Appendix B Standard Management Requirements and Monitoringa123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic... · 2013. 8. 1. · temperature, relative humidity, wind speed, and radiation

Appendix B

Standard Management Requirements and Monitoring

Chipmunk Recovery and Restoration Project Environmental Assessment

2 Appendix B

Wildlife and Fisheries

The wildlife and fisheries standard management requirements (SMRs) are contained in the Chip-

munk Recovery and Restoration Project Wildlife Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation.

This report is part of the Chip-munk Recovery and Restoration Project (Chip-munk Project)

record on file at the Mt. Hough Ranger District; a copy is available upon request.

The following Limited Operation Periods (LOP) would be implemented within ¼ mile of known

active nest sites and within a stream mile of Sierra Nevada yellow-legged frog detections:

American Peregrine Falcon, February 1 – August 31; California Spotted Owl: March 1 – August

15, Northern goshawk: February 15 – September 15, Bald eagle: November 1 – August 31; Sierra

Nevada yellow-legged frogs: no activity from October 1, or the first wetting rain (more than ¼

inch precipitation), until April 15th. From April 15 to October 1, if a weather system resulting in

more than ¼ inch of precipitation occurs in project area, operations must be suspended until a dry

period of 72 hours occurs, unless the district biologist determines there will be no effect to frogs

(USDA Forest Service 1988, as amended by the SNFPA, USDA Forest Service 2004). A stream

mile is determined by following the stream course for one mile and includes the width of the

RCA equipment exclusion zone or full suspension zone for skyline logging system treatment

units.

Hydrology and Soils

Introduction

As defined by the Plumas National Forest (PNF) Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP),

the Streamside Management Zone (SMZ) is the land adjoining a stream channel that is managed

to meet water quality and riparian objectives. In general, these zones harbor the most complex

biotic communities within the Forest. Important qualities associated with the streamside

environment include its unique visual character, abundant and diverse wildlife, timber producing

capabilities, and recreational opportunities, in addition to its ability to maintain and improve

water quality.

Wildlife utilize the riparian environment disproportionately more than other habitat types. Here

the microclimate is measurably different from the surrounding forest, grassland, or brushland. Air

temperature, relative humidity, wind speed, and radiation are moderated, creating a unique

environment available to wildlife. Within this environment, food, cover, and water, are in close

proximity, maximizing the density and diversity of wildlife. In addition, the streamside zone

along permanent and intermittent streams provides migration routes and travel corridors, serving

as a forested connector between forest habitats.

Environmental Assessment Chipmunk Recovery and Restoration Project

Appendix B 3

The streamside environment also enhances plant species diversity and fosters high plant biomass

production. Streamside Management Zones are well noted as a premium-growing site for timber.

Conifers grow rapidly in these environs and intense shade encourages the growth of good quality

timber. Plant species diversity is high and many plants are unique to the moist environments of

the streamside area. Botanical interest is acute in these areas.

The streamside area also serves as a moderator of stream temperature and as a filter for sediments

originating within or beyond the streamside zone. The vegetation growing here anchors geologic

instabilities and secures the stream channel, while downed logs lying across the stream channel

dissipate the energy of flowing water, enhancing stream stability. Given water of good quality and

a healthy streamside environment, recreational opportunities are numerous. Quality recreational

experiences can include swimming, fishing, hiking, aesthetics appreciation, and historical

appreciation.

Water Drafting Plan 1. New or existing water draft sites would be evaluated with the Mt. Hough Ranger District

biologist prior to changes or use. Drafting sites shall be visually surveyed for amphibians and

their eggs before drafting begins.

2. “Mucked out” debris, bedload sediment, etc. shall be transported to an appropriate disposal site

(to be designated) if no apparent site is feasible.

3. Maximum draw-down volumes would be estimated prior to use of the draft site. Minimum pool

sites would be maintained during drafting using measurements such as staff gauges, stadia rods,

tape measures, etc.

4. Back down ramps would be constructed and or maintained to ensure the streambank stability is

maintained and sedimentation is minimized. Rocking, chipping, mulching, or other effective

methods are highly recommended to achieve this objective. As necessary, earthen or log berm,

straw waffle, certified hay or rice straw bale berms, or other containment structures would be

constructed at the bank full water line to protect the stream bank.

