species.
The implementation of a prescribed natural fire program in conjunction with a management ignited prescribed
fire program for NLF will bring the role of fire back closer to its natural regime.
Nordt
LcN!.a Face EIS
175
ClaapterSix
38. We are aplDst the burIlIq or commerdal staDds or timber wIthID the proposed LaRoeeo wUderaess
area, until the rate or the wUderaess proposal is resolved.
A estimated 6,130 acres in the North Lochsa Slope Roadless Area (includes the proposed Lewis and aark
wilderness area introduced by former Congressman Larry LaRocco) are proposed to be treated with prescribed
(mixed severity) fire with Alternatives 2, 3, and 5. Not all of this acreage bas been field reviewed, and it is
estimated that up to three-fourths of it may contain timber of commercial size, consisting primarily of mountain
hemlock, subalpine fir, and lodgepole pine. The Forest Plan lawsuit settlement agreement does not allow any
timber sale or road construction within the proposed Lewis and aark wilderness area, leaving only prescribed
fire to treat these acres. In response to this concern, Alternatives 3a and 4 were developed that proposes little
(930 acres) to DO burning within the North Lochsa Slope Roadless Area.
TIMBER HARVEST
39. Offer the timber In FIsh Creek for sale to see lfyour opinion or it baving DO eommerdal value is eorreet.
Since the Forest Plan lawsuit settlement agreement does not allow timber harvest in this area, this suggestion is not
possible. However, let us review the history of the Longview timber sale for comparison purposes. This sale was
located in the Deadman Creek drainage Gust over the ridge from Fish Creek) and consisted of 1 skyline unit and 4
helicopter units, with an estimated 3 MMBF of commercial timber. 1be helicopter units had yarding distances up to
6,400 feet (well within Regional guidelines and much less than the 1-3+ miles that would be required for the Fish Creek
area). The haul distance to the mill was shorter, and the timber was larger and of better quality than the hemlock,
spruce, and lodgepole stands existing in the Fish Creek area. This sale was offered in 1995 and received NO bids.
40. AU vegetation wIthID the NLF area should be .......ged with aU the tools possible, iDcludlng logglng_. pther
up the brush and place it iD portable mulch machines that create environmental mulcll._ consider altemadves
that construct fire breaks, develop water sources, aDd aUow more Ioging In the roadless areas_. fire should be
the last resort after other management tools have been used.
Regeneration harvests, thinning. burning. planting. and other treatments are all tools that can be used to manipulate the
vegetation within the NLF area. Each tool has certain advantages and disadvantages. Silvicultural halVest activities
generally involve the.<fevelopment of some type of transportation system that may cause detrimental impacts to
watersheds and other resources, such as wildlife. Where a transportation system is in place, timber halVest is usually
the preferred vegetation treatment since it will provide raw materials for local communities with reduced impacts on
other resources and forest users.
Mulching shrubs and other woody vegetation can provide a useful organic layer on the soil surface, but it is expensive
and very labor intensive, compared to prescribed burning. Prescribed bums can reduce fuel loadings while
simultaneously recycling nutrients and organic matter to the soil.
While timber harvest in roadless areas is not possible due to a number of legal, biological, social, and physical
constraints, timber harvest activities remain an integral part to the NLF project and between 50 and 79 MMBF of
commercial timber are being proposed within the project area.
41. Forest Roads 483, 485, 500 provide primary access in the Fish Creek area to do some logging••• during the
wlDter Road 500 eould be turDed Into a snow road just Ionl enough to baul out the product.
These roads do provide access, but only FS Road 483, which is being proposed for minor reconstruction, provides
access to areas outside the lawsuit settlement area. All areas within the Fish Creek drainage, covered by the lawsuit
settlement agreement, are off limits to timber harvest, whether there is existing access or not.
42. Build no permanent new roads._ use only existing roads.
All action alternatives rely on the use of existing road systems for logging access. Only Alternative 2 proposes any
pennanent new roads. This consists of one road, 1.1 miles in length, in the Tick Creek drainage. Alternative 3, the
preferred alternative in the DEIS, proposes no new roads (pennanent or temporary). The remaining action alternatives
propose no new pennanent roads, but do include temporary road construction, all of which will be obliterated after use.
176
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
43. Include watenhed restoradon work as purchaser perfOnDaDCe III the timber sale contract.
Roads used by the purchaser that are in need of some sort of restoration will require performance by the
purchaser thru the timber sale contracL Watershed restoration work will also be accomplished where
appropriate in conjunction with timber sales when it meets the existing regulations under the KV (KnutsonVandenberg) AcL KV collections will be made from the sale to perform this work. Work must be within the
Sale Area to qualify for this type of funding. Needed restoration work outside the Sale Area or not qualifying
for KV funding will require appropriated funds.
Projected future funding is expected to be primarily available through the 'Capital Improvement Program' for
watershed restoration. Appropriated funding for watershed, fish and wildlife improvement is expected to also
be used. By accomplishing the NEPA planning process through this project, we will be able to aggressively
pursue funding to implement watershed restoration activities.
44. In reprds to treatiDl watershed restoradon under a timber sale contract, the FS should coDSicler
transferable credits much the same as road credits are curftndy admIDlstered.
I
I
Purchaser credit for watershed restoration is not currently permissible under the Forest Service timber sale
contract. This proposal is outside the scope of this analysis.
45. We would Uke more discussion on sUvicultural treatments. In particular, we would Uke a better
explanation on the use and placement or reaeneration treatments.
If silviculturaI treatments are defined as harvest treatments, they fall into three categories.
The first is salvage. Salvage is designed to leave a fully-stocked stand that is little different from pre-harvest
conditions. Salvage harvest removes dead trees, or trees that are declining due to insect or disease attack, and
will die in the near future. Again, the trees left after salvage is completed, fully occupy the growing space.
There is no reforestation needed.
The second type of treatment is thinning. We have proposed three types of thinning: precommercial thinning
where the trees are too small to be of commercial value; commercial thinning where the trees are large enough
to be of commercial value and where we expect increased growth on the remaining trees; and stocking control
where the trees are large enough to be of commercial value but they are old enough that we expect little
increased growth response from the remaining trees. The purpose of all of the types of thinning is to keep these
stands in a relatively healthy, disease and insect-resistant condition. 1bey would all remain as fully-stocked
forest stands, but with less competition for moisture and nutrients amongst the remaining trees. Structure and
composition would be little changed from existing conditions. Though early sera! species would be favored, it
would not result in elimination of late sera! species, but rather a shift in the percentages of species in the stands.
The third type of treatment is' regeneration harvest. Regeneration harvest proposals came from two sources.
First were the age class distributions by LTA. Where the existing age class distribution by LTA and drainage
did not match the desired distribution, we proposed to move some blocks from an older age class to a younger
age class. We selected regeneration harvest blocks based on the desired age class distribution (by drainage and
LTA), patch size (the desired patch sizes varied by LTA), and accessibility (could we implement the change).
The patch size screen took into account the surrounding forest conditions also. The second type of regeneration
harvest proposal came from the salvage proposal. Some stands, when we looked at them on the ground, were in
such poor condition that they are not fully stocked now. The only options available were regeneration harvest
or nothing. Many stands in this condition will not be treated for a variety of reasons. Some are in patches
surrounded by large expanses of young forest, so that maintaining even a poorly stocked stand is better than
converting it to a young stand. Some are not accessible, and we could not implement harvest even if we
proposed it.
None of the regeneration harvests will be clearcuts where no trees, or only a token few trees are left after
harvest. They will look more like an area that had a mixed severity fire. Riparian areas will not be harvested,
and that
Nortla LoeIasa Face ElS
ClaaplerSix
alone will maintain about 113 of the harvest block in forest cover. In addition, the upland areas will have about
10 to 40 trees per acre left, though that will vary by LTA and with existing conditions. Many of those trees will
be legacy trees that will be a part of the stand through the next 100 or more years. Others will gradually die and
provide for snag habitat and down woody debris for soil productivity maintenance. They will all contribute to a
diverse vertical and horizontal forest structure, and maintenance of ecosystem functions.
In the Bimerick drainage, we have proposed conversion harvest, using clearcuts or the use of stand replacement
fire. This is in an area burned over in 1919 and 1934. It was planted by Civilian Consetvation Corps crews in
the late 19305. Our records indicate that the seedlings were from all over the northwest, from Oregon and
Washington to Montana and the Black Hills of South.Dakota. Ponderosa pine, cedar, and other species were
planted, but seedlings from those distant areas are not adapted to the growing conditions in Bimerick Creek.
The ponderosa pine in particular is susceptible to many more insects and diseases than well-adapted trees would
be. Growth has been poor, and mortality has been high. The conversion proposal is to remove the off-site,
maladapted trees, and replant the area with adapted tree species that will contribute to a healthy ecosystem. We
will still retain riparian protection areas, but outside of those, all trees will be removed, in what will look close
to an old-fashioned clearcut.
46. It appears that Altenative 2 bas the saJIle number or acres as Alte.....dve 3, yet caDs for 12 MMBF
of additional timber. This would seem to be the more 1oP:a1 seleetioD.
The acreages are not the same. Alternative 2 DOW proposes timber harvest on 9,020 acres, whereas Alternative
3 proposes timber harvest on 7,870 acres. The differences in acreage and timber volume are due to Alternative
3 dropping the harvest units in Alternative 2 accessed by proposed road activities (1.1 miles of road construction
and the construction of nine temporary roads).
47. Surplus timber eould be removed by "selective 1ogiDa" to e.......ce the value for wildUle, recreatioa,
aesthetics, IDsect eontrol, etc.
This suggestion is similar to our commercial thinning and stocking control proposals. Alternative 2 and 3a
propose 2,950 acres of just this sort of harvest, and Alternatives 3 , 4, and 5 proposal harvesting slightly less
acreage by this method.
48. De use orlogiDa to replleate the effects orftre seem a particularly odd representadoa, since the two
processes are worlds apart.
Logging can replicate the structures and composition left after a fire. It does not, of course, replicate the amount
of dead wood on the site. Harvest is generally followed by prescribed burning. so short-term nutrient release is
similar to wildfire, though not as much material is volatilized under prescribed burning as under wildfire
conditions. So, yes, there are differences, but we can and will mimic stand structures, compositions, and
functions to a large degree.
49. De elrects or iDereased water yield, as weD as edle-blowdoWD and other Ioglng damale will
exac:era.te additlonaDy the elrects or eleaftllttiDg seveD square mDes of p-Gund.
There are no intentions of clearcutting seven square miles of ground. The total harvest proposal (salvage,
commercial thinning. regeneration harvest, and clearcutting) is for 5,190 to 8,980 acres, with the clearcutting of
off-site trees being proposed on 2,250 acres (equivalent to about 35 square miles). See comment #45 for a
discussion of the various harvest treatments.
The Bimerick area, containing the off-site trees proposed for harvest, consists of slopes generally less than 30%
and high soil infiltration due to the volcanic ash mantle. The major natural disturbance process on these sites is
a lethal, stand-replacement fire regime which would remove most of the trees in large patches, often in the
thousands of acres. Riparian areas (default PACFISH buffers) will not be harvested, and minor blowdown may
occur along these edges. Damage due to logging is expected to be minimal through the proposed use of log
forwarders and helicopter systems.
Nortll Locbsa Faee ElS
178
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
I
I
so. It one of the purposes of this project is to provide for the local "timber dependant" economy, then it
is reasonable to Umit bidding to this local area. Otherwise, it is reasonable to delete this issue.
One of the Clearwater Forest Plans Goals, pg ll- 2, is to "provide a sustained yield of timber and other outputs at
a level that is cost-efficient and that will help support the economic structure of local communities and will
provide regional and national needs". Bidding on National Forest timber sales is not limited only to
geographical areas, however general economics related to distance between sale area and processing facility
normally will limit prospective bidders. A timber sale must be designed to be economically feasible to become
viable for anyone to purchase.
51. The radonale for salvale is weak. A claim of 10% of the stand volume beinl "dead, dying, and high
risk" represents DO emergency.
Correct, that level of incidence of insect and disease effects is not an emergency. Salvage is not necessarily an
emergency situation. It does allow for commercial utilization of material that will not be available later when a
more extensive harvest proposal may be made. Salvage harvest will be conducted so that the desired levels of
snags and down wood remain in the stand to support important but often overlooked ecosystem functions, and
material is available to support local economies.
I
i
52. Exceeding the 40 acre size limit on deareuts, estabUshed by NFMA, requires exceptional
circumstances and speclalapproval.
Actually, NFMA requires approval for almost any kind of even-aged management over 40 acres in size, not just
for clearcuts. We have initiated the process for obtaining the special approval needed to implement some of the
larger regeneration harvests we have proposed.
53. One of the acdon altemadves should offer some smaller, gender, sustainable harvest proposals (i.e.
30% removal, DO new roads, and no openings over 40 acres except iD the off-site piDe areas)
The traditional approaches, as suggested, do not fit with the ecosystem management approach of today. We are
now looking at very large landscapes (i.e. 128,000 acres), and the results of some past harvests and tire
suppression activities are showing the need for large scale treatments in order to shift species composition and
densities towards desired conditions. Restricting treatment opportunities as suggested would further contribute
to large areas being outside their natural range of variability.
54. More heUeopter logging should be considered for the Flsh-Bungery Creek drainage and the Loehsa
River facinl exposures.
The Forest Plan lawsuit settlement agreement prevents us from pursuing any timber harvest activities in the
proposed Lewis and Oark wilderness area. This area includes most of the Fish Creek drainage and all of the
Hungery Creek drainage. Additional areas along the Lochsa River facing exposures were considered, however,
no suitable landing sites for helicopter operations could be found within a feasible distance from proposed
harvest units.
55. Can a small percentage of the stumpale sale of logs be directed toward construction and
maintenance oftraUs for ORVs?
Current regulations prevent use of receipts from a timber sale being used for construction or maintenance of
trails. Changes in these regulations are outside the scope of this analysis.
56. A clearer explanation of what "regeneration harvest of off-site tree species in the Bimeric:k
drainage" actuaUy means would be of great value.
In the late 19305, following the Pete King Fire in 1934, CCC crews planted much of the area in Bimerick Creek.
We have most of the old records of the dates and types of stock that were used. Over the past 20 years, many
people noticed that the ponderosa pine, in particular, were not growing well, and were particularly susceptible to
Nortla Locbsa Face EIS
179
ClaaplerSix
needle cast. That lead to a closer look at the old planting records, to try to determine the cause for the poor
condition of these trees. What we discovered is that the trees came from distant forests, and are not adapted to
the conditions in Bimerick Creek. Because they are not adapted, they are in poor condition and susceptible to
diseases and insect attacks. The proposal to remove these trees was made so that they will not interbreed with
swrounding local trees, and perpetuate a forest of trees that are "on the edge" and could be completely destroyed
by the next insect or disease that comes along. Ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, and Engelmann spruce were
planted and would be removed. This area would look the most like an old-fashioned cleareut of any of our
proposals, though we would still protect riparian areas. It would be replanted with locally adapted trees. If any
of this area were to prove unfeasible for timber harvest (i.e. DO bids received at sale offering), prescribed fire
would be used to remove the off-site trees.
57. What mix of IogInI systems do we project, and wbat is the extent or road buildinl?
:~~-~
:--;;.,
.
SkvliDe
TractorlForwarder
Helicopter
Total Acres:
~
....
--
.... ' ,
~
5150ac
1,5230
2.300
8.980ac
4.060ac
1510
2.300
7,870ae
;-, ¥
.....'.
. '~~~' :'.::
........ ~.:
4.450ac
1.530
2.300
8.280ac
.
~~
-~
-'.~.~:~.-.~:J~''"_.~-?~~~
3.970ac
480
740
5.190 Ie
"
New COnstructiOD
RecoastruetiOD
Temporary
1.1 miles (1 road)
12.9 miles (4 roads)
4.6 miles (9 roads)
0
12.9 miles (4 roads)
0
0
12.9 miles (4 roads)
4.4 miles (8 roads)
.....
_.~
0
1.5 miles (1 road)
4.4 miles (8 roads)
58. How are you addressing smaU salvage opportunities (18-100 MBF)? Looks like lots of salvage
opportuDities were missed.
Although some salvage opportunities have been specifically identified in this assessment, not all potential
opportunities are identified. Mortality will continue to occur on this landscape. As small patches die or
blowdown, new salvage opportunities arise. This document is not able to identify all the salvage opportunities
that can and will exist on this landscape in the near term. To meet the intent of NEPA, treatments not
specifically identified in North Lochsa Face must be identified on a site specific basis in another "future"
document. It is envisioned that most small salvage opportunities will be less than 1 MMBF and be located
along existing roads. True salvage does oot change the age class, structure, or composition of the existing stand.
Below are listed guidelines which future salvage opportunities need to consider to conform with the cumulative
effects analysis in this document
•
•
•
•
•
Salvage must be from existing roads.
Salvage will not occur in late mature successional stages, with the exception that salvage within 200'
of open roads is acceptable.
Salvage analyzed in each future document will not exceed 1 MMBF.
Salvage will maintain or promote the desired conditions for each LTA described in this document and
therefore be within the cumulative effects analysis as defined by this assessmeot..
No more than 25% of the trees would be removed under salvage, and the remaining stand of trees
would fully stock the site.
59. De DEIS displays In AppelUUz H the proposed barvest or old p-owtb timber. It the Forest is "rely
meetinl its Forest PlaD standard for old p-owtb aDd old p-owtb Is UmltecI In this area, why is some or it
proposed for harvest?
The ClealWater National Forest has recently completed an update of the Old Growth Status Report. This report
concludes that forestwide, the Forest Plan standard of 10% old growth is being met or exceeded. Within the North
Lochsa Face area there are 12,500 acres of old growth, with most of these stands clustered in areas missed by the large
wildfires of the early 1900s. (Specific infonnation about available old growth within the analysis area is displayed in
Table 3.2, North Lochsa Face FEIS • Wildlife and TES Plant ResOlUCes SttItIlS Report, located in the project file.)
A 1998 review of the old growth data base records indicated that some of the stands identified in the 1992 Forest old
growth query had been missed during the preparation of the DEIS. Review of the stand examination records indicated
many of these stands failed to meet north Idaho old growth forest criteria and were subsequently dropped with rationale.
However, an estimated 450 to 500 acres of additional stands that could quality as old growth are known to occur within
the analysis area, plus, there are inclusions of old growth forest within other mid-sera! (mature) forest stands.
