Evaluating Multiple Management
Approaches on the Mt. BakerSnoqualmie NF to Enhance Tribal
Treaty Resources
Dave Vales, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe
Mary Rowland, USFS, PNW Res. Station
Topics to be covered:

Project background
 Importance
of elk in this region
 Prior land management
 Huckleberry Land exchange
 PNW Research Station grant



Example applications in the White River area
Nutrition and Elk Habitat Use Model results
Conclusions
Importance of elk in the region

Point Elliott Treaty area
 9 Tribes + state
 MBSNF 30% land
 MBSNF 60% GMU 653
 LSR, RR, wilderness
 White River elk herd
Huckleberry Land Exchange






USFS traded 1,280 acres 80-year old forest to
Weyerhaeuser in White River
USFS received 10,938 acres from Weyerhaeuser, net gain
≈9,100 acres
Blocked up management but limited activity on received
parcels
3,360 acres designated 8E, Greenwater Special Area for
elk and deer forage habitat
USFS would create 400-500 ac forage openings on winter
range and 100-130 on summer range
Areas within 8E but outside forage areas will be managed
as Late Successional Reserve (LSR)
Muckleshoot Analysis Area
Management Alternatives Considered
Alternative
Existing
condition
Alternative 1
Alternative 2
Alternative 3
Description
Heavily forested, all National Forest lands
(White River Ranger District), primarily LSR
Planned treatments of Elk Forage Areas (0%
CC) and Upper White River Thinning Units
(60% CC), plus opening roads to access units
As above, only thinning to 0% CC
As in Alt. 1, but with roads closed after thinning
Muckleshoot Analysis Area, MBSNF
Elk Forage Analysis
Area (18,540 acres)
443 acres
Thinning Unit Analysis
Area (22,230 acres)
2,150 acres
68,800 acres
Modeling Results – Nutrition
DDE Classes Used in Summaries
Class
1
2
3
4
5
6
Description
Poor
Low-marginal
High-marginal
Low-good
High-good
Excellent
Mean DDE
<2.4
2.40 – 2.575
>2.575 – 2.75
>2.75 – 2.825
>2.825 – 2.9
>2.90
ELK FORAGE AREAS
Existing Condition
Alternative 1
THINNING UNITS
Existing Condition
Alternative 1
Alternative 2
Modeling Results – Habitat Use
Elk Forage Areas
Existing condition
Alternative 1
Thinning Units
Existing condition
Alternative 1
Thinning Units
Alternative 2
Alternative 3
Summary



Harvests as planned will lead to
real, local benefits to elk nutritional
resources and use
Ability to thin to lower canopy
cover levels would yield much
greater benefits
Coordinated, strategic planning of
timber harvest and road
management is critical
Thanks to:

Muckleshoot Indian Tribe
Melissa Calvert
 Mike Middleton


U.S. Forest Service, PNW
Research Station


CRAG
U.S. Forest Service, Mt.
Baker-Snoqualmie Natl.
Forest
Sonny Paz
 Jessie Plumage
 Paula James
 Doug Schrenk