5. Forest personnel and contractors shall use the Forest Service approved suction strainer (FGM

5161) or other foot vales with screens having openings less than 2mm in size at the end of

drafting hoses. The suction strainer shall be inserted close to the substrate in the deepest water

available; the suction strainer shall be placed on a shovel, over plastic sheeting, or in a canvas

bucket to avoid uptake of substrate or aquatic biota.

Streamside Management Zone Plan

The PNF LRMP requires preparation of an SMZ plan for any activities within streamside

management zones. For the Chipmunk Recovery and Restoration Project, proposed SMZ

activities include cutting and yarding (either with tractor skidders or cable yarding methods) of

trees that were killed by the Chips Fire of 2012 to remove safety hazards along roadways and to


4 Appendix B

recover the value of burned timber. Proposed Chipmunk Project activities within SMZs also

include hand-piling or machine-piling (with grapple pile machine, not a dozer blade) of slash and

debris generated during harvest of fire-killed or fire-injured trees and road maintenance activities

along haul routes. Additional road treatments are proposed in the Clear Creek watershed to

further protect and improve water quality, including gravel surfacing of roads at stream crossings

and obliteration of a road that crosses several streams tributary to Clear Creek. See Chapter 2 of

this Environmental Assessment (EA) for a description of proposed project activities.

Prescribed widths for Streamside Management Zones and Riparian Conservation Areas

Integral to the protection of streamside management zones is the designation of prescribed widths

for these zones, so that the location of special treatment design features associated with SMZs is

clear to all persons involved in carrying out a proposed project. Guidelines for widths of SMZs

are presented in Appendix M of the PNF LRMP. These guidelines were superseded by the

suggested widths for Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs) presented in Appendix A of the 2004

Record of Decision (ROD) for the regional amendment of Forest Plans within the Sierra Nevada

(USDA 2004b).

Using the guidelines suggested in the 2004 ROD, RCA widths for the Chipmunk Project are

presented below in Tables 1 and 2, with separate tables for proposed roadside hazard treatment

units and for proposed “interior” salvage treatment units. Included in these tables are prescribed

widths for zones where ground-based motorized mechanical equipment would be excluded.

Exclusion zones along intermittent streams are wider for intermittent streams above 3,500 feet

elevation to better protect habitat for Sierra Nevada Yellow-Legged Frog (a species of special

concern). These equipment exclusion zone widths are supported by published research which

indicates that sediment delivery to streams caused by timber harvest activities away from

roadways occur infrequently (Litschert, MacDonald 2009), provided that proper Best

Management Practices (BMPs) are implemented, such as adequate drainage measures for skid

trails and landings. This finding is supported locally by BMP effectiveness evaluations performed

in 2010 on the Plumas National Forest for a similar fire recovery project, the Moonlight and

Wheeler Fires Recovery and Restoration Project (see a discussion of BMP effectiveness below).

The Chipmunk Project RCA widths are identical to the widths suggested in the 2004 ROD with

one exception. For ephemeral streams, the width described in the ROD is 150 feet on each side of

the stream (the same width that the ROD describes for intermittent streams). As shown in Tables

1 and 2, the RCA width for ephemeral streams within the Chipmunk Project area is 100 feet on

each side of the stream. This RCA width for ephemeral streams would facilitate more effective

treatment of roadside hazard trees killed or severely injured by the Chips Fire and would permit

more efficient recovery of salvage timber from the interior units. This reduced RCA width is

particularly important for facilitating hazard tree removal since the majority of the stream lengths


Appendix B 5

within the proposed project units are ephemeral reaches (61% of the 533 miles of stream). The

100-foot SMZ width was used in the Moonlight Project and proved to be an effective width for

prevention of sediment impacts along ephemeral streams.