Nortla Loebsa Face EIS
•
•
•
•I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•I
I
I
•
Verification of old growth stands proposed for treatment has been completed. During the summer of 1998,
Dennis Talbert (wildlife biologist) and Kris Hazelbaker (ecologist and silvicu1turist) visited all of the stands that
were identified as potential old growth having a regeneration harvest proposal. Only two of those stands were
in fact old growth, and both have been dropped as harvest proposals. The remainder were not old growth, most
often due to being too open-grown from past salvage halVest or extensive insect and disease activity. A few
were too young and small.
Compared to the treabnents proposed in the DEIS, only one underbum and several commercial thins are
currently proposed in old growth stands. All of these stands are in a deteriorating condition, and the treatments
are aimed at promoting a healthier stand of large, old trees that may occupy the landscape for a longer period of
time.
WATER QUALITY/FISHERIES
60. De DEIS rails to address the treaty-reserved fishing rights or the Nez Perce Tribe and other
CRITFC (Columbia River Inter-Tribal FISheries Commission) member tribes and the United States
government's trust responsibility to these tribes.
Although only the Nez Perce Tribe has treaty-reserved fishing rights on the Oearwater National Forest, we
recognize the other CRITFC member tribes interest in this area. In the 1855 Treaty with the Nez Perce Tribe, it
states they have "the right of taking fish at all usual and accustomed places in common with citizens of the
Territory; and of erecting temporary buildings for curing.." Currently, improving the swvival of fish, primarily
salmon and steelhead is a central objective of the Nez Perce Fisheries Resource Management Program. Our
adherence to Forest Plan water quality standards, PACFISH riparian buffers, and proposing no new stream
crossings (all proposed system and/or temporary roads are ridgetop roads) are consistent with the Tribe's
fisheries objectives.
In regards to the government's trust responsibilities, the NEPA implementing regulations require Federal
agencies to invite Indian tribes to participate in the scoping process on projects or activities that affect them.
The Nez Perce Tribe has IeselVed rights upon the Forest, and consultation with the Tribe was initiated prior to
public scoping. During the NFMA phase, prior to public scoping. Allen Pinkham (Nez Perce Tribal
Government Liaison, Northern Region) was a member of the combined Forest and District lOT. During the
NFMA and NEPA phases, the Tribe was informed of this project through several meetings at Lapwai and a field
trip on the Lolo MotolWay to discuss cultural concerns. The Tribe was also notified of all public meetings,
invited to participate in additional field trips, and mailed all scoping documents.
We recognize that the DEIS was weak in discussing treaty rights and trust responsibilities. The Final EIS
includes sections within applicable chapters addressing tribal treaty rights and government trust responsibilities.
61. The DEIS fans to disclose that the action altemadves will dqrade ....dromous fish habitat and
water quality and, thus, thwart elrorts to rebuUd ....dromous fish runs.
The effects of the alternatives are discussed in Chapter Four of the DEIS and in the Fish and Watershed Report.
The action alternatives are not expected to degrade anadromous fish habitat due to the following:
a.
Implementation of PACFISH buffers which will protect the riparian area as well as the stream.
b.
Implementation of Forest Plan and State water quality standards.
c.
Implementation of Best Management Practices.
d.
All proposed roads (system and/or temporary) are located on ridges, with no stream crossings.
e. Temporary roads are to be obliterated after use, which in most cases will be the same year of
construction.
181
CUDterSis
l
I
f. An estimated 11.4 miles of road in the Frenchman Butte and Bimerick Meadows area and 1.5 miles
of the Pete King Road are proposed to be reconstructed, which will correct existing sediment problems
associated with these roads. Planned work includes surfacing. to limit movement of fines off the road
surface, and replacement of undersized culverts.
g. An estimated 95 miles of old roads are proposed for obliteration. Identification of these roads and
their location are displayed in Appendix E of the DEIS.
h. Sediment traps will be removed from Walde and Pete King Creeks to encourage natural flushing of
sediment.
i.
Landslides resulting from past flood events will continue to be stabilized.
We feel our proposals move us beyond the status quo towards an improving trend that will rebuild anadromous
fish runs. Also, prior to issuing a decision, concurrence will be obtained from the National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).
62. The DEIS taUs to disclose that the .ctIon .tte.....tives eoDllict with the Tribes plans for the
restoration or...dromoDS fish babltats aDd populations in the Columbia River Basin.
We have reviewed Wy-Kan-Ush-Mi Wa-Kish-Wit,· SpiTit of the Salmon,· The Columbill River Anadromous Fish
Restoration Plan of the Nez Perce, Umatilltl, Warm Springs and Yaktuna T~s, the Tribe's plans for restoring
salmon in the Columbia River basin. Since the alternatives are not expected to degrade fisheries habitat or
populations (Fish and Watershed Report), we feel there is no conflict with these plans.
We recognize that PACFISH does not provide the additional protection specified in the Tribe's plan. However,
the science behind PACFISH has concluded that degradation of fish habitat can be arrested and reversed by the
use of default riparian buffers, until the time site-specific buffers can be developed. These default buffers,
displayed as mitigation measures in Chapter Two of the FEIS, are no harvest or burning within 300 feet of fishbearing streams, 150 feet of non-fish bearing perennial streams, and 50 feet of non-fish bearing intermittent
streams.
-
In addition, we know that on the Oe8JWater National Forest that sediment and water from overland flow travels
significantly less than the distances required for PACFISH buffers, due to the ML Mazama ash cap covering the
Forest. Generally, overland flow is not known to occur where this ash cap is present, except in areas of
concentrated flow, such as below a relief culvert. This observation was presented by Jim Caswell in the Best
Management Practice Audit, December 6, 1994. While the Forest was using buffers significantly less than
PACFISH, we still accumulated an overall BMP effectiveness of 97.2%.
63. The CNF bas failed to develop .ny .etIon .iterDative that is eonsisteDt with protediDg aad restoring
salmon babitat within the project area .nd alreeted .reas dOWDStream.
Salmon habitat within the North Lochsa Face area is limited to the Lochsa River and two larger tributaries, Fish
Creek and Pete King Creek. Although current salmon production is very low in the lower Lochsa River
drainage, relatively good potential habitat for salmon spawning and rearing is available in Fish Creek. Except
for prescribed burning. no road building and only a minor amount of timber harvest below Mex Mountain is
planned in this drainage. Habitat conditions for salmon are expected to improve in the upper Fish Creek
drainage, where past development occurred, and remain at pristine conditions within the Hungery Creek
drainage.
Pete King Creek currently has very limited salmon production, mostly a result of supplementation efforts. The
potential habitat is located in the lower reaches and is currently rated as fair to poor due to the degraded
substrate conditions. These habitat conditions are expected to improve with the implementation of the road
obliteration projects.
I
I
I
I
I
J
II
•
•
•
•II
I
I
1
I
I
r
--
II
-Ii
•
!
I
I
Nortll Locbsa Face EIS
182
III
•I
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•I
-I
I
-I
Therefore, the habitat conditions within the two primary salmon streams within the project area are expected to
improve as a result of project implementation. Other streams within the project area (Canyon, Deadman, Glade,
Apgar, and Bimerick Creeks) may provide some thermal refugia for salmon during the summer months, but
these smaller streams do not have any substantial spawning and rearing habitat for salmon.
64. Revision after site-specific analysis of PACFlSB riparian bders, as cited as a
likely to reduce large woody debris and shade from logging near riparian areas.
m~or
objective, is
PACFISH buffers, site specific or default, are designed to achieve resource management objectives (RMOs).
Only default buffers will be used in this projecL
65. The DEIS faDs to thoroughly disclose the CNFP objectives and requirements for anadromous ftsh
habitat: (a) De DEIS coneedes that sediment deUvery will increase iD Deadman and Pete King Creek; (b)
Modeled sediment averales do not adequately predict the yearly sediment peaks; (c) The CNF sediment
model only estimates sediment deUvery from roads less than six years old; (d) The action alternatives
promise to greatly increase sediment deUvery; and (e) The DEIS concludes that under the action
alternatives, habitat recovery in the NLF draiDages may be retarded by up to 5 years.
a. The WAmAL model indicates that proposed activities will delay the recovery of some of the
drainages, but Forest Plan water quality standards will be met. In those critical reaches curently not
meeting Forest Plan standards, the sediment estimated to be produced will be balanced with the
sediment already removed through road obliteration and the cleaning of sediment traps. In most cases,
more sediment will have been removed than what is estimated to be produced. In addition, the sediment
reduction resulting from the obliteration of temporary roads is not reflected in WAmAL.
b. The WAmAL model has been validated on the 3-year mean of sediment production. The model
predicts this 3-year average of sediment production. Professional interpretation by the hydrologist is
always needed and used. Sediment models can not predict yearly sediment loads because of the
variability in yearly precipitation and temperature. This is documented in Watershed Response Model
for Forest Management, WAmAL, Technical Users Guide (patten, 1989).
c. WAmAL does continue to show very low levels of sediment from roads greater than 6 years old
(WATBAL Technical Users Guide, page 14). It is true that WATBAL cannot predict sediment from a
specific road failure. However, the model does include acceleration factors by parent material and road
age for mass erosion, which is accelerated and induced by management activities (WAmAL Technical
Users Guide, pages 12-13).
d. The alternatives do not show any measurable increases in sediment production. Aside from possible
small increases in sediment transport in the headwaters of a few drainages due to road obliteration, the
road construction and timber harvest practices proposed are not expected to increase sediment
production. Therefore, we do not anticipate any additional sediment deposition into existing pools
within any of the fish bearing streams.
e. WAmAL predicts that some streams may not return to pre-project levels immediately. However, in
streams currently not meeting Forest Plan standards and mandated by the Forest Plan Lawsuit Stipulation
of Dismissal to have "no measurable increase" in sediment, the obliteration activities and removal of
sediment traps will remove sediment far in excess of what may be generated by the proposed activities.
66. The DEIS faUed to credibly analyze the elrect of the alternatives of substrate condition such as
cobble embeddedness and pools.
The alternatives are not expected to degrade substrate conditions. The Fish and Watershed Report states the
effects of the alternatives on stream flow regime, stream channel morphology, water quality, rearing habitat,
channel substrate, stream temperatures, natural fish production, and additional project related effects.
Additionally, pages 1-4 in Chapter Four of the FEIS address the effects of the alternatives.
Nortla Locbsa Face E1S
183
CupterSix
I
I
67. De DEIS does Dot Ideatlfy and ....Iyze the eonsisteDcy or the alterutives with the ripariaD .oals or
PACFISH.
PACFISH direction is discussed in the Fish and Watershed Report. The alternatives are consistent with
PACFISH.
68. De DEIS does not adequately disclose the existing condltioD or water quaUty, ftsh habitat and the
cumuladve effects or past aDd present manalement on those conditions: (a) Disclose the number or road
erossiDp, amount or area within RHCAs occupied by roads, and amount or RHCAs Ioged, dqraded by
graziD& and disrupted by mining; (b) The DEIS erroneously asserts that there is a recovery trend in the
affected streams (I.e. Pete King Creek); and (c) De DEIS faDs to clisclose available data OD riparian
coDditions (Le. riparian areas logged).
a.
This data is in the project file. This infonnation shows how much less disturbance there will be to
RHCAs because of the proposed road obliterations. Cattle grazing and mining are very minor to nonexistent within the project area and thus have had a negligible effect on RHCAs.
b. Our sediment coring data shows there is no clear trend in fine sedimenL Recent landslides have
added sediment to Pete King. While the trend in the watershed may be improving, the stream may have
some stored sediment that has not processed out of the system. The alternatives and recent restoration
through road obliteration will improve the condition of the watersheds by removing chronic sediment
sources.
c. Riparian areas that were disturbed by past logging are improving, since we no longer enter riparian
areas to harvest timber (i.e. PACFISH riparian buffers). Available data on the level of past timber
harvest in riparian areas is also in the project tile.
69. De DEIS's .....ysis or cumuladve effects on water quaUty aDd ftsh habitat are iDadequate and
erroneous: (a) The CNF has faUed to take a bard look at the efrects or the altemadves OD water
temperature, sediment delivery, sedimentatioa, and turbidity; (b) Loggial aDd roadlng Increase sediment
many times over natural; (c) De DEIS Dever makes aDy credible, quantitadve estimate or sediment
deUvery by alternative; and (d) De DEIS does Dot analyze the effects or land management aDd recent
storms at the Lochsa River suba-siD scale.
a. The Fish and Watershed Report, summarized in Chapter Four of the FEIS, documents the effects of
the alternatives on water temperature, sediment delivery, and sedimentation. It is also anticipated that all
alternatives will maintain turbidity at less than the State standard.
b. There is no dispute that past logging methods and techniques have increased sediment, and it is true
that some of the developed areas within the project area are recovering from past logging. However, we
do not anticipate delaying or reversing this recovery trend. In contrast to past logging, proposed
treatments include helicopter and fOlWarder systems, plus the implementation of PACFlSH riparian
buffers. Proposed road constroction are ridgetop roads with no stream crossing, and temporary roads are
to be obliterated after use, usually the same year of construction.
c. WATBAL is a validated model that was developed on and for the CleatWater National Forest. It
considers both surface and mass erosion and was validated on the 3-year mean sediment production. The
WATBAL model also carries mass and surface erosion from roads for over twenty years (patten, 1989).
Although WATBAL describes the effects of past and proposed activities, it can not analyze planned
improvements (i.e. proposed road obliteration and sediment removal). Estimates of improvements from
these activities need to be balanced against sediment predicted by WATBAL from logging and roading.
d. Within the Lochsa Basin we have concluded that Squaw Creek and it's tributaries, Papoose Creek
and it's tributaries, and Noseeum Creek are not within a state of dynamic equilibrium due to the recent
flood events (Jones and Murphy, 1997). Other streams, like Pete King Creek, have been impacted by
road failures, however, they are still within equilibrium. The Lochsa River itself appears not to have
been impacted from past land management and floods (Clearwater BioStudies Inc., 1996). The draft
Assessment of the Effects of the 1995 and 1996 Flood on the Clearwater National Fores!, 1997,
Nortla Locbsa Face ElS
184
Claapter Six
I
,
I
-I
I
I
I
11
•
•
•
•
•II
I
,
I
l
JI
I
Ii
•
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,I
I
•I
I
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I
I
concluded that "although some significant stream responses were seen in landslide streams compared to
no-landslide streams, depositional patterns of sedimentation in landslide streams indicate that total
sediment input from the February, 1996 tloodllanslide event is well within the natural range of
perturbation and the streams' processing capability."
70. The DEIS fails to disclose that habitat damale causes irretrievable losses of a..dromous fish
production.
It is true that most studies show that past impacts to fish habitat have resulted in reduced salmonid survival and
production. However, we do not anticipate the proposed projects adversely impacting habitat conditions for
anadromous and resident fish or causing irretrievable and irreversible commitments of aquatic resources. lbis
takes into account the positive benefits of the projects, such as, the project design (pACFISH default riparian
buffers, limited road construction on ridgetops, and obliteration of temporary roads after use), mitigation
measures (regarding timber harvest, road building, prescribed burning), and watershed restoration activities
(road obliteration, riparian restoration, sediment removal).
71. The Nez Perce Tribe requests that we incorporate into the North Lochsa Faee project habitat
protection measures from their plans to restore anadromoDS fish habitats and populations in the
Columbia River Basin.
We believe the proposed action meets the anadromous restoration goals of their plans through: (a) improving inchannel stream conditions for anadromous fish by improving or eliminating land-use practices that adversely
impact watershed quality; (b) preventing riparian vegetation removal and, where necessary, restoring soil and
riparian vegetation; and (c) actively restoring watersheds.
72. The EIS is flawed iD its range of alternatives. There is no serious, comprehensive restoration
proposal for the dep-aded sections of the ....Iysis area.
Technically, all of the treatments proposed are some type of restoration proposal. It has been stated throughout
the document about the need to restore the natural role of fire. To do this we are proposing prescribed fire
(mostly in the unroaded areas) and timber harvest, which mimics the role of fire in the roaded areas.
Other types of restoration proposed are the hatvesting of off-site tree species from the Bimerick Meadows area
and replanting the area with native species and the controlling of noxious weed infestations along roads and
trails.
Also included in all alternatives are proposed road obliteration projects aimed at restoring degraded watersheds,
and the planting of trees in riparian areas to restore shade to the streams.
73. Logging or 75 MMBF violates the settlement agreement by failing to adequately protect water
quaHty.
Logging of 7S MMBF over a period of S years is within the parameters of the settlement agreemenL Water
quality will be protected, and in Pete King and Canyon, more sediment has been removed through road
obliteration and restoration than what is estimated to be produced by the proposed activities.
74. Nowhere in the document does it indicate that proposed road-rip activities are intriDsicaUy tied to
timber harvest, implying that if the $lM+ necessary for the road-rip activities is not aUocateci, harvest
will proceed without restoration.
We anticipate no measurable increase in sediment due to timber hatvest by itself, mainly due to the type of
harvest (retention of more trees within the units) and the implementation of default PACFISH riparian buffers.
Nortla LocJasa Face EIS
185
CupferSix
In the last two years, approximately 25.7 miles of roads were obliterated within the NLF analysis area. Also,
within the last 6 years, over 210 miles of roads have been obliterated Forest-wide. This work was multifinanced using a variety of funding sources including emergency funds to repair damage from recent landslides,
challenge cost share money through the Nez Perce Tribe, and appropriated funds for watershed, fish and
wildlife habitat improvement. Most of the recent obliteration projects were outside of activity timber sale
boundaries; there was DO funding associated with timber sales that was programmed or available to do this
work.
By accomplishing the NEPA planning process with this project, we should be better able to compete for all
funding sources. Appropriated funding for watershed, fish and wildlife improvement is expected to be used for
road obliteration projects as well as road maintenance dollars that are earmarked for road obliteration. In
addition, the Nez Perce Tribe has proposed extending an existing Challenge Cost Share Agreement to include
road obliteration within the North Lochsa Face Analysis area.
75. We question the claim that minimal to
actioD is completed.
DO
disruption in stream reeovery will oec:ur if the proposed
The fish and watershed report states the effects of the activities on stream recovery. Due to PACFlSH buffers
and watershed restoration projects, stream recovery should continue on an upward trend.
76. The tool used to predict recovery, WATBAL, Is Dot designed to predict ace:urately the road-caused
mass-wasting eveDts that have oecurred over and over in the NLF area.
WATBAL was developed on the Oearwater National Forest in response to a large flood/mass wasting event
and was designed to predict mass wasting from road failure. It is viewed as the best tool we have at this time.
In addition to WATBAL, watershed surveys, monitoring, professional judgement, and field verification are used
to detennine current conditions. Roads that are determined to be at risk for mass wasting are made candidates
for obliteration or reconstruction.
77. There Is no discussion of the effects of beUeopter mpts and landings OD the water quaUty of the
Lochsa Wild and Scenic River or its fishery. Does this meet the requirements of the Wand S Rivers Act?
Specific actions are not prohibited by the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. Section 10, Administration, states:
"Each component of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System shall be administered in such manner as to
protect and enhance the values which caused it to be included in said system without, insofar as is consistent
therewith, limiting other uses that do not substantially interfere with public use and enjoyment of these values."
Having reviewed the three proposed helicopter landing sites, with the Pete King site being outside of the wild
and scenic corridor, the Forest Fisheries Biologist and Forest Hydrologist concluded that these sites will not
prevent attainment of the PACFISH riparian management objectives, nor will they increase sedimentation risks
with the recommended mitigation measures (refer to Chapter Two, page 29). Therefore, the Wild and Scenic
values will be protected.
78. The DEIS faUs to properly assess impacts to Appr Creek and other smaU watenhed, since there are
no bydrolopcalmodels used OD the Clearwater suitable for assessing impacts to small watersheds.
In addition to models, watershed surveys, monitoring, and professional judgement is used to assess impacts.
WATBAL is the best model for the Clearwater National Forest because it was developed with data from the
forest. While WATBAL may limit watershed size, professional judgement is used to determine impacts to
smaller watersheds. The treatment for the units in Apgar is to remove 50% of the vegetation up to the
PACFlSH buffer. The soil scientist feels this mitigation will retain slope stability and not deliver sediment to
the stream.
NoJ1ll Loeb. Face E1S
186
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
79. We are concerned that the follow-through for actuaUy doing the work (road obUteratioDS) wiD not be
there as budgets for such things continue to be cut.
The District is taking every opportunity to obliterate roads to improve watershed conditions. Historically,
efforts to remove roads from the land have been hampered by lack of funding (thereby, the inability to securing
skilled personnel) to review roads at the landscape scale to determine future needs, current/projected watershed
problems, and recommend corrective actions. In addition, the funding to take this information and
recommendations through a landscape scale environmental analysis was not available.
The FEIS will now allow the Forest to aggressively pursue funding to implement watershed restoration
activities. Funding decisioDS, where the environmental analysis is complete, will receive higher priority at the
Regional Office level. Projects involving cooperators will also receive high priority for funding through the
Regional Office. Potential cooperators include state and tribal affiliates. The roads proposed for obliteration in
this document will be surveyed in the summer of 1999. While future funding is difficult to predict, current
trends indicate that we will continue to get funded to obliterate roads.
so.
If the understatement of water quaUty impacts is the product of WATBAL, then it should be
replaced with an updated model.
WATBAL was created on the Clearwater National Forest with local data, therefore it is the best model, at this
time, for this area. WATBAL is one of many tools used to determine impacts and is used in combination with
professional judgement.
81. The EIS should demonstrate that the project will comply with existing total maximum daUy load
(TMDL) for ,oUutants for Usted waters, and must demoDStrate that project implementations wiD comply
with State water quaUty standards.
TMDLs have not been developed yet. The fish and watershed report states compliance with State water quality
standards by not creating an accumulative gain in sediment in listed streams.
82. The EIS should provide some discussion of the adequacy of PACFISB bufrers in protecting surface
water.
PACF1SH states that one of the Riparian Management Objectives (RMO s) is to have instream flows to support
healthy riparian and aquatic habitats. This project is in compliance with PACFISH and therefore in compliance
with the RMOs.
83. In regards to the risk of petroleum spUls, the EIS should specifteaUy discuss which BMPs and
response measures would be utilized to counter the danger or such spills, including monitoring
procedures.
Idaho water quality standards require the use of Best Management Practices (BMP's) to mitigate nonpoint
pollution. State-recognized BMP's that would be used during project design and implementation are contained
in Rules and Regulations Pertaining to the Idaho Forest Practices Act, (IFPA), as adopted by the Idaho Land
Board.
The Forest Service Soil and Water Conservation Practices Handbook (FSH 2509.22) guides interdisciplinary
development of BMP'S in project design. The BMP's listed below are referenced to the Practices listed in the
Handbook. All rules contained in Chapters 3 (fimber Harvesting) and 4 (Road Construction and Maintenance)
of the Idaho Forest Practices Act (IFPA) Rules are addressed.
Practice 11.07 - Oil and Hazardous Substance Spill Contingency Planning
Practice 11.11 - Petroleum Storage and Delivery Facilities and Management
Practice 15.11 - Servicing and Refueling of Equipment
Nortla LoeIasa Face EIS
187
To prevent or minimize contamination of waters from accidental spills and leakage of fuels, lubricants,
bitumens, raw sewage, wash water, and other harmful materials the following regulations will be utilized.
If the total oil or oil products storage exceeds 1320 gallons or if any single container exceeds a capacity of 660
gallons, the Purchaser must prepare a Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures (SPCC) Plan (limber Sale
Contract Clause C(f)6.341 Prevention of Oil Spills). The plan must meet applicable EPA requirements (40
CFR 112) including certification by a registered professional engineer.
Petroleum product storage containers with capacities of more than 200 gallons, stationary or mobile, will be
located DO closer than 300 feet from a Oass 1 Stream. Dikes, berms, or embankments will be constructed to
contain the volume of petroleum products stored within the tanks. Diked areas will be sufficiently impervious
and of adequate capacity to contain spilled petroleum products (lFPA Rule 2.j, Paetish Standards, and Timber
Sale Contract Oause C(T)6.341).
During fueling operations or petroleum product transfer to other containers, there shall be a person attending
such operations at all times (lFPA Rule 2.j.i and Timber Sale Contract aause C(T)6.341).
If necessary, specific requirements for transporting oil to be used in conjunction with the contract will be
specified in the Timber Sale Contract aause C(T)6.S3. Equipment used for transportation or storage of
petroleum products shall be maintained in a leakproof condition. If the Forest Practice Advisor determines
there is evidence of petroleum product leakage or spillage be/she shall have the authority to suspend the further
use of such equipment until the deficiency has been corrected (lFPA 2.j.ii and Timber Sale Contract Clause
C(f) 6341).
Although SPCC Plans cannot eliminate the risk of materials being spilled and escaping into waters, they can if
followed be effective at reducing adverse effects to tolerable levels. Depending on the location and quantity of
a spill, a properly implemented Plan can provide for up to 100 percent containment of a spill. The Contracting
Officer, Engineering Representative, or Certified Sale Administrator will designate the location, size and
allowable uses of service and refueling areas and monitor to insure compliance with these plans. In the event
any leakage or spillage enters any stream, water course or area of open water, the operator will immediately
notify the appropriate Forest Service Representative who will be required to follow the actions to be taken in
case of hazardous spi!l, as outlined in the Forest Hazardous Substance Spill Contingency Plan.
The Fiscal Year 1996 aearwater National Forest Monitoring Report discusses the audit that was conducted at
the Forest level on Idaho Forest Practices Best Management Practices. There were 298 BMP's observed in 1996
with a 98.7% rate of implementation and a 97.7% rate of effectiveness.
A complete discussion of all BMP's is presented in the Fish and Watershed Report.
84. The DEIS mentioDs that UDder certalD dreumstaDces, sediment would Deed to be removed from
Walde Creek. What would be the impacts of this process in this and/or other streams or rivers?
Oean water has an inherent capacity to move sediment through the channel. Because of the history of roading
and landslides in the Pete King watershed, this system has an excessive amount of instream sediments
embedded (trapped) in the channel. This is evidenced by surveys indicating high embeddedness of larger stones
and excessive sand in spawning gravels. To the trained observer, sandbars in the channel are obvious and
uncharacteristic for the Pete King watershed.
There are four sediment traps in the Pete King watershed (two in mid-Walde Creek; one in the west of Pete
King, near Sebring Flat; and one in the mainstem of Pete King Creek near Placer Creek. These sediment traps
were installed in the mid-1980's for the purpose of trapping some of the bedload (primarily sand) sediment
coursing through these streams from the upland tributaries and providing cleaner water below the sediment
traps. These traps have been cleaned most years, with more than 3000 cubic yards (300, 10 yard dump truck
loads) being trapped and removed from these streams. For the purpose of encouraging the natural flushing of
instream sediments, these traps are proposed to be removed, with the sites restored to approximate natural
channel cross-section conditions. Emphasis will be placed on road obliterations to address sediment problems.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
With the recent landslide history in the headwaters of Pete King Creek, excess instream sediments is expected
to continue. The effect of this "pulse" of sediment generated by these landslides is expected to take a decade or
more to stabilize (via revegetation). It may take several decades for sands not stabilized by vegetation to course
through the watershed to the Lochsa River.
The planned "impact" of this activity is to speed the recovery of the primary steelhead rearing habitat in Pete
King Creek by: 1) minimizing the recruitment of instream sediment from the headwaters; and 2) encouraging
the natural flushing of instream sediments out of this reach. Efforts, such as road obliteration, to reduce
landslide frequency and severity (prevention) will prove most beneficial.
85. The EIS should address potential short-term aad long-tenD impacts resulting from the planting of
trees aloag Pete King and Fish Creeks.
Short-term impacts of tree planting are minimal. Long-term impacts would be more shade leading to lower
stream temperatures. Additionally the trees will provide large wood to the riparian area. This wood will act as
habitat and pool creators. Trees in the riparian area will also provide bank stability.
86. Was a ecosystem ....Iysis at the watenbed scale performed?
Although an analysis at that scale is Dot required for this project, most of the steps were completed, including a
6-step process. Instead, a landscape assessment was conducted for the North Lochsa Face area. Major
watersheds within the area were characterized by this process.
87. With the severe decliDe of wild steelbead, bow can the FS evea think or Ioggiag and aBowing
motoreycles in the FISh Creek area.
I
Very little logging is proposed along existing roads in the headwaters of the Fish Creek drainage. The access
option emphasizes the continuance of "existing", historic use of motorcycles in the Fish Creek drainage.
Neither the logging plan or the motorcycle use will jeopardize the existence of the wild steelhead populations.
88. The aDDul precipitation and nmotr both decrease over time in your model (speciftcaUy the upper
Pete King drainage). Bow do you justify this assumpdoa?
Annual precipitation is a constant in the model and does not change from year to year. Runoff shows a decrease
due to recovery of the watershed. As the watershed recovers, more vegetation intercepts water yield, causing
less runoff.
89. What evideace is there that stream recovery will proceed as rapidly as predicted ill the DEIS?
WATBAL, the sediment model, does not take into account restoration projects such as road obliteration,
channel improvements, and riparian planting. These projects will help accelerate the natural recovery of the
stream.
90. The FS should prioritize watersheds for sedimeat reduction to limit impacts to threateaed aad
eadaDgered fish species.
Watershed road obliteration is being prioritized by mass wasting potential, proximity to streams, number of
stream crossings, and overall watershed condition. While these factors are analyzed, TES species are taken into
consideration.
91. Streams withbl this area are coataiDed on the States Water QuaUty Limited Segment list. AU
activities must be conducted such that the ultimate outcome is a reduction iD poUulaDts, resulting iD
water qua6ty improvements.
Although Pete King, Canyon, Glade, and Deadman Creeks were designated water quality limited by the state
with the pollution of concern being sediment, the State has recently detennined that beneficial uses are being
protected and have removed these streams from the WQLS list. Proposed treatments are expected to cause no
gain in sediment by implementing default PACFISH buffers, and there should be an overall reduction in
sediment due to road obliterations and other watershed restoration activities.
NortIa LoeIIsa Face £IS
CUpkrSix
I
92. Since die Locbsa RIver Is IIstedlD the Goveraor 5 BaD Trout
wID enbaaee die recovery of the bull trout, mould be punaed.
eo.......tIon PIau, a.y acdvldes, wbleb
Activities to enhance habitat for all fish species are being considered and pursued when feasible.
93. It appean that you are Dot taking credit for road obllteradon _d using the wiggle room that
provides to build additional access.
The point of road obliteration is to eliminate roads from the landscape which pose a risk to the aquatic resource
or which are no longer needed for future use. The current conditions of our developed watersheds are such that
there will be no "wiggle" room until these streams have reasonably recovered from the impacts of past roading
and timbering practices. Specifically, this means that excess sediments from headwater and mainstem streams
must be reduced. It also means that streamside vegetation must recover in some instances to restore relatively
natural stream shading conditions.
The road obliterations will speed the recovery of these streams faster than letting the current conditions heal
with time. Vegetative restoration for shade and channel stability, however, will take time. There are currently
no silvicultural practices (such as thinning or promoting uneven-age forest structure) that can be used along with
the PACFlSH buffers to develop larger trees sooner. Only time will allow the recovery of vegetation.
VEGETATION
94. For lIUUI8.ement of mature, late mature aDd/or old growth stands, show the purpose aDd Deed of the
proposed manapmeat aedvlty in relation to the desired future condldoD of the stands, LTA, and forest.
This information is displayed in O1apter 4, in the vegetation section.
95. We would like more detaU on old growth management.
The traditional definition of old growth forest does not clearly incorporate the natural variety of late mature
forest conditions expressed at the landscape level. The definition was driven by descriptions of structure and
age. Assessments relied on physical features within one or more adjoining stands as the criterion for selecting
or rejecting suitable stands. This approach to managing did not acknowledge the variety of late mature forest on
the landscape.
With the NLF FEIS, the term 'old growth forest' is replaced under these guiding ecosystem management
principles with 'late mature forest'. Forest ecosystem management within the NLF recognizes, defines and
directs that all forest succession stages, including those of mature and late mature succession stages, be present
and represented within the natural range of variation for each LTA.
With the application of ecosystem management principles and practices, the purpose and need related to
viability for old forest obligate species has advanced. Management practices which mimic historic patch sizes
and disturbance intervals benefit associated wildlife and plant species. Incorporating ecosystem management
principles and practices into forest management implies that the probability of maintaining wildlife species
viability is high.
A thorough discussion is presented in the biologist's status report (North Lochsa Face PElS - Wildlife and TES
Plant Resources Status Report, September 2, 1998) and summarized in Chapter 4 of the FEIS.
High risk associated with frequent, and now intensifying fire behavior, inappropriate patch size and tree species
composition would neither produce nor retain the full array of landscape level, old forest processes.
Forest plant succession ranges from young trees to the old trees (i.e., early successional stage to a late mature
stage) across the landscape. This concept acknowledges the natural progression of forest aging and rejuvenation
via disturbance. It also acknowledges the continuation and expression of the natural ecologic processes in the
forest environmenL
NortIl LoeIIsa Faee ElS
190
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
96. There is DO jUStillcatioD tor the sbiftiD. of species composidoD in the analysis area toward sera)
species. This impUes the cuttiDg ofold-growth timber (climax) species.
The reason that the desired condition for the project area includes a higher percentage of seral species that
currently exists, is that historically, there was a higher percentage of seral species. Oimax species are not
necessarily old growth. The climax species for most of the project area are western redcedar and grand fir.
They can be any age, from seedlings to very old. Shifting species composition toward sera! species can be done
many ways. In thinning, seral species (usually Douglas-fir, western white pine, ponderosa pine, western larch,
or lodgepole pine) can be favored over grand fir or western redcedar, without completely eliminating the grand
fir or cedar. In regeneration harvesting, seral species can be selected for leave trees, where they exist, but some
grand fir and cedar will also be lefL Planted trees will be mostly the serals because they have better survival
and growth rates. Species composition of stands did not generate harvest proposals. Species composition does
influence how the various proposals are implemented.
97. No data was supplied in the EIS to justify "forest health" problem claims.
Forest heal th involves much more than just the presence of trees with endemic levels of insects and diseases. In
fact, the evaluation of forest heal th acknowledges the importance of insects, diseases, fires, windthrow, floods,
landslides, etc, as natural ecosystem processes for nutrient recycling, biomass redistribution, species diversity,
habitat enhancement, and a host of other interactions within the forest. Diseases and insect infestations can
reduce stand density and change species composition so the remaining trees are more resistant to environmental
stresses. Floods and landslides are natural processes which can enhance nutrients and habitat conditions in
aquatic ecosystems.
The emphasis of this project has been to understand the natural systems in the North Lochsa Face area and use
that knowledge to design management activities that maintain the ecosystems within the historic range of
variability. This permits us to identify areas that may have "forest health" problems in the future while we still
have time to respond. An example of this concept is the use of prescribed fire and/or timber harvest to reduce
high stand densities on breakland LTAs. Historically, mixed, lethal/nonlethal fires would occur approximately
every 26-50 years on these locations. Sera! species such as Douglas-fir, ponderosa pine, and western larch
would often survive these fires while less fire resistant species (grand fir and western redcedar) would be
removed. Due to past fire exclusion, many of our breakland areas have higher stand density and a different
species composition than would have occurred naturally. An example of this condition is stand 512-01-007.
This stand has been an open ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir stand, and the large, old trees are still standing.
However, because they have not been underbumed periodically, the understory is now densely stocked with 1"
to 8" grand fir and Douglas-fir. Higher stand densities like this are common all across the breaklands, and have
increased the stress on the remaining trees. This has led to a high level of bark beetle activity, and pockets of
large trees that have been killed all across the breaklands. Review of the insect and disease aerial detection
maps for the past 10 to 15 years indicates that this is an ongoing and widespread occurrence. By applying a
range of different management activities, we can maintain the forest health within a historic range of variation,
which does not eliminate insect and disease activity, but maintains it at a low to moderate level.
So, while the DEIS does not directly report high rates of insects, diseases, etc., forest health problems are
addressed through the presentation of data portraying ranges of stand densities, species composition, age class
distributions, etc. that are outside the natural range of variation.
98. The ageacy proposes to elimiDate a considerable percentage (20-30%) or the old growth. Action
alternatives range from 1017 to 2079 acres or logging in old growth aDd would occur in two old growth
units that already fail to meet Forest Plan standards.
The Forest Plan standards for old growth will be met and documented in the Record of Decision. Most of these
treatments are designed to maintain the existing stand age and structure. They are commercial thins or salvage
treatments. There are no regeneration harvests planned in functioning old growth.