Table 1. Riparian Conservation Area (RCA) widths, mechanical equipment exclusion zone

widths, and burn pile restrictions for ground-based mechanical equipment operations under

roadside hazard actions. Stated widths apply to both sides of the stream channel and are measured

from the bank full edge of stream. (a - For Clear Creek watershed, the equipment exclusion zone

width for ephemeral streams would be 50 feet)

Table 2. Riparian Conservation Area (RCA) widths, mechanical equipment exclusion zone

widths, and burn pile restriction widths for ground-based salvage timber actions. Stated widths

apply to both sides of the stream channel and are measured from the bank full edge of stream. (a -

For Clear Creek watershed, the equipment exclusion zone width for ephemeral streams would be

50 feet)

Stream Type

Equipment Exclusion Zone

Riparian

Conservation

Area (RCA)

width

Minimum

distance to

burn pile

Slope < 25% Slope

>25%

Perennial stream 300 feet 40 feet 100 feet 300 feet

Intermittent stream over

3,500 ft. elevation

150 feet 40 feet 100 feet 150 feet

Intermittent stream

below 3,500 ft. elevation

150 feet 25 feet 50 feet 150 feet

Ephemeral stream 100 feet 25 feet 25 feet a 100 feet

Stream Type

Equipment Exclusion

Zone

Riparian

Conservation

Area (RCA)

widths

Minimum

distance to

burn pile

Slope <

35%

Slope

>35%

Perennial stream 300 feet 40 feet 100 feet excluded

Intermittent stream over

3,500 ft. elevation

150 feet 40 feet 100 feet

excluded

Intermittent stream below

3,500 ft. elevation

150 feet 25 feet 50 feet

excluded

Ephemeral stream 100 feet 25 feet 25 feeta

excluded


6 Appendix B

Project Design Features for Activities within SMZs and RCAs

Design features for the Proposed Action are presented in Chapter 2 of this EA. Several of these

design features specifically address RCAs within the proposed treatment units.

As described above, motorized equipment is excluded from zones immediately adjacent to

streams. In the outer RCAs (outside the equipment exclusion zones), mechanical equipment is

generally excluded from slopes over 35%. For roadside hazard treatment units, mechanical

equipment in the outer RCA is excluded from slopes over 25%. Harvest of fire-killed trees is

needed along roadways to protect safety. Since forest roadways frequently cross stream channels,

these roadside hazard treatments occur in RCAs more frequently than harvest of trees within

RCAs of proposed interior salvage timber units. While motorized equipment would leave road

surfaces to treat hazard trees only in limited instances, this additional slope exclusion was

incorporated in the design features to better protect streams and water quality in these

concentrated activity areas.

Exceptions to these slope exclusions may be made for short pitches (less than 100 feet in length)

that are over 35% (or 25% in the outer RCA of roadside hazard units), provided that consultation

occurs with the PNF District watershed specialist. Much of the Chips Fire area is steep country

and some over-steepened slopes (> 60%) exist within RCAs. However, as described in the PNF

Soil Resource Inventory (USDA 1988c), most of the soils have moderate maximum erosion

hazard rating (EHR), with some areas of high EHR but no areas of very high EHR. Since the vast

majority of mechanical equipment traffic would be excluded from slopes greater than 35% (or

25%), soil disturbance on over-steepened slopes in RCAs would be minimal and practically

nonexistent.

To limit soil disturbance and displacement, motorized equipment would not be allowed to turn

around when working in outer RCAs. No log landings would be located off of road surfaces

within RCAs.

Effective soil cover maintains soil stability by dispersing runoff, aiding infiltration, and

dissipating energy of falling raindrops. Ideally, 75% or more of RCAs would contain effective

soil cover, which usually consists of duff, litter, live vegetation, needles, rock, or woody debris

(pieces of logs or limbs). Before the Chips Fire, soil survey results demonstrated excellent levels

of soil cover in proposed treatment units, averaging 95 percent areal extent and ranging from 84

to 100 percent. Since proposed Chipmunk Project units are located in areas with high tree

mortality due to the Chips Fire (areas with moderate or high soil burn severity), much of this

effective soil cover was burned. Recovery of soil cover will likely take 1-3 years, as vegetation is

re-established in the burned areas.

While current soil cover is less than the desired condition of 75% areal extent, several design

features are included in the Chipmunk Project Proposed Action to enhance soil cover. Substantial

slash and woody debris would be left on the ground due to harvest activities to assure that post-


Appendix B 7

project extents of soil cover in treated units exceed pre-treatment levels. Subsequent treatments to

prepare for reforestation would utilize hand-piling or grapple piling of woody debris for burning

so that planting of seedlings could occur. Unlike dozer blade piling treatments, these methods of

piling debris would leave substantial fine woody material on the ground to provide effective

cover. For roadside hazard harvest areas that are more than 50 feet from the roadway, all project

generated slash would be lopped and scattered on the ground to a depth of less than 18 inches.

This same slash treatment would occur throughout interior salvage units where skyline cable

yarding is used. Along sensitive streams in roadside hazard units (all streams in areas of high soil

burn severity), small hazard trees and harvest slash would be left on the ground to a depth of 18

inches in RCA equipment exclusion zones rather than hand-piled for burning.

To protect stream channel structure, any trees removed from equipment exclusion zones along

intermittent or perennial streams would require full suspension (neither end of the log dragging

on the ground). This full suspension requirement would also apply to RCA equipment exclusion

zones along ephemeral streams in interior salvage units. In order to more effectively abate safety

hazards along roadways, an exception is made for proposed hazard tree units at ephemeral stream

crossings. Hand-felled hazard trees may be removed from these ephemeral stream equipment

exclusion zones by cable endlining (dragging the log on the ground to a place along the roadway

where equipment can reach it) or one-end suspension. Endlining may also occur in the outer

RCAs as equipment access would be limited in those zones due to the requirements that

equipment would not turn around and that skid trails would not be located parallel to streams. All

furrows created by endlining or cable yarding within RCAs would be filled and/or re-contoured to

match surrounding topography. No material would be endlined across a stream channel.

Project Best Management Practices (BMPs)

Best management practices utilized on Plumas National Forest System (NFS) lands are

procedures and techniques that are incorporated in project actions and have been determined by

the State of California to be the most effective, practicable means of preventing or reducing the

amount of pollution generated by nonpoint sources to a level compatible with water quality goals.

BMPs applicable to PNF projects such as the Chipmunk Project are presented in a regional

amendment (Pacific Southwest Region - Region 5) of the USDA-Forest Service Handbook,

Section 2509.22, Chapter 10 (Water Quality Management Handbook) (USDA 2011a). Additional

BMPs are presented in a guide for all U.S. national forests, National Best Management Practices

for Water Quality Management on National Forest System Lands (USDA 2012b), but the vast

majority of the BMPs in that guide are already covered in the Region 5 amendment to FSH

2509.22.

Some of these BMPs would occur within RCAs and others would occur outside of RCAs, but all

are designed to protect water quality. For example, waterbar treatments on skid trails and landings

outside of RCAs are designed to effectively disperse runoff so that drainage from these features is


8 Appendix B

not concentrated in a pathway that would lead to a stream channel. A brief list and description of

prominent BMPs applicable to the Chipmunk Project are presented below in Table 2. However,

that list is not all-inclusive. See the Region 5 amendment to FSH 2509.22 for a full list of BMPs

and complete descriptions.

Since 1992, the Best Management Practice Evaluation Program for USDA Forest Service, Pacific

Southwest Region (the region comprised of the 18 National Forests in California) has

demonstrated that BMPs are an effective means for preventing delivery of sediment from timber

harvest project units and protecting beneficial uses of water. For the 2007-2009 monitoring

seasons (the most recent seasons in which Forest BMP monitoring reports have been compiled),

186 evaluations of BMPs were conducted for practices associated with timber management

activities on Plumas National Forest System lands. BMPs were rated as effective for over 88

percent of those evaluations (USDA 2009a). The BMP deficiencies observed were predominantly

due to legacy effects associated with the original design or location of system haul roads.

Legacy road designs often incorporated in-sloped road surfaces that drained to an inside ditch

rather than current design practices that utilize, as often as practicable, out-sloped road surfaces

that disperse runoff. In-sloped designs concentrate road runoff in the inside ditch and the legacy

design roads—most constructed prior to the Clean Water Act amendment of 1972— often did not

include sufficient frequency of drainage structures to disperse road runoff and prevent the ditches

from delivering sediment to streams at road crossings. Legacy designs that located roads at mid-

slope locations typically have higher road-intercepted runoff volumes than roads near ridgetops

and mid-slope locations also result in frequent stream crossings. When the 2007-2009 Plumas

National Forest timber BMP evaluations are considered without the road evaluations, the

resulting set of 67 evaluations had a 95 percent effectiveness rate.

Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) treatments for the Chips Fire are planned or have

already been implemented on all National Forest System roads in the Chipmunk Project area that

are located in areas of moderate or high severity. Many of these treatments are located at

road/stream crossings to provide additional capacity of the crossing structure to pass the increased

stream flow and debris that could occur in periods of intense precipitation over the next several

post-fire years. For example, trash racks have been added at culvert inlets to prevent plugging or

hardened overflow dips have been installed to protect the road from wash-out in case the culvert

does plug. In addition, the potential for sediment delivery from roads within the Chipmunk

Project area will be reduced due to BAER treatments that add additional road surface dips to

disperse runoff and due to BAER maintenance of existing roadway dips and ditches to assure

proper function. Continued maintenance of those road drainage features would also occur along

haul roads under the Proposed Action.

Three water drafting sites (sources of water for pump trucks that add water to haul roads to abate

dust and stabilize the road surface) would be constructed or reconstructed under the Proposed


Appendix B 9

Action. Per BMP 2.5, this work would occur so that water would be pumped outside of the

normally flowing stream channel, preventing impacts to in-stream flow and assuring that

disturbance associated with pumping or maintenance of the water source would not cause

turbidity in the stream. Additionally, the short access routes to the water sources from NFS roads

for water trucks would be reconstructed to improve drainage and prevent sediment delivery from

the access route to the stream. These actions would improve long-term protection of water quality

at these drafting sites.

In 2010, BMP evaluations were performed on roadside and salvage timber units implemented

during the Moonlight Fire recovery and restoration project. BMPs evaluated included those

associated with streamside management zone protection, project skid trails, and project landings.

Twenty-one evaluations were performed and the BMP effectiveness rate was 95 percent. For the

one evaluation that indicated ineffective BMPs, an instance of sediment delivery to an ephemeral

channel was observed due to poor location of a project skid trail. The issue was subsequently

treated with waterbars and additional woody debris added to the trail. Erosion was noted to be

minor, with no delivery of sediment to downstream intermittent ephemeral or perennial streams

and no adverse effect to beneficial uses of water.

Per the Region 5 amendment to FSH 2509.22, Chipmunk Project activities would have BMP

implementation monitoring using a “checklist” approach. BMP implementation checklists would

document whether and when the site-specific BMPs specified in NEPA analyses were

implemented. These checklists would provide a systematic means for early detection of potential

water-quality problems, and would be completed early enough to allow corrective actions to be

taken, if needed, prior to any significant rainfall or snowmelt throughout the duration of the

project. Checklists would be completed several times during the life of most projects, including

prior to ground-disturbing activities, prior to winter periods, and at the completion of the project.

Table 3. Prominent Best Management Practices applicable to Chipmunk Project activities. This

list is not all-inclusive. Further BMPs presented in the Region 5 amendment to FSH 2509.22 are

also applicable to the Chipmunk Project.

BM

P

No. Best Management Practice Description

1.1 Timber Sale Planning Process

Project contract includes provisions set forth in NEPA to protect water quality.

1.4 Using Sale Area Maps and/or Project Maps for Designating Water Quality Protection Needs

Sale area or contract map contains treatment unit boundaries, streamcourse and wetland protection zones, roads where haul is permitted/prohibited, and areas where special operations are designated to protect water quality.


10 Appendix B

BM

P


1.5 Limiting the Operating Period of Timber Sale Activities

Purchaser's Plan of Operation and Operation Schedule are approved by Forest Service per clauses C6.3 and B6.31 Operating period limitations, such as when soils are wet, are defined per clause C6.313

1.9 Determining Tractor-loggable Ground

Project contract specifies areas upon with tractors can operate.

1.10

1.12

Tractor Skidding Design

Log Landing Location

Skid trail patterns serve to avoid build-up of destructive runoff and sedimentation to SMZs. Landings are of minimal size, are located well outside of SMZs, minimize the number of skid trails required, and are of stable construction.

1.11 Suspended Log Yarding in Timber Harvesting

For suspended log units, erosion control measures are applied in cable corridors to control erosion and runoff.