NortIa LocIIsa Face ElS
191
CuplerSix
The commercial thins are proposed because forest inventory indicates that those particular stands are very dense
and in danger of falling to extensive insect and disease activity, similar to the stands that we are proposing for
regeneration harvest. We do not want that to happen, because we need to maintain these age classes to match
the desired conditions identified for each LTA. Thinning may slightly change stand structure, while reducing
the density. The result will be a stand of trees that is more resistant to insects and diseases, and one that will
remain on the landscape for a longer period of time.
99. Bow does your deaslty aaalysis lit Into the _tunI nD.e or v.riability ror this .rea .Dd the dUl'erent
IaDdtypes?
We have DO data concerning the natural range of densities found in this specific landscape. However, the
research that resulted in the Stand Density Index approach to density management, found that there is a
maximum density for each species, that is not site dependent. So, the maximum densities used for the North
Lochsa Face analysis are those that were developed for our species, and are valid across the range of the
species. What Stand Density Indices tell us is that beyond a certain density, there will be mortality in the stand
that will reduce density to a lower level. The agents for that reduction are generally disease or insects. In order
to limit the "foothold" that a disease takes in a stand, we propose to reduce the stocking level in places to a
sustainable level, and utilize the trees for local economic benefits.
100. III reprds to old growth, it Is not clear bow DWly .cres of tftes with • dbb 10" _d IarKer would be
Joaed UDder each .edon .ltenadve.
Large diameter and old growth status are not equivalent. Growing conditions here often produce trees over 20"
in diameter well before a stand qualifies as old growth. We have chosen to implement the ecosystem
management principles described in this FEIS. The reviewer should study the descriptions of the 'Desired
Future Conditions' in Chapter 2 of the FEIS. Also, a thorough discussion is presented in the biologist's status
report and summarized in the FEIS.
101. The EIS admits that lire suppressioa .nd poor login. practlees have resulted iD unhealthy stands.
Bow do you know that your current proposed lDau.ement .ctlvlties WOD't cause more problems?
The current proposals are based on the kinds of disturbance that occuned naturally, and are the processes that
were a part of the ecosystem. By implementing these proposals, we will be starting to put those same, or
similar, processes back in the system. These activities are designed to maintain or restore the st.nJcture,
composition, and functions of the North Lochsa Face system.
The impacts of management activities will be monitored over time. The proposed activities are the result of
current scientific knowledge as wen as results and modifications developed through the monitoring of past
activities. Fire suppression was "thought" to be good in all cases when it was first implemented as a major
emphasis of the Forest Service early in this century. Subsequent monitoring and scientific knowledge have
shown that fire is essential for the maintenance of many ecosystems and it is being reintroduced back into those
areas. We have applied the best available knowledge in designing the management activities for this project
102. Were .erial surveys the only survey method used to detect bisect aad disease dam••e? Were these
surveys YaOd.ted out 08 the ground?
We routinely collect insect and disease information during our forest inventory work. That information mostly
documents the endemic levels of insect and disease activity. Aerial detection pinpoints more severe levels of
activity that are later confirmed by ground observation.
103. Bas there been aay •••Iysis of potential increases iD iasects aad diseases due to logging aad road
buildlag? Bow .bout ....Iysis or potential shifts iD type of Insects .nd diseases due to the same?
The new road construction (system and/or temporary) proposed in the action alternatives is within areas
proposed for harvest. Stand replacement harvests will not result in insect and disease increases, but rather in a
reduced susceptibility. Thinning could result in increased levels of root rot and associated bark beetle
populations if they are present in the stand now, and we do not design the harvest to reduce their impact.
Nortla Loebsa Faee E1S
192
ClIa,tcrSb
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
We can reduce their impact in those cases by treating small pockets of infestation to "sanitize" them. Stands
which currently have a high level of infection are not good candidates for thinning, and will be avoided.
We do not know of any alternate types of insects or diseases that could become established due to harvest or
road construction.
104. Wbat do you meaD by "shrubftelds must be permitted to shift spatiaUy across the IaDdscape over
time"?
Ecosystem management recognizes that forest plant succession ranges from young trees to the old trees (i.e.,
early successional stage to a late mature stage) across the landscape. This concept acknowledges the natural
progression of forest aging and rejuvenation via disturbance. It also acknowledges the continuation and
expression of the natural ecologic processes in the forest environment.
Many of the current shrobfields in the North Lochsa Face area are the result of two, or even three, intense
wildfires early in this century. These tires resulted in the destruction of the duffllitter layer, as well as the
volatilization of much of the organic matter within the soil itself. These areas are not currently capable of
sustaining forest vegetation until the soil recovers through the natural process of plant succession. Therefore,
any given area of land would be allowed to proceed through a relatively natural progression of forest aging and
rejuvenation. Plant succession in what is now a shrubfields, would be allowed/encouraged to advance to young
forest; young forest to older forest, etc. lbis progression would "shift spatially across the landscape over time"
as disturbances of different intensities occur..
lOS. What evidence is there that current forest conditions Dever oc:eurred anytime durinl the past
10,000 years?
Climatic conditions are believed to have changed significantly over the past 10,000 years. After the retreat of
the continental glaciers north of the North Lochsa Face area (and possibly limited alpine glaciation in the north
portion of the analysis area), the climate is believed to have gone through a number of warm and dry as well as
cool and wet cycles. Approximately 6700 years ago, Mount Mazama (where Crater Lake now is) erupted
depositing up to two feet of volcanic ash across the analysis area. Based on the ash retention in different forest
types, it is believed ~at the climate was much warmer at that time, possibly to the extent where current grand fir
habitat type series were ponderosa pine and western redcedar series were Douglas-fir. More recently, in the
1600's in Europe, the climatic period know as the "Little Ice Age" was well documented and is believed to have
occurred throughout the Northern Hemisphere, including the North Lochsa Face area.
Therefore, it is not possible to positively document that the current forest conditions never occurred during the
past 10,000 years due to the dramatic variation in climatic conditions and the subsequent responses in plant
succession. However, based on the current climatic conditions and those known for the past hundred years or
so, historic ranges of variation in forest structure, composition, and function have been developed as tools to
direct our management activities and opportunities.
106. It there weren't numerous seed sources tor the tolerant trees to become established after effective
lire suppression, they would not be in those sites today.
That is true. Tolerant species also establish themselves immediately after a fire disturbance, but often are
slower growing than the seral species, and end up as understory trees in the new forest. Where they are a part of
the general forest canopy, they are found mixed with a good representation of seral species.
107. Extensive heavy cutting bas occurred, yet, the area is characterized as being somehow unhealthy, in
Deed of more cutting.
Past harvest was not designed to mimic natural processes. As a consequence, it focused on the large, old stands
with high commercial volumes. It left many of the younger stands, or less accessible stands; untreated.
Together, that has resulted in many young stands in need of thinning to maintain healthy forests that will live to
become the large, old forests of the future. Age classes are also skewed to the 60 to 90 year bracket due to the
extensive fires in the late 1800s and early 1900s.
Norda LocIIsa Face ElS
193
CllapterSix
108. Where ill die doeument Is a eopIIt esplaDatloDloalysis or the SCIeDdfte Uterature repnliD. forest
types, lire regimes, old growth, DOn-forest vegetative types, and wildore/flsherles abuDdaaee and
distributioD iD pre-European settlement times?
Few scientific documents chronicle the historic conditions for forest conditions in most of the Northern Rockies
region, much less the North Lochsa Face area specifically. The Lewis and Oark Expedition was the first
recorded scientific assessment into this area and a great deal of general information was obtained during their
journey. As far as forest conditions, much of the historic information has been extrapolated backward in time
from early forest surveys conducted as early as the tum of the century, as well as fire scar analysis on living
trees and snags. Information from studies on similar landforms and forest types has been utilized. The basic
landscape unit used in this analysis, the landtype association (LTA), was assigned forest types, tire regimes,
successional stage distributions, animal/fisheries characteristics, etc. based on the best available knowledge
which is listed in the Reference section of the FEIS.
109. A seedoD Is needed esplaiDIDl how much old forest existed "bIstoricaUy", wbleh spedes were
iIIvolved, and rouPJy where It m....t have been.
The amount of late successional stages that existed "historically" varied considerably across the landscape
depending upon LTA. The general discussion of LTAs in the FEIS, beginning O1apter One, provides a basic
framework for the species historically present in each LTA along with the historic fire regime and patch size.
Appendix F presents the major habitat type group conditions and forest types by LTA for each of the four major
watershed groups. Finally, the vegetation discussion in Chapter Three presents tables showing the desired age
class distribution by LTA for each drainage. lbis desired age class distribution is our best approximation of
what the historic conditions were for each LTA.
110. There is no clIscussioD or the Coastal ~UDct Sensldve Area status that entaDs much or the Lochsa
Face area.
Endangered and Sensitive plant species known to occur in the North Lochsa Face area along with their location
are discussed in Chapter Three of the FEIS. In addition, there is a discussion of the Lochsa Research Natura1
Area and the unique coastal disjunct plant species that occur there.
111. The Locbsa RNA was created with aDd ror the preseDce or Scotcb Broom, aDd thus does DOt
represent the coaeeived threat that you seem to place on it.
Research Natura1 Areas (RNAs) are set aside to preserve and protect native plant communities and other natural
features of unique areas. Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius) is an extremely aggressive shrub introduced into
California from Europe. Since then it has moved north as far as Canada and is present in the North Lochsa Face
area. It is appropriate that concern be made about its presence in the RNA since it is not a native species.
WILDLIFE HABITAT
112. Where crIdeal elk habitat is Deeded we suggest you browse burn wbere commercial timber is Dot aD issue
and log ill "ckoountry areas to eDbance summer raD.e browse_ it's Dot loss or habitat that's the problem, it's
bUDten and predators. Regulate the hunters, use some StroDg predatory control measures to aUeviate the kill
rate and promote cow and calC survival rates, and quit importing wolves aDd grizzly bears into the area.
The planned activities are intended to favor timber harvest, where feasible, to accomplish elk winter range objectives.
Although "summer range browse" is not the appropriate terminology (elk favor grazing lush grasses and forbs from
early spring through the summer growing season), disturbances on summer range by timber harvest and/or fire increase
grass and forb production. Alternative 3a favors the retaining the option for future commercial timber harvest from
much of upper Fish and Hungery Creeks, deferring any significant disturbances that could benefit elk summer habitat,
to the future.
Suggestions to "Regulate the hunters...and quit importing wolves and grizzly bears..." are beyond the scope of this
analysis.
194
C...... Sa
-I
-I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
113. I suuest you establlsb a collaborative group of speclaUsts from fire behavior, fish and lame, aDd timber
industry, along with eDvironmeDtalists to come up with a plan to improve the health and vigor of our elk herds
and prevent catastrophic wildfires in this area.
•
•
•I
I
A collaborative effort was recently initiated (Spring 1998) called the Clearwater Basin Elk Initiative. It is pursuing your
suggestion. Numerous partners/collaborators are working on an memorandum of understanding and have started the
process. North Lochsa Face is within this "initiative area".
114. IDcorporate elk vulnerability measures to detenDiDe land IIWIalement drects.
Actions to limit vehicle access during hunting season were considered. The effects on bull elk vulnerability during
hunting season are displayed in O1apter IV, Tables 4.14 through 4.17. Calculations were done by IDF&G biologist,
George Pauley.
lIS. Include a map of the EHEUs wlthiD the project area and a table, iDcludinl size in acres, road density, and
elk drectiveaess measure of EHEUs before ad after adJustmeDts for each altenative.
The correct tenn or 'EHEU' is 'EAA' (per IDF&G Wildlife Bulletin 11, page 33). The EAAs are first discussed in
Chapter 3 (refer to Table 3.9). The effects of each alternative on elk summer habitat effectiveness are displayed in
Table 4.2. Calculations used to develop Table 4.2, are in tables in wildlife section of the project file. The tables in the
project file display the road density (i.e., 'Miles of Standant Road per Square Mile') by BAA, by alternative.
116. Identify EHEU boundaries reladve to those defined in the forest plan.
,-
•
,
•I
•
•I
I
,
Refer to the response to the previous comment regarding EHAU. There were no EAA boundaries depicted in the
Forest Plan. Rather, EAA boundaries were developed after completion of the Forest Plan, similar to the guidelines
displayed per IDF&G Wildlife Bulletin 11, page 33. Management Areas depicted in the Forest Plan, were not
developed per the same guidelines (i.e., prescription watersheds, timber compartment boundaries, etc.) as those used for
the EAA delineations. EAA boundaries, therefore, were not developed exactly along Forest Plan management area
boundaries. EAA boundaries, however, were developed as closely as practical to the management area boundaries
depicted in the Forest Plan. EAA boundaries adjoining winter range, excluded winter range and attempted to
approximate winter!Uge management areas (C3 and C4), where possible. Local (site-specific) adjustments were made
to accommodate landscape features (existing roads, major ridges or breaks in topography) and facilitate consistent
identification of management area boundaries on the landscape. These EAA delineation practices eliminated small
inclusions of summer range within winter range (and vise versa) that were impractical for either elk summer range
analysis or elk winter range managemenL Maps depicting EAA boundaries are in the project file.
117. Expand Appendix F to melude 2 columns showing exisdng aDd desired patch size by rorest type to provide a
"sis for discussing habitat fragmeDtadoD, wildlife corridors and Unkages, and maintenaDce or iDterior forest
habitats for wUdHre species.
Due to the nature of the Forest Service timber database, the determination of existing patch size is not easily obtained.
However, through the development of LTAs and the subsequent assignment of historic fire regimes to LTAs, desired
future conditions for vegetation were developed which acknowledged historic vegetation patterns. Typical disturbance
patch sizes were determined for each LTA and management activities and alternatives were designed to mimic these
patch sizes. Since fires and the associated vegetation patterns have operated on this landscape for thousands of years,
animals have evolved with those conditions. Since historic vegetation patterns (by LTA) are the desired future
conditions within the analysis area, any wildlife needs in terms of corridors, linkages, interior habitat, etc. will be
adequately addressed.
118. To protect the elk berds, the 10/1 closure to OHVs in Opdon 3 should be sbortened to Labor Day,
and aU trails Dot ill critical big game wmter range should be OpeD to sDowmobiles.
The principal factor in closing roads in the fall is related to providing additional security areas during the
general ritle season for big game. Preliminary results from the bull elk vulnerability study indicate that
provisions for security during the elk hunting season are essential to improving bull elk survival. The
Nortla LocIIsa Face EIS
195
CllapterSix
·incremental benefits of closing roads to protect elk during September (the archery season) are inconsequential
when compared to the beuefits of doing so for the general rifle season. The rationale for this conclusion is that
most of the hunting mortality (by virtue of the number of hunters and their ability to more easily harvest elk) is
attributable to rifle hunters (not archers).
There are NO restrictions outside of critical winter range, during routine winter operating seasons, to
snowmobiles.
119. The rebuilding or Road S548 near Mex Mountain wID disrupt the patterns of use aDd travel widell
the IarKer aDimaIs have worked out. lastead, couldD't this area be aceessed with helleopten?
The reconstruction of Road SS48 is no longer proposed. The two regeneration units that would have been
accessed by Road SS48 have been dropped from further consideration. Recent field surveys show these stands
to be at or Dear their desired condition.
120. We are very conceraed about eJreets to North AIIIericaD lyo, _ end....ered spedes, aad northern
gosbawk ad old growth dependent spedes.
The North American lynx has been proposed by the USFWS for listing. An estimated 8850 acres of suitable
lynx habitat occurs with the NLF. The planned action would treat approximately 400 acres of lynx habitat.
Also, approximately 47,000 acres of suitable northern goshawk habitat occur in the NLF. The planned action
would treat approximately 3000 acres of goshawk habitat The affects of management activity on each of these
species is summarized in Olapter 4 of the FEIS and the Biological Evaluation for these species.
121. The DEIS fans to provide substaDtive aDaIysls or poteDtial dired and lDdired effects or
maDa,eJDeat acdvltles on rare, threateDed, eDdaapred, aad seDSidve species.
A thorough discussion is presented in the biologist's status report and summarized in O1apter Four of the FEIS.
The effects will also be documented in the biological assessment and a biological evaluation, to be prepared for
the respective species classifications. Also, pages 47-63 of the aquatic specialist report discuss effects of the
activities on TES fish species. Little to no effects are expected to occur.
122. Bow does lire suppressloD aad the remoYai or old growth belp black-Mckeel woodpeckers aad
nammulated owls?
Neither species is an old growth forest obligate. A thorough discussion is presented in the biologist's status
report. The affects of management activity on each of these species is summarized in Chapter Four of the FEIS
and the Biological Evaluation for these species.
Ecosystem management practices employing fire will benefit both of these species. For black-backed
woodpecker, habitat will be improved where fire is used to create snags. For flammulated owls, low and mixed
severity fire wi)) provide additional foraging areas below a canopy of older ponderosa pine and Douglas fir.
Approximately 600 acres of habitat improvement for flammulated owls would be accomplished by prescribed
fire, including underbuming.
123. Where is there an analysis of aU relevant MIS species?
A thorough discussion is presented in the biologist's status report and summarized in Chapter Four of the FEIS.
124. The historical relationship betweeD past and proposed machine management in the fisb and wUdlife
e.rimental closure area is poorly and UDclearly baDdled.
A thorough discussion relating to the impacts of motorized vehicles on management indicator and threatened,
endangered or sensitive species is presented in the biologist's status report and summarized in Chapter Four of
the FEIS.
NortII Loebsa Faee E1S
196
CIlapterSb
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RoADLESS AREA VALVES
125. I am curious as to wbat President ClintoD'S Dew roadless area poBcy meaDS for the North Lochsa Slope
Roadless Area and this projeet... this poBey will limit wbat forms of managemeDt caD be used in FISh aDd
Bungery Creek areas.
The interim road policy will have little effect on proposed activities, since minimal road activities are being proposed
with each alternative. Only Alternative 2 proposes any new road construction (one road 1.1 miles in length) within the
North Lochsa Slope Roadless Area. This alternative will remain as proposed, since this is an "interim" road policy.
The remaining alternatives all have no roads (permanent or temporary) proposed within this roadless area.
126. Designate the North Lochsa Slope Wilderness to include 121,000 acres.
As stated in Chapter Two, designating wilderness is beyond the scope of this analysis. Only Congress can
designate wilderness.
127. Logging and road buDding in a proposed wilderness area is unheard of aDd must be maintained as
wilderness.