1.13 Erosion Prevention and Control Measures During Timber Sale Operations

Equipment has not operated when ground conditions are such that excessive damage has resulted. Erosion control measures have been in place prior to likely precipitation events and prior to seasonal shutdown.

1.14 Special Erosion-prevention Measures on Disturbed Land

This BMP is only for projects which contain identified special soil stabilization problems which cannot be treated by normal methods. These areas are shown on the project map and treatments are described in the contract.

1.15 Regeneration of Areas Disturbed by Harvest Activities

This BMP is only for projects where it is expected that disturbed soils in certain areas will require vegetative cover for stabilization and normal contract methods will not mitigate sufficiently. These areas are shown on the project map and treatments are described in the contract.

1.16

1.17

Log Landing Erosion Control

Erosion Control on Skid Trails

Erosion control work is completed on landings and skid trails to adequately drain and disperse water and minimize erosion and sedimentation. Landing treatments facilitate revegetation, stabilize cut and fill slopes, and divert road drainage away from landings.

1.18

1.19

Meadow Protection during Timber Harvesting

Streamcourse and Aquatic Protection

Any damage to streamcourses or meadows has been repaired in a timely fashion. All project-generated debris has been removed from streamcourses.


Appendix B 11

BM

P


1.20

1.21

Erosion-control Structure Maintenance

Acceptance of Timber Sale Erosion-control Measures Before Sale Closure

Erosion control measures throughout the project area are acceptable and have been maintained throughout the project term.

1.22 Slash Treatment in Sensitive Areas

Special slash treatment, without the use of mechanized equipment, is specified in project sensitive areas as necessary. These areas are shown on the project map and treatments are described in the contract.

1.25 Modification of the Timber Sale Contract

If necessary, the project contract was modified during implementation to prevent damage to soil, water or watershed values.

2.4 Road Maintenance and Operations To ensure water-quality protection by providing

adequate and appropriate maintenance and by

controlling road use and operations

2.5 Water Source Development and

Utilization

To supply water for road maintenance, dust

abatement, and other management activities, while

protecting and maintaining water quality

2.7 Road Decommissioning Stabilize, restore, and vegetate unneeded roads to a

more natural state as necessary to protect and

enhance NFS lands, resources, and water quality.

The end result is that the decommissioned road will

not represent a significant impact to water quality

by reducing sedimentation from road surfaces and

slopes, reducing risk of mass failures, and restoring

natural surface and subsurface drainage patterns.

2.8 Stream Crossings Minimize water, aquatic, and riparian resource

disturbances and related sediment production when

constructing, reconstructing, or maintaining

temporary and permanent stream crossings.

Standard Soil and Water Quality Protection Measures

Several soil and water quality protection measures are standard for timber harvest projects on

NFS lands. Most of these measures, such as practices for streamcourse protection, harvest traffic


12 Appendix B

patterns and skid trail layout, are described in the Timber Sale Administration Handbook for

Region 5 (FSH 2409.15) and in standard clauses of timber sale contracts. Additional soil

protection measures specific to the Chipmunk Project include:

Unless otherwise agreed to by the District hydrologist or soil scientist and sale administrator, all

landings, skid trail approaches to landings (to a distance of 200 feet), and utilized temporary

(unclassified) roads would be subsoiled through the full depth of compaction to restore soil

infiltration. Vehicle access to temporary roads would be blocked and water bars would be

installed prior to subsoiling operations. Subsoiling to 18 inches minimum depth would occur on

temporary roads and landings within the same year as harvest.

The subsoiler would be lifted where substantial root and bole damage to larger trees would occur

from subsoiling. Subsoiling would not occur on shallow soils where the displacement of rocks

disrupts soil horizons or where there are concerns about the spread of root disease, or damage to

tree roots. Skid trails with slope over 25% may not be approved for subsoiling, but would be

frequently waterbarred per contract requirements. Subsoiling skid trails within harvest units on

coarse textured soils (USDA texture classes: sands; loamy coarse sands; and coarse loamy sands

with less than 5% clay) that have developed from granitic parent material would generally not be

recommended. Further subsoiling recommendations are documented in a letter from the Regional

Soil Scientist, which resulted from a field review of subsoiling conducted on the Plumas and

Tahoe National Forests (USDA 2006).