Logging and road building are not planned in the proposed Lewis and Oarlc wilderness area covered by the
Oearwater Forest Plan lawsuit settlement agreemenL Alternatives 2 and 3 propose logging and minor road
construction (Alt 2 only) in the portion of the North Lochsa Slope Roadless Area outside of the settlement area.
I
128. The DEIS indicates poteDtial timber barvest weD within the proposed wilderness area, currently
protected under the Oearwater lawsuit settlement.
I
Although the proposed timber harvest near Mex Mountain is not within the area covered by the lawsuit
settlement, these two regeneration units and the reconstruction of Road 5548 have been dropped from further
consideration. Both units were found to be at or near their desired condition.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
129. Proposed motorized trail in the upper Fish Creek drainage directly violates the terms of the
settlement agreement, does Dot protect the wilderness character or quaUdes of the area, and is
inappropriate aDd inconsistent with the maaagement direction for B2 areas. AppeDdix item iD the
iDterim is the Forest Supervisor's 3130/93 letter, which directs "when trans are constructed or
reconstructed in B2 areas, those traUs will be closed to ORVs until wUdemess legisladon deals with use
issues. "
There are four answers to this comment: (a) The settlement agreement does not constrain or restrict existing
motorized uses in the roadless areas, and neither does B2 management direction, so long as their wilderness
features are protected; (b) Motorized use within this roadless area would not impact the wilderness character or
qualities of the area. Motorized use is to be monitored, and "triggers" are in place keep use within resource
capabilities and acceptable social experiences; (c) Motorized -use within this roadless area would not preclude it
from future wilderness designation. Motorized use has been common in many areas, including the SelwayBitterroot Wilderness, prior to them being designated as wilderness; and (d) The ORV interim guides for B2
says only "full size" vehicles are not permitted. This does not include trail bikes and OHVs less than 50".
However, it should be noted that Access Option 3 no longer proposes any trail reconstruction within the HR
1570 boundary.
130. Access OpdOD 3 in esseDce gives aU or the roadless area to the motorized users, thus compounding
dimculties in future wilderness designadoD tor this area.
Within the roadless area, the Hungery and Willow Creek drainages are proposed as non-motorized areas.
Within the Fish Creek drainage, only low levels of existing motorized use are proposed, and no trails are
proposed for reconstruction to accommodate motorized use. Within the Fish Creek drainage, only one
motorized loop (for motorcycles), in its existing condition, is proposed, and its season of use is 5/15 to 10/1.
The vast remainder of the roadless area is proposed for non-motorized recreational use. Should a suitable
Nortla Loebsa Face £IS
197
CuplerSix
relocation be found for the Deadman Trail System (Trails, 116, 192, 70S) this area could also accommodate
future motorized trailbike use.
131. The DEIS laDs to aaalyze the bDpads of ORV use lDsIde (or outside) the roaclless area
ODee
the
trails are rebuDt.
Current impacts of unrestricted motorized use within the roadless area were part of the rationale used to
formulate Access Options 2, and 3. With Option 3, a monitoring plan would be implemented to analyze the
impacts of motorized use in the Fish Creek drainage.
132. The Forest Plan MaaagemeDt Areas ba Chapter 1 does DOt show the proposed LaRocco wilderness
area asB2.
The Oearwater Forest Plan allocated this area as Management Areas C3, C6, and CBS. Although the Forest
Plan lawsuit settlement states that the area proposed for wilderness by former Congressman Larry LaRocco
"will be managed according to Forest Plan standants and guidelines for recommended wilderness (Management
Area B2)", current management area allocations remain in effect until a revision of the Forest Plan becomes
effective.
133. Bow ......y 450 aere IogIDg aalts would be In the roadless area, aDd bow many aalts would be
clearcuts witb reserves?
There are no 450 acre logging units planned for the roadless area, under any alternative. That means the entire
North Lochsa Slope Roadless Area, not just the Fish Creek drainage.
Many of the regeneration harve~ts would, in technical silviculture terminology, be some form of clearcut with
reserves. lbat term applies to any treatment that is intended to replace the existing stand with planted seedlings,
even if that stand will be two-storied, and have half of the existing trees retained for the next 100 years. About
15 to 20 of the proposed regeneration harvests would be shelterwood or clearcut with reserves. The reserves
would make up a considerable portion of the stand.
134. Where In the DEIS is there aD a. .lysis of the impacts to the iDtel!ity of the entire roadless area aDd
not just the acreage affected by proposed developlDellt?
This is discussed in Section F of Chapter Four.
135. Bas the FS groud-trathecl the roadless area boundary? Are there other roadless areas ba the
a. .lysis area DOt identlfted ill the Forest Plan?
The North Lochsa Slope Roadless area, the only roadless area in the analysis area, is irregular in shape and
consists of narrow stringers of roadless land along the Lochsa River from Rye Patch Creek east to the Indian
Graves Road (#107) and north to the Lola Motorway. Its boundary was mapped during the RARE D process
and acknowledged by our Forest Plan. There are no plans to adjust iL
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
·1
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOIL STABILITY
136. We are concerned about the effects or burning OD watenbeds aDd 5OiIs__ steep terraiD, ODCe stripped or its
ground cover, loses its abUlty to bold wheD rains aDd spring thaws come_ the forest would beDeftt by intensive
investigation bate possible long term soU degradatioD on the North Lochsa Face._ bow will fire be prevented from
burning the riparian areas?
Fire has been the dominant historical disturbance process across the North Lochsa Face landscape for thousands of
years. Fire is important in recycling nutrients that have been tied up in trees and other forest vegetation for many years,
making them available for other plants on the site as well as inputs into aquatic systems. We have identified the
historical fire types (mixed severity, non-lethal, etc.) and sizes that have operated in different LTAs throughout the
analysis area and will develop burn plans to mimic those conditions.
198
CllapterSb
I
I
·1
D
Fires will only be ignited when duffllitter moisture conditions are sufficiently high to minimize damage to the soil. It is
critical to keep a portion of the duffllitter layer intact to maintain bacteria, fungi, lichen, etc. populations in the upper
soil horizons. On steep slopes, bums will be conducted to maintain a mosaic of vegetation conditions, retaining an
extensive root mantle throughout the soil to maintain slope stability.
The maintenance of long-term soil productivity is a primary objective of this project. By mimicking distwbance
processes that have occurred for thousands of years, soil productivity should be maintained. Riparian areas experience
catastrophic bums primarily during extreme drought periods, but in an average year, fires will bypass these areas or
burn with low-intensity on the ground surface.
137. I fear that the changes whieh have been identifted in the DEIS may result in irreparable damage to
the drainage. (i.e. The thiD breakiaDd soils, which are of low to moderate fertility, will be dimcult to
revegetate and upon harvest wiD be highly susceptible to slope lailure.)
The identification of the historic disturbance (primarily fire) regimes should permit us to tailor our management
activities to the natural range of variation. The example you relate is very appropriate because we are
specifically avoiding treatments on some of our breakland areas because of past damage caused by multiple
burns. Many of these areas are now in seral brushfields because of past intense fires which removed the
dufflIitter layer and damaged the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of the soils. These sites will
not have any management activities to allow the natural successional processes to "heal" the soil, replenishing
the nutrient levels and allowing the natural soil microflora and fauna to develop.
In other areas where stand densities are higher than historical levels, or species composition is outside the
natural range of variation, we have designed management activities that will return the area (over time) to the
natural levels. The advantage this affords us is to burn when the duffllitter layer is moist (and thereby minimize
soil damage), which is often not the case with natural wildfires. We can design our harvest activities to
minimize risk of landslides by maintaining at least a 50% canopy cover on breakland areas which will retain the
root mantle holding soil on the slope. The soil resource, particularly the Mazama volcanic ashcap, is the
resource upon which all the terrestrial communities depend, so it is our intent to protect that resource to the
greatest extent possible..
138. The last two years or flooding have hoperully taught us the importance of being more sensitive to
the environment .Dd the watershed (Le. IandsUdes resulting from logging activity or associated roads).
Survey teams made on-site measurements of over three hundred landslides that occurred on the Oearwater NF
during the 1995-96 storm events. Many characteristics of the landscape (I andfonn, geology, slope, aspect,
elevation, etc.) and management activities (road construction methods, road maintenance operations, harvest
methods, etc.) have been identified to help avoid areas with high landslide potentials and minimize risks. We
are implementing these findings into our management activities in order to protect the watershed. While
landslides are a Datural occurrence in many of the landforms in the North Lochsa Face area, we do not want to
increase their incidence through any of our management activities. One of the changes we have implemented is
the retention of at least 50% canopy cover on harvest units on breakland locations. This action mimics the
natural fire regimes on these sites which were a combination of lethal/nonlethal bums which would remove
some of the trees while others would survive.
139. The removal of 50·75 % of the trees will make the land extremely vulnerable to erosion.
The amount of trees removed will vary depending upon the LTA. On steeper LTAs, such as stream breaklands,
at least 50% of the canopy cover will be retained to provide for soil stability concerns. This canopy cover
should leave a sufficient root mantle throughout the soil to provide for soil strength against mass movements.
On gentler LTAs, such as the rolling old surfaces, the risk of landslides and other mass movements is
considerably less and more trees can be removed without increasing the risk of erosion and/or landslides.
This is also done to mimic the role that natural wildfires would play in these landscapes. The natural fire
regime in breaklands is a mixed, lethal/nonlethal type, which would kill some of the trees while others would
survive. On the old surfaces, the fire regime is one of infrequent, lethal bums which would often kill most of
the trees in large patches. In all of our silvicultural activities, care will be taken both during the harvest
operation and subsequent site preparation to protect the litter/duff layer as well of minimize impacts to the soil
resource. Aerial yarding methods, including the use of helicopters, will be used on sensitive soils.
NortIa LoeIIsa Faee E1S
199
CllapterSix
140. The DEIS avoids stadq bow madl of the Iud to be developed faUs bato areas proDe to . . .
wasting, debris torrents, aDd surfaee erosIoa.
The discussion of landtype associations in O1apter Three presents a series of tables where mass wasting and
surface erosion risks are summarized by LTAs. The reader can refer to the LTA map in Chapter One to see the
distribution of LTAs across the analysis area. Risk of debris torrents have been included in the LTA tables of
Chapter Three.
REcREATION/ACCESS
141. We sugest expanding road closures withID access OptioD 3 by closing roads 5515 begbmlDg at ItsjunCtioD
with the 101 road system; 5S46 and 5544 at the 101 road Juactlon; and 486 begbmlDg at itsJunctioD with the
486A road between 10/1 and 611.
The road closures you propose essentially re-implement the elk study closures, which is addressed by Access Option 4.
However, Access Option 3 now closes Road 486 beginning at its junction with the 486A road between 10/1 and 6/1, as
you suggest, and closes an additional segment of Road 5515 on the east end.
142. We offer the Department's (FIsb aDd Game) eooperation in developbag aDd ImplemeDting the monitoring
plan outllDed ba Access Option 3.
We accept the Deparbnent's offer of cooperation in developing and implementing the monitoring plan associated with
Access Option 3.
143. The FIsh Creek trail is rocky, DaITOW, aDd steep maldDg it unsuitable as a motorcycle loop.
Motorized use of the Fish Creek trail currently exists. The proposed loop will not be modified and will continue
to be suitable for those trail bike recreationists desiring a "challenging" loop trail.
144. Resources need to be committed to discourage the estabUsbmeat and use or sborteuts created by
ORV usen (i.e. sboFt access traUs from the Lolo Motorway to Road 5548).
This statement is true. We'll monitor and take appropriate action when shortcut trails are found. There may be
opportunities to increase user awareness to the resource damage caused by these unauthorized trails. Both the
Forest Service and organized motorized recreationists could cooperate in this effort. Also, since trails of this
nature could jeopardize future motorized use in these areas, the most effective method may be for motorized
recreationists to start policing themselves to minimize the establishment of shortcut trails.
145. Road densities appear lower than expected. DIepI trails aDd roads
uDder-represeDted in the analysis.
fLe.
Green Saddle road) are
The analysis used the best information that was available to estimate road and trail densities. We are aware of
and considered some non-system trails and roads. There are also system roads and trails included in the
analysis that are impassable in their current condition.
146. I don't UDdentand the statemeDt that "there are limited motorized loop riding opportuDities during
the summer." What about all the opeD roads aDd traUs in the Clearwater?
Apart from the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness, the Fish Creek area is unique from the rest of the District due to
its undeveloped wild and scenic character. The limited motorized riding opportunities found there are rare
elsewhere on the District. Except for one loop trail for the "seasonal" use of motorized trailbikes, Access
Option 3 reduces the current level of motorized use within the Fish and Hungery Creek drainages.
Nortla LoeIIsa Face E1S
CllapterSis
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
·1
147. The DEIS does DOt iDdude a motorized vehicle access plan whieh can be monitored and enforced.
(i.e. The FS proposes no Dew approach to dreetively protect resources threateDed by increased motorized
access.)
Please refer to the revised monitoring plan in the FEIS. The new "trigger" language will protect against
resource damage by effectively controlling unacceptable motorized use.
148. We should consider a new access option, whicb would be Option 2 plus the I-moDth road closures
for elk vulnerability or OptioD 4.
This would constitute a minor change from the existing range of access options that would require no further
analysis. However, there is no need to develop additional access options, because the decision maker can
choose, if desired, to add the I-month road closures to any of the access options and justify its selection in the
Record of Decision.
149. GiveD the iIIstabUity of funding ror FS pro....ms, I wODder if the monitoring program for the Fash
Creek area would be given high eDough priority to be funded 10Dg eDough to accomplish wbat is needed.
This is a valid concern, should Access Option 3 be selected. However, the monitoring plan is designed for ease
of implementation. Many of the monitoring activities can be done in conjunction with other recreational
activities in the area. In addition, much of the monitoring can be done using cooperative agreements with user
groups and other agencies.
150. or the 76 miles or roads to be obliterated, caD some of these be turned into trails or ORV
opportunities?
Many of the roads to be obliterated are on LTAs that are prone to landslide. Considerable work would be
necessary to maintain trails in these locations to assure they do not pose an unacceptable risk to water quality
for fish habitat.
One possibility is to convert portions of road 445 to 'trail' status in Canyon Creek. Not all this road could be
converted because ~f the unstable and erosive land and the major stream crossing. However, that section of
road that ties Trail 107 with Road 445 (at its junction with Road 5540) may be viable for conversion from road
to trail. This section of Road 445 is within 50 feet of a fish bearing stream the whole distance. The road,
though a ready source of sediment to Canyon Creek in its current condition, is not prone to landslide.
Conversion from a road to a trail would probably reduce surface erosion potential. Other obliterated road
segments being studied for conversion to trail include segments of Roads 453, 5515, and 75158.
151. Having motorcycles on the Fish Creek trails would destroy the feeling of soUtude and degrade the
areas use ror wUdlife as weD as water quaUty.
People's perspectives of solitude differ. Currently, more motorized use is permitted in the Fish Creek area than
what is proposed under Access Option 3. The monitoring plan (refer to Appendix A) is designed to prevent
undue resource damage as a result of motorized use on a proposed loop trail. Bridges, armored crossings, or
avoidance of wet areas, are some of the mitigation measures that may be used to protect water quality.
152. Where ill the DEIS is there aD analysis of wUdlife impacts from ORV use along rebuUt trails, aDd
wbere is there aD analysis or the massive changes that are to be expected rrom rebuUding the trails for
ORVs?
In response to the first part of this question, impacts to wildlife are discussed in the biologist's status report
found in the project file and summarized in Chapter Four. The issue of bull elk vulnerability resulting from
motorized use of roads and trails during the fall hunting season is also summarized in Chapter Four. The effects
are also discussed in the biological assessment and evaluation (refer to Appendix h).
In response to the second part of this question, trails outside the HR 1570 boundary are being reconstructed
to
stock standards (24' width). No trails are proposed for reconstruction in the Fish Creek area, and no trails in the
analysis area are being proposed for reconstruction to a wider track 4-wheeler (ORV) standard.
Nortla Loebsa Face ElS
201
CllapterSix
153. BaekeoaDtry reeratioD uen wUI be ......ed by motorized
used by motorized vehldes.
Ule
Into areas that are earrendy Dot
There are currently "no" administrative restrictions on motorized use in the Fish and Hungery Creek drainages.
There are physical restrictions due to some of these trails being impassable to motorized and even nonmotorized recreationists. Access Option 3 proposes limited motorized use on existing trail systems, without any
reconstruction. Since this option was developed in a collaborative learning environment, we anticipate very few
conflicts with non-motorized recreationists.
154. There are DO alternadves that Omit motorized vebldes to existing roads.
This is not a viable alternative, considering existing use patterns (motorized and non-motorized) and public
input. Access Option 2 comes close to this by proposing Access Management Zone "A" as non-motorized.
155. Tbere remalDs
DO
valid reaSOD why the very lint aeeess plaD (Option 2) offered by the DIstrict
should DOt be approved.
Access Option 2 remains a viable alternative. The deciding official can still opt to select this option in the
Record of Decision.
156. There Is DO dear or IllWllbipous Iaa....le a.ywhere that says what the Distric:t's "Dew" goal Is for
Ilsh Creek .....gement.
Maintenance of the existing condition over time, as determined by the total number of motorized trailbike users
currently using the Fish Creek trail system, is the objective of the monitoring plan.
157. With the eurreDt treDcI to close roads aDd traUs to the motorized users, it is time to lake a sincere
look and plaa of action to aeeolDlDodate aU of the user croups within our national forests.
To do just this, an access working group was fonned early in the scoping process. They represented the various
user groups affected by management decisions in the North Lochsa Face area. Working in a collaborative
learning environment, this group was key in aiding with the fonnulation of Access Option 3.
158. According to Dr. Steve Russell's latest IIDdings, the espedltion route denoted on the Option 3 ....p is
DOt correct (i.e. the route -villi BUlllery Creek and joining Road 500).
We are aware of Dr. Russell's findings, but they are, to date, unpublished. Every effort has been made to avoid
any impacts to either route location so further study can be completed.
159. The value In kayaking, eanoe, rafting, and eommerdal Interests for these water sports
overlooked In Chapter 3, UDder "recreation values" •
"5
been
The recreation values table displayed in Chapter Three now includes kayaking and rafting on the tributaries of
the Lochsa River (primarily Fish Creek). The recreational values displayed are those found within the North
Lochsa Face analysis area. The Lochsa River bounds the analysis area, but is not part of it. This is why those
river values are not included in the discussion. However, mitigation measures will be implemented to protect
recreational values associated with the Wild and Scenic River.
160. It Management Area CSS (i.e. upper Fish Creek drainage) will be closed to all public use of motor
vehicles once roaded, how can you aDow motorized traO access in this area?
Chapter ill, page 55 of the Clearwater Forest Plan states the following standard for Facilities (i.e. trails and
roads): "Prohibit public use of motorized vehicles on all new roads constructed in the management area,
except permit snowmobiles during the winter period (December 1 through March 1). Permit trailbike use on
trails suitable for trail bikes until the area is roaded, at which time the entire area will be closed to all public use
of motor vehicles."
No.... LoeIIsa Faee ElS
C...... Sa
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The perimeter roads currently providing access to the Fish Creek drainage existed prior to Forest Plan direction.
More roads are needed to fully access the area. However, no new roads have been constructed, and our
analysis proposes no new roads in this drainage. Therefore, this part of the drainage (Management Area CBS)
cannot be considered lOaded, and proposed motorized trailbike use occurring on trails within the Fish Creek
drainage does not violate any Forest Plan standards.
LOCHSA RIVER
161. Visual impacts from logging could severely impact the sceDic drive alODg Highway 12.
I
•~
~
•
•~
1
I
1
I
I
1
•I
Refer to Chapter Four for the response to this question. While harvesting activities in the river corridor would be
a change from the existing closed canopy character of some of the individual ridges proposed for harvesting, the
introduction of openings would not be out of character in the river corridor in general. There is a mosaic of
openings created both from natural fire processes and from natural rock outcrops found throughout the river
corridor. Harvesting proposed in this project would be designed to mimic those small openings of 1/4 to 1/2
acre in size and maximum canopy removal in the river corridor would be 50% of the existing structure. Given
the moderately steep slopes, the low impact harvesting methods proposed, mitigation of harvesting evidence
proposed, and existing vegetative cover; the proposed activities should meet the existing scenic quality
objective of High in the foreground, Moderate in the middleground and Low in the background. High scenic
integrity refers to landscapes where the valued landscape character appears intact. Deviations may be present
but must repeat the form, line, color, texture, and pattern common to the landscape character so completely and
at such scale that they are not evident.
162. Will proposed helicopter IaDcIIngs close to the river pose a risk to river nomen?
This concern was identified by our Wild and Scenic Rivers Administrator in her specialist report. During an
IDT meeting it was determined that we could control the flying of helicopters over the river, where there would
be no impact to the river runners. Also, the most popular section of the river for boating is up river from any of
the proposed helicopter landing sites. Most of these boaters take out at Knife Edge, with some continuing
downstream to Lowell.
163. Will boater ~ccess to Fish Creek be reduced? WiD there be less parIdDg for boaten if the trail is
motorized? WiD Fish Creek be closed to boating at certaiD times because ofbuming?
We anticipate no reduction in boater access to Fish Creek, since the existing use of the trail by motorized users
has not caused reduced parking or other conflicts with boaters. Upon completion of an ongoing study of
harlequin ducks by the Idaho Department of Fish and Game, it is possible that boater access could be limited to
protect harlequin duck breeding and brood rearing. Also, proposed burning will have no effect on boater access.
164. The DEIS DeedS to disclose what proposed harvest activities will look like from the river, Dot just
the highway.
The size and shape of harvest units are designed to mimic natural openings on the landscape. In the areas where
harvesting is proposed, the views from the river would generally be more restricted than the views from the
highway. The viewing position of the river user is lower than that of the highway traveler restricting some
views of the project area and in many cases is screened by vegetation located between the highway and the
river. The duration of view would be longer for the river user, but with the restricted views of the project area
and the minimal visual impact of the proposed activity, the project should meet the existing scenic integrity
objectives from the river as well as from the road.
165. The DEIS cODtaiDs DO informatioD whatsoever about the Lochsa WUd aDd Scenic River.
Two Wild and Scenic River issues are discussed in Chapter Two; its scenic beauty is described in Chapter
Three; and the visual effects of the alternatives on the Highway 12 corridor are discussed in Chapter Four.
Also, in the project file are two specialist reports related to the Lochsa Wild and Scenic River.
Nortla LodIsa Face ElS
203
CupferSix
•
166. In reprds to the Wild aDd SeeaIc RIvers Ad, what Impacts wDlacdvides OD adjaeeDt IaDds have on
I
the Lochsa River?
Water quality is a very important value protected by the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act To be considered viable,
any activity within the river corridor or on adjacent lands to the river corridor must protect the water quality of
the Lochsa River. WAmAL analysis and professional judgement currently predict the effects of proposed
activities to meet Forest Plan standards for water quality. Contributing to this are the leaving of many trees in all
harvest units and the implementation of PACFISH riparian buffers in both timber harvest and prescribed
burning proposals.
167. The FlDaI EIS should Inelude an eJiIIblUty study for aU of tbe creeks In the project area and a
ftndlDl of eUPblUty or Don-eupblUty.
As stated in Chapter Two, eligibility studies are beyond the scope of this analysis. All streams across the Forest
were considered for eligibility during the Forest Plan process. After a Forest Plan amendment, seven streams,
including portions of Fish Creek and Hungery Creek, were identified as eligible candidates to the Rivers
System. The next step, suitability studies, was initiated by the Forest in 1993. Recommendations for additions
to the wild and scenic rivers were made to Congress, but no action has been taken to date by the State's
Congressional delegation.
168. Where Is the dlseassioD oftbe Loeb. RIver's eoadItlon pp, It's lIWIaIement opportuDities, or lack
of?
The Lochsa River bounds the analysis area to the south and is not within the area being analyzed. The land
immediately north of the river consists of the face watersheds. Their condition gaps by LTA were described in
Chapter One of the DEIS. A river plan, that is not a part of this analysis, covers management opportunities for
the Lochsa River.
CONTROL OF NOXIOuS WEEDS
169. There's DO Deed to treat DODous weeds, fore over a period of time, the forest caDopy wID take care
of thisdes and most.other noxious weeds. Reseed the roads with a good fescue grass, aDd over a few years
the DODous weeds wID disappear.
Most proposals for treatment are in areas that will not have a full forest canopy over them. They occur in
openings, temporary openings where they will spread to other areas, along roads and along trails. You cannot
just seed grasses. An integrated approach must be used. First, the weed must be eliminated, then grasses can be
sown, and in some cases fertilized.
170. There are llU\ior problems with using chemical treatmeDts to coDtrol noxious weeds along key
steelbead SpawniDg streams such as FISh aDd Bungery Creeks.
Under the worse case scenario discussed in the specialists report which was used for Chapter Four input, far
from lethal doses would be present. Label direction will be followed. Application near or adjacent to water is
discussed on the label.
171. The DEIS coDlalDS DO analysis of ecological coDditions whiclJ foster aDd promote the spread of DODDative weed species in the forest and specifICally In the project areas.
A full discussion is in the specialist's report. Discussed is weed seeds present in hay and straw (mention is made
of the Forest SupelVisor's order requiring weed seed free hay and straw), seed being transported by
recreationists and vehicles (including OHVs), seed being transported by logging and construction equipment,
and seed beds being created by management activities that expose bare ground. Mitigation measures are also
discussed.
NortIl LocIIsa Fa« EIS
CupterSb
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,~
-I
172. The EIS should addftSS the level of persisaeDce of the berbicides wbidl would be applied, aDd
should ex•• iIIe wbetber IoadiDI. -iDn& saorqe ud traDsport of herbicides wiD be executed iD a
manner which will minimize leaks ud spills.
As has been stated before, label directions will be followed. Label directions address this concern.
173. You have not analyzed adequately poteDtiaidrects of herbicides on DOD-target plants aDd animals.
What about drift of nmoff iIlto waterbodies?
A full analysis and discussion is contained in the specialist report contained in the project file. The specialist
report also makes reference to several publications that address this concern, such as, Risk Assessment for
Herbicide Use in Forest Service Regions 1, 2, 3, 4, and 10 and on Bonn~jJle Power Administration Siks
(September 1992) and HU1nQ1J Health Risk Assessment for Herbicide Applications to Control Noxious Weeds
and Poisonous Plants in the Northern Region (1988 Edition).
I
I
j
I
174. No ODe meatioas of yellow starthistIe was evideat. This p....t will take OYer, ud you wUI DOt aet rid
or it.
Yellow starthistle is of great concern. There are no known infestation in the analysis area. We plan to take
quick action if any infestations are found. The specialist report speaks to the very need to treat yellow
starthistle aggressively if it is found to occur.
175. Where is there aD analysis betweeD DOxious weeds, roads, and ORVs?
The specialist report in the project file discusses spread of weeds by vehicles and other equipment both on and
OfflOad.
176. Your proposal to treat weeds other than those desipated as "noxious" is only the ftrst step OD an
escalatiDg train of thougbt that legitimizes spraying anything aDd everytblq.
1
I
II
•
•I
•I
I
The undesirable weeds proposed for treatment are not state listed as noxious, but are considered invaders. Most
are addressed in a _working draft for long range weed management in the Oearwater River Basin Weed
Management Area. The Forest Service is a member of the Clearwater River Basin Weed Management Board.
A primary goal is to prevent the introduction, reproduction and spread of designated weeds and Invasive exotic
plants into and within the Oearwater Basin.
177. I have been Wormed by your omce that the use ofberbicides faD UDder a categorical exclusion aDd
DeedS DO EIS.
Under revised policy and procedures of the National Environmental Policy Act published in the federal register,
vol. 57, DO. 182, Friday September 18, 1992, certain actions can be categorically excluded and do not require a
case file or decision memo. Section 31.1b, 3d allows the application of registered pesticides for rodent or
vegetation control on administrative sites. Section 31.1b, Sd allows for applying registered pesticides for rodent
or vegetation control at recreation sites and facilities.
Areas infested with noxious or undesirable weeds occurring outside of the above mentioned areas require more
than a categorical exclusion. This EIS analyzes the effects in a more comprehensive manner.
178. Please provide aU manutacturen safety data sheets (MSDS), pesticide labels, lists of iDert
ingredients, aDd lists of affects from synergism for any herbicides you plan to use.
Sample MSDS and example labels are included in the project file. These change over time. At the time of
project implementation, copies of current labels and MSDS will be available. Synergism is not a concern
because we are not combining different herbicides.
I
I
Nortia LodIsa Faee £IS
205
CupterSix
179. Plea. oplalD: (a) why only seIeded portloas ofNLF are covered UDder the NEPA replatioas; (b)
why lTD was p-uted approval for the use of herbicides without a NEPA document; and (c) why the
public was DOt iDformed prior to application DOr granted the opportuDlty to comment.
Under the easement from the Federal Highway Administration to the State of Idaho, the State does not need our
expressed permission to use chemical sprays. They are only required to consult with us as to chemical used,
time, and method of application. The use of herbicides is a State option and under their control, not govemed
byNEPA.
180. Please IDdude the sdeDdftc studies to show us how you "determine the doses that eould injure
hamaD health" •
These are referenced in the project file in the specialist report. One of these is the Rl, R2, R3, R4, euul Rl0 Risk
Assessment of 1992.
181. Please dIseuss the sdeDtUle da.. that addresses the toxic affects on wlldUfe species, the prevalence
of geDder dlsnptioD, and the toxic dects when these substances eater the food ebaiD.
As discussed above these are referenced in the project file in the specialist's report and in the above described
assessment.
182. Will you be adding surfactants, photo-reactivaton or other substances that assure these substances
re....in toxic for loDger periods?
No.
183. Regional Forester Hal Salwasser stated to IDe that "lmapweed is here to stay". Why then the big
eoaeernand carefuilistiDl oflmapweed as a species ofauUor eoaeern?
Knapweed may be "here to stay", but that does not mean we are not concerned with it. There are areas that are
not currently infested which we need to protect. Knapweed must be controlled in areas where it occurs to
prevent the weed's spread. In addition we will continue biological control efforts to prevent knapweed spread.
184. There Is DO discussion of the aera to be treated, mitigation and safety measures.
All proposed treatments are listed in Appendix D. Legal descriptions and acres are given. It is stated in the
specialist's report to follow label directions which covers mitigation and safety measures.
185. Why is there DO IDentioD of an Integrated weed control program and prevention? (i.e. seeding the
IaDdslide areas of cleareuts to preveDt iDfestation)
All proposed treatments consider an integrated approach. The specialist's report speaks specifically to using an
integrated approach.
186. We were told by the FS and ITD that herbicides wereD't allowed In the Wild and Scenic river
corridor, aDd the 10-year management plaa signed in 1993 by both the FS and ITD expUcidy bans
herbicide use along the highway. Why does this DO longer seem to be appUeable?
The ten year plan signed in 1993 by the FS and I1D did not ban the use of herbicides along the Highway. Pages
24 and 25 of the management plan speak to unresolved issues. Use of herbicides was one of the issues. On
page 25 the plan said a new decision would be forthcoming. Under the easement from the Federal Highway
Administration to the State of Idaho, as amended May 7, 1997, the I1D need only to consult with the Forest
Service concerning type of chemical, method of application, and where treatment will occur.
CUpterSm
•
•
•111
•
•
•II
•II
•
•
•
•I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
187. Because herbicides create a chemical barrier that I dare not travel through, the use of pesticides OD
pubUe IaDds clearly violates my rights under the AmerieaDs with Disability Act of 1990.
The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 speaks to specific disabilities. Multiple chemical sensitivity is not
recognized by the act.
188. "Sediment yield from lmapweed sites.. increased 50 perceDL" You are quotiDg a study done iD
bunchgrass habitat, which the Loehsa Face is DOt, and by infereDce are proposing that results will be
identicaL
They may not be identical, but will be similar. Where knapweed grows, for the most part, it excludes other
vegetation and does not provide adequate vegetative coverage, compared to native vegetation, to reduce
sediment delivery.
189. It the visual Impact is stated to be temporary (1-2 hours), what has caused the miles of browD and
dead vegetatioD aloDlllighway 12, where herbicides were used this spring?
Much of the shoulders along Highway 12 were mowed in early Summer (much more area was mowed than
sprayed). A lot of the browning you speak to was from mowing. A transcription error occurred in the draft EIS.
A temporary visual impact is 1 year to meet the visual quality objective of retention.
190. OD page Chapter Four-IS, are homed larks aDd meadow larks reaDy species iD the treatment
areas?
This statement was reported in the noxious weed status report and is in error. There are NO records, nor is
habitation (residential or accidental) known or suspected for horned larks or meadow larks in the NLF. These
species are associated with foothill grasslands and prairie habitats. Suitable habitat does not exist in or near the
NLF.
191. It in excess of 90% of the doses of herbicides are excreted within 5 days of exposure and don't
bioaeeam*te, what becomes of the remaining 10%?
The remaining amounts are also excreted from the body, it just takes longer. The amount of the dose and the
length of exposure determine how long the residual amounts will be found in the tissues. (Forest Service USDA
Agriculture Handbook #633, 1984)
192. De DEIS gives no thought to the effect of toxic spraying on individuals suffering with multiple
chemical seDsidvity.
The risk assessments referenced in the DEIS do address variable sensitivity that occurs in the human population.
It uses the EPA's reference dose (RID) or a margin of safety (MOS) factor in establishing an amount of
herbicide that below which a daily exposure would not be expected to have any effect. The proposed project
does not expect to have any exposures that would cause any of the public to come close to those thresholds.
Cases of extreme sensitivity occur, but there are no known thresholds established for them, therefore, our
practice is to post signs notifying the public of locations we have used herbicides so that people with extreme
sensitivities can avoid them if they so desire.
193. The cum*tive effects must consider state, county, and private use of chemical poisons.
There is no county or private use of herbicides within the analysis area. The amount the state uses within the
analysis area was considered and has a negligible effect
194. We request that the FS work with agencies, OrganizatiOD5, aDd chemically seasitive iDdividuals to
come up with a less poisoDOUS soluOOD to weed eradicaOOD.
We are always looking at other effective alternatives. If we don't proceed with effective alternatives in the
mean time, we will face a larger infestation in the future, ie, spotted knapweed.
NortII LodIsa Faee E1S
207
CupterSix
•
ECoNoMIcS
195. De oDly ecoDOIDlc study resource IDendoned In the document is the UCRBEMP DEIS. nus document bas
DOt been accepted yet and Is In doubtful question by industry, IocallOvernments, aDd the State.
The study mentioned in Chapter Three was one recently completed by University of Idaho sociologists working on the
Columbia River Basin Assessment. It revealed some infonnation about rural communities and their resiliency to
tolerate change more than previously thought. Our mention of this study was for infonnation only. It had no bearing on
our economic analysis displayed in Chapter Four.
196. De economic picture dlsdosed In the DEIS Is Ineomplete. All values of our pubBc lands need to be
presented, aDd aU costs related to each alterDative need to be disclosed.
Although amenity and commodity resource values are both important, trade-offs between them are difficult to
measure in monetary terms at the project level. Our economic analysis does not include un-quantified
environmental impacts, values, and amenities. However, a cost efficiency analysis was completed as part of the
Clearwater Forest Plan. Values considered included recreation, wildlife, range, minerals, water, fisheries, and
non-priced benefits such as community stability, T&E species, cultural resources, dispersed recreation, wildlife
habitat, visual quality, old growth dependent species, and special areas.
spec.
197. Where is there aD ....Iysls of the costs and benefits of this proposed timber sale to the public?
Where is the
kind of economic analysis that NFMA requires?
The economic analysis is the product of several different economic models. The information provided by the
models is used as a tool to understand the relative difference between the alternatives rather that predict actual
"values" for each alternative and is summarized in the FEIS. This summary of information as with other
resources is displayed for the public and the decision~makerto understand the analysis that was completed and
to evaluate the effects of the different alternatives.
A complete economic analysis is presented in the project file, titled North I..ochsa Face Economic Analysis
(6/19/98) and summarized in the FEIS.
198. Please publish documents and references that support your statement that the local economy is
"primarily timber depeDdeDt" •
The local zone of influence (Idaho and Qearwater Counties) is closely aligned to the North I..ochsa Face project
area because of geographic location, historic reasons for settlement, economic dependency, and traditional land
use patterns. Both counties were first settled because of mining activities. Developments of agriculture and
cattle ranching occurred in the early 1900's, when farmers and ranchers settled the Middle Fork, South Fork, and
main Oearwater River valleys and the Weippe and Camas Prairies. The forest industry developed shortly
thereafter.
The local area is predominantly rural and primarily dependent upon three major industries: cattle ranching,
agriculture, and timber products. The stable demand for products produced by these industries has had a direct
impact on the steady growth pattern in the dependent communities within the counties.
Figures published in Evergreen titled "A Quick Reference Guide to Forests and Forestry in Idaho" indicated
basic industry labor income for northern Idaho counties for 1990 as follows: Wood and Paper Products - 44.4%,
Mining and Railroad - 14.4%, Agriculture - 13.5%, Other Manufacturing - 10.3%, Federal Government - 9.7%,
and Travel - 7.7%
Idaho County is rated as "high reliance on timber harvested from Forest Service and BLM lands" in the
Integrated Scientific Assessment for Ecosystem Management in the Interior Columbia Basin 9/96 (Chapter 3,
pg 89).
NorIIl LocIIsa Faee £IS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
MISCELLANEOUS COMMENTS
199. The apper eDds of these draiDages should Dot be written orr as a source of timber, DOW and iD the future••• if
the settiemeDt agreement impedes your short-term abUity to use aU maD8gement tools iD that area, theD revise
the Forest PlaD to remove that impedlmeDt.
Forest Plan revisions have been mandated to occur, and it is beyond the scope of this analysis to make the revision
process occur any sooner or faster. Until revision does occur, the existing settlement agreement is binding.
Alternatives 3a and 4 have been developed to address concerns related to stand replacement tire. These alternatives
either reduce or eliminate acres treated, thus leaving management of those acres to a future decision.
200. Basically this (proposed barDIng) is a dODe deaL.. our COllUlleDts are Dot going to make a dill'ereDce.
II
II
I
201. Itls time to pat forest maDagement In the bands of qU8 11f1ed local people, whose survival depends on souDei
maDagemeDt... commOD seDse foresters, Idaho Fish aDei Game, aDd local commDDities should take up the
cbaUeDge to argue for the "best" plaD for the land, animals, and the people who Dve, work and recreate here.
As stewards of a national resource, the Forest Service is required to represent all viewpoints in its decision making. A
"common sense approach" and good land management are our objectives. Our public involvement strategy solicited
input and actively engaged the local area. Unfortunately, people hold many diverse values (even locally) on how a
piece of public land should be managed.
202. The DEIS does not CODtain a "DO action" alternative, giveD that coDtinued timber barvestiDg is
aUoweel.
There are two accepted interpretations of the "no action" alternative: (1) there is no change from current
management;, and (2) the proposed project does not take place. The "no action" alternative for North Lochsa
Face meets both of these interpretations, in that: (1) current management would continue, including timber
salvage sales averaging 2 MMBF/year; and (2) none of the North Lochsa Face proposals would occur, unless
analyzed under a different NEPA document.
203. The publie involvemeDt proeess bas beeD UDeven. (i.e. many meetings were sponsored by ORV or
other special interests.)
I
II
A review of the public involvement sections in Chapters Two and Six shows that only two meetings were
hosted outside of the Forest Service, with both meetings being highly publicized and open to the public. A
result of these meetings was the fonnation of an access working group made up of representatives of various
special interest groups. This group worked with us in a collaborative learning environment A citizens group,
made up of special interests, including timber industry, also invited us to their meetings and provided input on
the analysis. Apart from these meetings, much time and effort was spent on public solicitations, field trips, and
open house meetings. All sources of public involvement provided us with valuable input for the analysis of
North Lochsa Face.
204. Its obvious the ageDcy coDsiden aDY iDput as some kind of support for Its project.
The underlying goal of this project is to develop a scientifically sound and ecosystem-based strategy for
management of the North Lochsa Face area. Since this land has many different stakeholders, we've received
throughout the analysis many letters, calls, or public contacts from special interest groups, outside agencies,
industry, and the general public. Some are in favor of the project, some are against, and some want more
I
I
In response to public comments regarding proposed burning in the Fish Creek and Hungery Creek areas, we extended
the public comment period; provided an infonnation brochure, Looking Ahead: Prescribed Fire 011 the North Lochsa
Face; and held a public bearing to gather more public comments about the proposed burning. A content analysis was
conducted on the public testimony, and several meetings were held with timber industry representatives to discuss their
concerns over the burning of commercial timber. All of this public involvement was key in the development of a new
burning proposal that is part of Alternative 3a. This alternative has an equal chance of being selected by the Forest
Supervisor.
!
NortIl Loc:IIsa Faee ElS
CupterSix
information. Their input is not used as a vote for or against the project, but is instead used to help us make
better management decisions.
105. Release of the DEIS prior to eo.pletloD of the upper Columbia BasIn EIS is pre....ture.
It is uncertain when the CRB EIS will be finalized or what form the final decision will take. However, it is not
premature to proceed with North Lochsa Face, because CRB, a sub-regional ecosystem analysis, was never
intended to stall or halt planning and implementation of other site specific projects.
North Lochsa Face incorporates ecosystem management principles, utilizing science developed on a sitespecific landscape basis as well as science developed by the Upper Columbia Basin project. A concerted effort
was made to use and verify the CRB science on this projecL For example, CRB science indicates a need to
increase prescribed burning in this area. Local scientists (specialists) on the North Lochsa Face Team identified
the same need, thus linking up sub-regional science to more site-specific coDciitions and needs.
206. Have surveys beeD do. for ardaaeololical of 1Iistoric:a1 sites? Bow wUI this propoDI meet the
ARPA aDd the Antiquities Ad?
During the past 25 years, numerous heritage surface surveys and limited subsurface swveys (archaeological testing
below groUDd) have been conducted over various locations of the analysis area. As a result, well over a hundred
historical and cultural sites, features, or artifacts have been identified and recorded. Since 1993, the northern boundary
of the analysis area has had a sigDificant amount of archaeological survey through a systematic inventory of heritage
and cultural values along the Lolo Trail System.
The heritage, historical, and cultural values within the Lolo Trail System are protected by the Forest Plan, the Lolo Trail
National Historic Landmark designation, two National Historic Trail designations, and several other acts providing
specified protection including ARPA and the Antiquities Act. Other "archaeological or historical sites" within the
analysis area not associated with the Lolo Trail System are subject to, among others, the National Historic Preservation
Act, the Archaeological Resource Protection Act, the American Indian Graves and Repatriation Act, and the Antiquities
Act.
When considering ~as proposed for treabDent outside of the 1..010 Trail National Historic Landmark, the Forest must
determine: (a) if there has been adequate coverage of the area from previous archaeological inventories, and if not, the
Forest will conduct surveys on landforms within that treatment area that have a high or moderate probability of human
use; (b) if sigDificant archaeological or historical values are within the areas, and if so, a determination of eligibility
must be made of these values; (c) if there are values eligible or potentially eligible to the National Register within an
area of potential effects, and if so, the Forest, through consultation with the State Historical Preservation Office, and
perhaps other consulting parties, will either avoid adverse effects to the values or will mitigate effects to the values. A
report summarizing the effect of proposed activities was sent to the State Historical PreselVation Office. A copy of
their letter of concurrence is attached to the end of this chapter.
207. The DEIS would be Improved if It clearly eommlts the CNF to fun aad uaambiguous protectioa of
the tremeadoas historic resouree that lies In the aortbem portioD of the .....ysis area.
There are numerous known historic resources that lie in the northern portion of the analysis area. The Forest considers
each of these historical values depending on their sigDificance and whether or not they are within an area of potential
effects. The "tremendous historic resource" that is a priority for the Forest and an intregal part in the Forest Plan, is the
Lolo Trail System and associated heritage and cultural values. These values are included within the Lolo Trail National
Historic Landmark. A National Historic Landmark designation provides specific guidelines for government agencies
and others to follow regarding the preservation and protection of the values within that landmark.
Within the Lolo Trail National Historic Landmark, two congressionally designated National Historic Trails, the
NeeMeePoo and Lewis and Oark, have specific guidelines for their protection and preservation. The National Historic
Preservation Act, the Archaeological Resource Protection act, the Native American Graves and Repatriation Act, the
American Indian Religious Freedom Act, and the Antiquities Act each provide specific guidelines that the Forest must
consider in the management of this nationally sigDificant Landmark. The Forest is committed to the preservation and
NortIl LodIsa Fa« £IS
210
CllaplerSm
•
•
•II
•
•
•II
•
•
•
•
•
•I
I
I
I
I
•
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
protection of the Lo10 Trail system and its associated historic and cultural values. Any project or activity proposed that
could potentially effect these values directly or indirectly is considered in consultation with the State Historical
Preservation Office, the National Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the National Park Service, the Nez Perce
Tn'be, and depending on the proposal, other interested parties, organizations, and individuals. The heritage, historical,
and cultural values are a major attraction for those recreationists in pursuit of a more serious recreational/educational
experience. The Forest is currently working on a recreation use plan that above all includes the protection and
preservation of those often fragile historic and cultural values people are attracted to.
208. De Lolo Motorway will be receiving a lot of tramc during the bicentennial in a few years. Now would be
the time to do some "OPt on the land" type thinninl Dear the roadway to facllitate the viewing of the area.
A field trip to the Lo10 Motorway was conducted last fall to assess the condition of the area in light of the upcoming
bicentennial. It was agreed by those in attendance that there are opportunities to open up vistas and clear some of the
second growth timber, particularly on the west end of the motorway. Roadside brushing is also recommended to be
completed this fall, which would allow the brushed areas to recover and be aesthetically pleasing. The brushing would
not alter the character of the road, but would provide added sight distance, a safety concern.
209. I strongly object to .ny additional intrusion on the historic Lolo Motorway for log DuOng or
anything else that requires its modification.
There are no proposals resulting from this analysis that propose modification of the Lolo Motorway. Log
hauling is also not proposed on the motorway with this project.
210. ID regards to the reforestation of shrubflelds proposal, wiD the public be involved ill the decision
makiDg process when a separate ....Iysis is completed?
Yes. Following the monitoring of the effectiveness of mechanical slashing of shrubfields in the Middle Butte
area, a separate NEPA analysis will be conducted to assess that and other possible treatments. The public will
be kept infonned of the analysis and will be given opportunity to comment on the proposals.
211. Have you eonsidered • reasonable range of alternadves? (I.e. timber volumes start at 50 MMBF,
theajnmp to 72 ~F, 75 MMBF, and 79 MMBF.)
Yes. A total of six alternatives have been considered, including the "no action" alternative. There are several
reasons to explain the range of alternatives:
•
The alternatives were developed in response to issues and public comment, and timber harvest was not a
driving force in the formulation of alternatives to the proposed action.
•
The reason the alternatives range from 50 to 79 MMBF is due to the large size of the North Lochsa Face
analysis area (128,000 acres). The ratio of volume (MBF) to acres (128,000) is 039 to 0.62. Past large
timber sales on the Forest often covered up to 10,000 acres, having alternative volumes ranging from 2 to
10+ MMBF. This equates to volume:acre ratios of 0.20 to 1.0+. This shows that the alternative
volume:acre ratios calculated for North Lochsa Face fall within the range of those calculated for past timber
sales.
•
These volumes would be divided among different timber sales over a five year period. Each sale would
probably cover a 5,()()()-10,OOO acre area and have a volume of 3-12 MMBF, which is also within the range
offered by past timber sale analyses.
212. De North Lochsa Face DEIS did not address range and livestock managemenL
A minor portion of the Eldorado-Canyon Allotment is included in the upper portions of the Pete King Creek watershed,
generally above Road 101. North Lochsa Face also includes approximately 40 percent of the 11,000 acre Yakus-Pete
King pasture (one pasture of three in the allotment). Within the NLF portion of this pasture, approximately 2000 acres
of suitable, transitory livestock range are available. Livestock grazing is permitted in this area under one grazing
pennittee. Annual livestock use is approximately 30 to 40 head of cattle pairs for four months.
No.... Loc:IIsa Face E1S
211
CupferSix
The DEIS (and subsequently the FEIS) did not address livestock grazing for the following reasons: 1) proposed NLF
actions are largely outside of the Yakus-Pete King pasture and the Eldorado-Canyon Allotment; 2) neither forage
production or livestock management are foreseeably affected by planned NLF actions; and 3) a separate environmental
assessment is scheduled in 200112002 to address changed environmental conditions related to re-issuing another term
pennit (which expires in 20(2).
212
CllaplerSb
•II
•
•II
•
•
•
•
•
•
•I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Distribution List for the Final EIS
Businesses
Libraries
Potlatch Corporation
Three Rivers TlDlber" IDe.
Empire Lumber Co.
Clearwater Forest Industri~ Inc..
Weyerhaeuser
Triple 0 Outfitters, Inc
Twin River RaDch
USDA-National Agricultural Library
Moscow Public Library
Orofino Public Library
Kooskia Public Library
Lewiston Public Library
TribtU Organizations
County Officials
Nez Perce Tribal ExeQ1tive Committee
Columbia River Inter-Tribal FISh Commission
Idaho County Commissioners
FeuNl Ageneiss
EnvUoDJDeDtal Protection Agency
Alliance for the Wild Rockies
American Wildlands
Bact Country Horsemen
Clearwater Biodiversity Project
Clearwater Forest Watch
Clearwater Road and Trail Committee
Concerned Sportsmen of Idaho
DefeDders of Wl1dlife
The Ecology Center
FrieDds of the Clearwater
Forest Guardians
Greystone
Offi~ofF~ral~~ti~
Region X
USDA - Forest Servi~
Director EnvirolUDental Coordination
CNF Ranger Districts
USDI - Offi~ of Environmental Affairs
USDC - NOAA Ecology and Conservation Div.
U.S. FISh aDd Wildlife Service
National Marine FlSheries Servi~
Idaho SIIIIe Ageneiss
Higb Mountain Trail MachiDe Assoc..
Department of FlSh and Game
Department of Health aDd Welfare
Division of Environmental Quality
Department of Parts and Recreation
Idaho Conservation League
Idaho Rivers United
Inland Empire Public Lands Council
Kootenai Environmental Alliaoce
National Wildlife Federation
Northern Rockies Presetvation Project
u.s. Congressmen -
Resource Organization on TImber Supply
Sierra Club - N. Rockies Chapter
The Wilderness Society
Senator Larry Craig
Senator (elect) Mike Crapo
Representative Hellen Chenoweth
IndividJuds
Wilson McKibben
Wayue Paradis
Mark Smith
Diane Prorak
Rod Sherfidt
Scott Carollon
Aaron Reed
Ralph Jackson
Skipper Bnndt
Charles Woods
BoDDie Schooefeld
Gary Macfarlene
Paul Norstog
Dale Gaskill
Jacqueline Moore
Dick Hallisy
Jim Fazio
Dave Galantuomini
Jim Baldwin
Steve Russell
Roger Williams
AI Poplawsky
Susan Westervelt
Kent Pressman
Dennis Dailey
John Swanson
David Rockwell
Laird Lucas
Del Newquist
Willard Dillon
Ivan Hendren
Kaia Wittstock
Joanie Fauci
Harvey Neese
Julie Pickrell
Craig Rabe
Bob Einhaus
Charlene Lopez
Steve Didier
Dick Ftke
Jim Hagedorn
Inge Stickney
Uoyd Johnson
Pete Ellsworth
Larry Binder
Ron Wise
Jerry Gospodnetich
BobLamm
David Hall
Ellen Glaceum
Michael Ratchford
Jack Praetorius
Mike Walter
Gerry Snyder
Carl Borski
Greg Schildwacbter
Craig Ames
Note: All other individuals contained on a NEPA mailing list were mailed a letter informing them of the
availability of the FEIS. Also, legal notices about the release and availability of the FEIS were sent to the
Lewiston Morning Tribune and several local newspapers.
Nortia LodIsa Face ElS
213
CupterSix
l
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
REFERENCES
Ames, B. N. 1983. Dietary carcinogens and anticardnogen5. Science 221:1256-1264.
Arno, Stephen F. and William C. Fischer. Larix occUk1lltdis - Fire Ecology and FIre Maaagement. 1995. IN
Ecology and Management of Larix Forests: A Look Ahead, Wyman C. Schmidt and Kathy J McDonald,
compilers. Intermountain Research Station. Ogden, Utah. pp.130-135.
Arno, Stephen F. Fire Ecology and Its MaD8gement Implications In Pondero. PIne Forests. 1988. IN
Ponderosa Pine the species and its management. David M. Baumgartner and James E. Lotan, compilers.
Washington State University. Pullman, Washington. pp.133-139.
Arno, Stephen F. Ecololical Relationships or IDterior Douglas-fir. 1991. IN Interior Douglas-tir the species
and its management. David M. Baumgartner and James E. Lotan, compilers. Washington State University.
Pullman, Washington. pp.47-51.
Belcher, J. W. and S. D. Wilson. 1989. Leafy spurge and the species eomposition ora mixed-grass prairie. J.
of Range Management 42(2):172-175.
Boise Cascade Corporation. Forest Ecosystem Management: A Graphic Overview. 1996. Boise Cascade
Corporation. La Grande, Oregon.
Bull, Evelyn L., Catherine G. Parks, and Torolf R. Torgerson. Trees and Logs Important to WildUre in the
IDterior Columbia River Basin. 1997. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Portland,
Oregon. pp. 21-41.
Byler, James W., and Sara Zimmer-Grove. A Forest Health Perspective on IDterior Douglas-fir
Maaagement. 1991. IN Interior Douglas-fir the species and its management. David M. Baumgartner and James
E. Lotan, compilers. Washington State University. Pullman, Washington. pp.l03-108.
Callihan, R:H. and T.W. Miller. 1994. Idaho's Noxious Weeds. Noxious Weed Advisory Board, Idaho
Department of Agriculture. Boise, Idaho
Chapman, D.W. 1981. Pristine Production or Aaadromous Salmonids- Clearwater River. Final report for
Bureau of Indian Affairs, Contract No. POOC14206229, U.S. Department of the Interior, Portland, Oregon.
Oeanvater BioStudies, Inc. 1991a. Habitat CoDditions and Salmonid Abundance in Selected Streams WithiD
the Canyon Creek Drainage, Loehsa Ranger District, Summer 1991. Final report submitted to USDA Forest
Service. Contract No. 53-0276-1-46. Oearwater National Forest, Orofino, Idaho.
Oearwater BioStudies, Inc. 1991b. Habitat Conditions and Salmonid Abundance in Selected Streams Within
the Pete KiDg Creek Drainage, Loehsa Ranger District, Summer 1991. Final report submitted to USDA Forest
Service. Contract No. 53-0276-1-46. Clearwater National Forest, Orofino, Idaho.
Clearwater BioStudies, Inc. 1991c. Habitat Condidons and Salmonid Abundanee in Apgar, Glade, and Rye
Patch Creeks, Loehsa Ranger District, Summer 1991. Final report submitted to USDA Forest Service. Contract
No. 53-0276-1-46. Oearwater National Fores~ Orofino, Idaho.
Clearwater BioStudies, Inc. 1993a. Habitat Conditions and Salmonid Abundance in Fish and Hungery
Creeks, Loehsa Ranger District, Summer 1992. Final report submitted to USDA Forest Service. Contract No.
53-0276-3-15. ClealWater National Forest, Orofino, Idaho.
Cle8lWater BioStudies, Inc. 1993b. Habitat Conditions and Salmonid Abundance in Deadman Creek, W.F.
Deadman Creek and Tributary A, Loehsa Ranger Disbiet, Summer 1992. Final report submitted to USDA
Forest Service. Contract No. 53-0276-3-15. Clearwater National Forest, Orofino, Idaho.
References - 1
Clearwater BioStudies, Inc. 1993c. Habitat Conditions and Salmonid Abundanee In Bimerick Creek, Loebsa
Ranger DIstrict, Sommer 1992. Final report submitted to USDA Forest Service. Contract No. 53-0276-3-15.
Clearwater National Forest, Orofino, Idaho.
Cleuwater BioStudies, Inc. 1995. Habitat Conditions ID the Lochsa River, PoweD and Lochsa Ranger
DIstricts, Summer 1994. Final report submitted to USDA Forest Service. Contract No. 53-0276-3-46.
Clearwater National Forest, Orofino, Idaho.
Oeuwater BioStudies, Inc. 1996. Wolman Pebble Count Data for Selected Stations on the Lochsa River,
PoweD aDel Lochsa RaDler DIstricts, 1994 aad 1996. Oearwater National Forest, Orofino, Idaho.
Clearwater National ForesL 1983. Land System IDventory. 397 pp.
Clearwater National Forest. 1989. Watenbed RespoDSe Model for Forest MaDqement (WATBAL). 2S pp.
Cooper, Stephen V., Kenneth E. Neiman, and David W. Roberts. Forest Habitat Types of Northern Idaho: A
SecoDel ApproDmation. 1991. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intennountain Research Station.
Ogden, Utah. pp. 26-36,44-78, 108-123.
Council on Environmental Quality. 1978. Regulations of the National Environmental Policy Act. 43FR 5597856007. 33 pp.
Crouch, E. A. C, R. Wilson, and L. Zeise. 1983. De risk of drinking water. Water Resources Res. 19:13591375.
Dow Chemical Company. 19~. Chemistry, environmental, and toDc:ology promes of clopyraUd herbicide.
Fonn No. 137-1846-86. Midland, Michigan.
Dow Chemical Company. Undated. Oopyralld: tedmleallnf'o....tion. Midland, Michigan.
Espinosa, AI. 1983. Background Paper: FISheries Resources - Analysis of the Management Situadon.
Clearwater-National Forest, Orofino, Idaho.
Espinosa, AI. 1992. DFC Fisheries Model aDd Analysis Procedures -- A TraiDing Module. Oearwater
National Forest, Orofino, Idaho.
Ferguson, Dennis E. IDvestigations on the GraDel Fir Mosaic Ecosystem of Northern Idaho. Draft Ph.D.
Dissertation. 1991. University of Idaho. Moscow, Idaho. pp.2-14.
Fiedler, Carl E., Rolan R. Becker, and Stephen A. Haglund. PreUmiDary Guidelines for Uneven-Aged
Silvicultural Prescripdons In PoDelerosa Pine. 1988. IN Ponderosa Pine the species and its management.
David M. Baumgartner and James E. Lotan, compilers. Washington State University. Pullman, Washington.
pp. 235-241.
Fiedler, Carl E., and Dennis A. Lloyd. Autecology and Syaecology of Western Larch. 1995. IN Ecology and
Management of Larix Forests: A Look Ahead, Wyman C. Schmidt and Kathy J McDonald, compilers.
Intennountain Research Station. Ogden, Utah. pp.118-122.
Forman, R.T., and M. Godron.1986. Landscape Ecology. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Fulton, L. A. 1968. Spawning Areas and Baundance of Chinook Salmon ODchorynchus tsbawytscba in the
Columbia River Basin - Past and Present. Special Scientic Report -- Fisheries No. 571. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Washington, D.C
References - 2
•I
I
•
•I
I
•
•
•I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Graham, R.T., A.E. Harvey, D.S. Page-Dumrose, and M.F. Jurgensen. Importance of SoD Organic Matter in
the Development of Interior Dougias-lir. 1991. IN Interior Douglas-fir the species and its management. David
M. Baumgartner and James E. Lotan, compilers. Washington State University. Pullman, Washington. pp.8591.
Graham, Russell T. Influence ofStaDd Density on Development of Western White Pine, Reclcedar,
Hemlock, and Grand Fir in the Northera Rocky Mountaills. 1988. IN Proceedings - Future Forests of The
Mountain West: A Stand Culture Symposium. Intermountain Research Station. Ogden, Utah. pp. 175-184.
Gratson,M.W., C.Whitman, and P. Zager. 1997. Lochsa elk ec:olol)', Study I: Road closures and buD elk
mortaUty. Proj. W-16Q-R-23, Job Comp.Rep.
Hagle, Susan K., and Donald J. Goheen. Root Disease Response to StaDd Culture. 1988. IN Proceedings Future Forests of The Mountain West: A Stand Culture Symposium. Intermountain Research Station. Ogden,
Utah. pp. 303-309.
Harrington, Michael G. Fire Management in Interior Dougias-lir Forests. 1991. IN Interior Douglas-fir the
species and its management. David M. Baumgartner and James E. Lotan, compilers. Washington State
University. Pullman, Washington. pp.209-214.
Harvey, A.E., M.F. Jurgensen, and R.T. Graham. De Role of Woody Residues in Soils of Ponderosa Pine
Forests. 1988. IN Ponderosa Pine the species and its management. David M. Baumgartner and James E. Lotan,
compilers. Washington State University. Pullman, Washington. pp. 141-147.
Haynes, Richard, Russell Graham, and Thomas Quigley. 1996. A Framework for Ecosystem Management in
the Interior Columbia Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research
Station.
Hoerger, F. and E. E. Kenaga. 1972. Pesticide residues on plants: correlation of representative data as a basis
for estimaton of their magnitude III the enviroamenL In: Coulston, F., ed. Environmental quality and safety.
Vol. 1. Global aspects of toxicology and technology as applied to the environment. New York: Academic Press.
.
IDFG 1995a. Provisonal Redd Count Data. Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Lewiston, Idaho.
IDFG 1995b. Summary of Spring Chillook Returas to PoweD - Provisional Data. Idaho Department of Fish
and Game, Oearwater Anadromous Fish Hatchery, Ahsahka, Idaho.
Isabella Wildlife Works. 1996. Fisheries Survey Report, Upper Fish Creek Drainage, Lochsa Ranger
District, Summer 1995. Final report submitted to USDA Forest Service. Contract No. 53-0276-5-19. Oearwater
National Forest, Orofino, Idaho.
Jones, Richard M. 1992. Water QuaUty Monitoring Results, Pete King Creek, Lochsa Ranger District,
Clearwater National Forest. Oearwater National Forest, Orofino, Idaho.
Jones, Richard M. 1993a. Water QuaUty Monitoring Results,Canyon Creek, Lochsa Ranger District,
Clearwater National Forest. Clearwater National Forest, Orofino, Idaho.
Jones, Richard M. 1993b. Water QuaUty Monitoring Results, Fish Creek, Lochsa Ranger District,
Clearwater National Forest. Oearwater National Forest, Orofino, Idaho.
Knigh~R.L., and K. Gutzwiller. 1995. WildUfe and Recreationists, Coexistence through Management and
Research. Washington D.C.: Island Press.
Lacey, C. 1987. Overview of the state noxious weed management plane In: Proceedings of the annual
conference of the Montana Weed Control Association. Great Falls. January 13-15.
References - 3
Lacey, J. R., C. B. Marlow, and J. R. LaDe. 1989. lDftueDee of spotted lmapweed <Centaurea maculosa) on
surface nmoff and sediment yield. Weed Technology 3:627-631.
Long, James N. Uslllg Stand Density Index to Replate Stoddng III UneveD-ABed StaDds. 1995. IN UnevenAged Management: Opportunities, Constraints, and Methodologies, Kevin L O'Hara, editor. The Montana Forest
and Conservation Experimant Station, School of Forestry, The University of Montana. Missoula, Montana. pp.
110-119.
Losensky, B. John. 1994. Historical Vegetation Types or the Interior Columbia River Basm. Prepared under
Contract INT-94951-RJVA for Systems for Environmental Management, funded in part by the Intermountain
Research Station, U.S.D.A. Forest Service. Ogden, Utah.
Lotan, James E., Clinton E. Carlson, and Jimmie D. Chew. Stand Density and Growth of Interior Douglasfir. 1988. IN Proceedings - Future Forests of The Mountain West: A Stand Culture Symposium. Intermountain
Research Station. Ogden, Utah. pp.185-191.
Lyon,W. 1979. Habitat effectiveness of elk as iDftuenced by roads and cover. Journal of Forestry.
77(10):658660.
Mayer, F. L and M. R. Ellersieck. 1986. Manual of acute toxicity: lllterpretation and data "se for 410
chemkals aDd 66 species of freshwater aDIma Is. Resource publication 160. USDI Fish and Wildlife Service.
Washington, D.C.
Mayeux, H S., Jr., C. W. Richardson, R. W. Bovey, E. Burnett, M. G. Merkle, and R. E. Meyer. 1984. Dissipation
ofpidoram III storm ruolr. J. Environ. Qual. 13:44-48.
McClelland, Douglas E., et ale 1997. Assessment of the 1995 & 1996 Floods and Landslides on the Clearwater
National Forest. Part I: LaDdsllde AssessmeDt. USDA Forest Service.
McLaugblin,WJ., N.Sanyal, J.Tangen-Foster, J.Tynon, S.Allen, and C.Harris. 1989. 1987-1988 Idaho lWIe Elk
H_dag Study, Execudve SUllUllary.
Monnig, E. 1988. Human health risk assessment for herbicide applicatioDs to control noxious weeds aDd
poisonous plaDts III the Northern Region. FPM Report 88-9. USDA Forest Service. Missoula, Montana.
Neary, D. G., P.B. Bush, J. E. Douglas, and R. L Todd. 1985. Pldoram movemeDt III aD ApplachiaD hardwood
forat watershed. J. Environ. Qual. 14:585-592.
Nez Perce Tnee. 1995. Personal communication with Jay Hesse, Fisheries Biologist, Nez Perce Tribal Fisheries
Department, Orofino, Idaho.
Noyes,J.H., BJohnson, L.Bryant, S.Findholt, and J.W.Thomas. 1996. mects of bull age on coDcepdon elates and
pregnancy rates of cow elk. Journal of Wildlife Management. 60:508-517.
Oliver, Chadwick D., and Bruce C. Larson. Forest Stand DyDamics, Update Edition. 1996. John Wiley & Sons,
Inc. New York, New York. pp. 1-8, 89-170, 195-314.
Owens, John N. Reproductive Biology or Larch. 1995. IN Ecology and Management of Larix Forests: A Look
Ahead, Wyman C. Schmidt and Kathy J McDonald, compilers. Intennountain Research Station. Ogden, Utah.
pp.108.
Patten, Rick. 1989. WATBAL TechDical Users Guide. Clearwater National ForesL
Quigley, Thomas, Richard Haynes, and Russell Graham. 1996. Integrated Scientific Assessment for Ecosystem
Maaagement III the Interior Columbia Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest
Research Station.
References - 4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Rehfeldt, Gerald E. Domestication and Conservation of Genedc VariabiUty ID Westen Larch. 1995. IN
Ecology and Management of Larix Forests: A Look Ahead, Wyman C. Schmidt and Kathy J McDonald,
compilers. Intermountain Research Station. Ogden, Utah. pp. 91-96.
Rice, P.M. 1990. A Risk Assessment Method To Reduce Picloram Contamination of Streams and
Groundwater From Weed Spraying Projects. Division of Biological Science, University of Montana, Missoula,
Montana.
Rice, P. M., D. J. Bedunah, and C. E. Carlson. 1992. Plant community diversity after herbicide control of
spotted kDapweed. Gen. Tech. Rept. !NT-460. USDA Forest Service. Intermtn. Res. Sta. Ogden, UT.
Rieman, B.E. and K.A. Apperson. 1989. Status and Aaalysis of Salmonid Fisheries. Westslope cutthroat trout
synopsis and analysis of fishery informaiton. Idaho Department of Fish and Game Proj. F-73-R-11, Subproj. IT, Job
No.1. Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Boise, Idaho.
Robinson, E. and L. L. Fox. 1978. 2,4-D herbicldes ID central WashlDgton.
pp. 1015-1020.
J. of the Air PoD. Control Assoc.
Rosgen, Dave. 1994. A ClassUlcadon of Natural Riven. Pages 169-199 in R.B. Bryan et al., editors. Catena.
An Interdiscliplinary journal of soil science, cydrology, geomorphology focusing on geoecology and landscape
evolution.
Russell, S. 1995. Personal conversation.
Saveland, J.M., and LF. Neuenschwander. Changing Stand Density and Composition with Prescribed Fare.
1988. IN Proceedings - Future Forests of The Mountain West: A Stand Culture Symposium. Intermountain
Research Station. Ogden, Utah. pp.33O-331.
Schmidt, Wyman c., and Robert R. Alexander. Strategies for Managing Lodgepole Pine. IN Lodgepole Pine
the species and its management 1985. David M. Baumgartner, Richard G. Krebill, James T. Amott, and
Gordon F. Weetman, editors. Washington State University. Pullman, Washington. pp.201-210.
Schuster, Ervin, Greg Jones, Mary Meacham, and Rick Cahoon. 1995. Timber Sale PIaDDing and Analysis
System: A User's Guide to the TSPAS Sale Program. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Intermountain Research Station.
Scifres, C. J., O. C. Burnside, and M. K. McCarty. 1969. Movement and persistence of picloram in pasture
soils of Nebraska. Weed Sci. 17:486-488.
Servheen,G., S.Blair, D.Davis, M.Gratson, K.Leidenfrost, B.Stotts, J.White, and J.Bell. 1997. Interagency
pideiines for managing elk habitats and populations on USFS lands in central Idaho. Idaho Dept. Fish and
Game, Lewiston, Id. 6Opp.
Smith, A. E., D. Waite, R. Grover, L. A. Kerr, L. J. Milward, and H. Sommerstad. 1988. Persistence and
movement ofpicloram in a northern Saskatchewan watershed. J. Environ. Qual. 17(2):262-268.
Trichell, D. W., H. L. Morton, and M. G. Merkle. 1968. Loss ofherbic:ides in runofrwater. Weed Sci. 16:447449.
Tyser, R. W. and C. H. Key. 1988. Spotted kDapweed in natural area fescue grasslands: an ecological
assessment. Northwest Science 62(4):151-159.
Unsworth,].W., L.Kuck, M.D. Sco~ and E.O.Garton. 1993. Elk mortality in the Clearwater drainage or northcentrallclaho. Journal of Wildlife Management 57:495-502.
U.S.A.C.O.E. 1993. 1993 Almaal Fish Passage Report - Columbia and Snake Rivers for Salmon, Steelhead,
and Shad. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. North Pacific Division, Portland, Oregon.
References - 5
USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land ManagemenL 1995. DedsIoD NotleelDedslon Record •
FbadIDg of No Sip1fleant Impaet - EDvIronmentai Assessment for the Interim Strategies for Managing
Aaadromous FIsb-Produdq Watenbeds ID Eastem Orepn aad WasblDgtoD, Idaho, and Portions of
eaDrornia. USDA Forest Service, Washington, D.C.
USDA Forest Service, 1997. Forest Service National Resouree Book on American Indian and Alaska Native
Relations. FS-600.
USDA Forest Service, 1984. Pesticide "ekp-ound statements. Vol. 1, Herbicides. Agriculture Handbook no.
633. Washington, DC. Government Printing Office. .
I1
I
Il
~
~
I
USDA Forest Service. 1987. Clearwater National Forest Plan. 344 pp.
USDA Forest Service. 1987. FIlIal Environment Impact Statement - Clearwater NatiolUll Forest Plan - Vol. I
aDdD.
USDA Forest Service, 1992. Risk Assessment for Herbidde Use in Forest Servlee RegIons 1, 2, 3, and 10 aDd
on Bonneville Power Administration SItes. FS 53-3187-9-30.
USDA Forest Service. 1996. Biophysical Classlfteation: Habitat Groups and Deseriptions. U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Region. Missoula, Montana.
u.s. Environmental Protection Agency, 1986. Ecological risk assessment. EPA-54019-85-OO1. Office of
Pesticide Programs. Washington, DC 20460.
,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1986. QuaHty Criteria for Water (1be GoIcI Book) EPA 440/5-86-001.
Office of Water Regulations and Standards. Washington, D.C.
U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994. Personal communication with Ralph
Roseberg, Fisheries Biologist, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Idahon Fishery Resource Office. Ahsahka, Idaho.
U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1995. Provisional Dam Count Data. Perdonal communication with Ralph
Roseberg, Fisheries Biologist, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Idahon Fishery Resource Office. Ahsahka, Idaho.
Watson, V. J., P. M. Rice, and E. C. Monnig. 1989. Environmental fate of plcloram used for roadside weed
control. J. of Environmental Quality 18:198-205.
Whitson, T.D., et al., 1996. Weeds of the West. Western Society of Weed Science. The Western United States
Land Grant Universities Cooperative Extension Service~.
Willard, E. E., D. J. Bedunah, and C. L. Marcum. 1988. Impacts aDd potential impacts of spotted kDapweed
<Centaurea maculosa) on forest and range lands in western Montana. Montana Forest and Conservation Exp. Sta.
School of Forestry. University of Montana. Missoula, Montana.
Woodward, D. F. 1976. Toxicity of the herbicides dlDoseb and picloram to cutthroat (Salmo clarki) and lake
trout (Salvelinus hamaycush). J. Fish. Res Board Can. 33:1671-1676.
Woodward, D. F. 1979. Assessing the hazard of pidoram to cutthroat trout. J. Range Management 32:230232.
Yates, W. E., N. B. Akesson, and D. E. Bayer. 1978. Drift ofgtyphosate sprays appUed with aerial and ground
equipment. Weed Science 26:597-604.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
j
References - 6
I
I