Conduct ground based harvest operations only when the upper 8” of the soil is essentially dry. For

this measure, soil is defined as “dry” when no portion of the top 8” can be molded by hand

compression and hold that shape when the hand is tapped. Allow cut-to-length harvesters and

forwarders to operate on moist soil, when the depth of the organic mat is greater than 18”.

Winter operations may occur only when the ground is frozen to a depth of 5 inches or over 8

inches of well packed snow.

Botanical Resources and Noxious Weeds

The SMRs for botanical resources and noxious weeds, as well as the associated site-specific

maps, are provided in the Biological Evaluation, Noxious Weed Risk Assessment, and the Plant

Protection Plan for the Chip-munk Project. These reports are part of the Chip-munk Project

record, which is on file at the Mt. Hough Ranger District and available upon request.

Botanical Resources Rare plant species in the proposed treatment units would be protected under the action alternative.

Plant protections for the project were developed using the guidance provided in the Plumas NF

interim management prescriptions (USDA 2007b). Rare species locations within the Botany


Appendix B 13

analysis area, but outside of the proposed treatment units, do not require specific design features

or mitigations for protection, because no project related activities are proposed near them. If

project related activities are to occur near other known rare species locations they too should be

flagged for avoidance.

Table 4 identifies sensitive and special interest plant species that occur within proposed salvage

units. All plant populations listed here would be protected under the action alternative through the

designation of flagged Control Areas. No ground-disturbing activities would occur within any

Control Area. Hazard trees may be felled but not removed within designated control areas.

Table 4. Sensitive Plant Species Within Designated Control Areas

Planning Unit TES Species Occurrence # Map Protection Measures

3 (Salvage;

Tractor)

Cypripedium fasciculatum

(clustered lady's slipper)

Occurrence: 139

Sub-occurrences: A2,

A5, A7, A9, A10

(~0.1 acres total)

16 Occurrences are designated

as control areas where all

ground disturbing activities

will be excluded.

24 (Salvage;

Skyline)

Lewisia kelloggii ssp.

hutchisonii

(Hutchison’s lewisia)

Occurrence: 008

(~3000 sq ft)

24 Occurrence is designated

as a control area where all


will be excluded.

32 (Salvage,

RCA Salvage

& Roadside

Salvage;

Skyline)

Claytonia palustris

(marsh spring beauty)

Occurrence: 007

Sub-occurrences: A-

D (~0.7 acres total)




will be excluded.

45 (Salvage;

Tractor)


hutchisonii


Occurrence: 022

(~0.6 acres)




will be excluded.

55 (Roadside

Salvage;

Tractor)



Occurrence: 031

Sub-occurrence: E

(~50 sq ft)




will be excluded.

56 (RCA

Roadside

Salvage &

Roadside

Salvage;

Tractor)



Occurrence: 031

Sub-occurrences: C

(~0.1 acres) and D

(~50 sq ft)

5, 6 Occurrences are designated



will be excluded.

64 (Salvage; Lewisia kelloggii ssp.

hutchisonii

Occurrence: 007

Sub-occurrences: B




14 Appendix B


Tractor) (Hutchison’s lewisia) and C

(~0.25 acres total)


will be excluded.

77 (Salvage,

RCA Salvage,

RCA Roadside

Salvage &

Roadside

Salvage;

Skyline)

Claytonia palustris


Occurrence: 007

Sub-occurrences: A,

E, & F

(~0.5 acres total)




will be excluded.

83 (Roadside

Salvage;

Tractor)



Occurrence: 031

(~6 acres)




will be excluded.

85 (RCA

Roadside

Salvage;

Skyline)



Occurrence: 050

Sub-occurrence: K14

(~100 sq ft)




will be excluded.

86 (Salvage,

RCA Salvage,

RCA Roadside

Salvage &

Roadside

Salvage;

Skyline)



Occurrence: 050

Sub-occurrences: B,

E, H1, H2, & K1-

K13 (~1.5 acres total)




will be excluded.

89 (Salvage;

Tractor)


hutchisonii


Occurrence: 009

(~1000 sq ft)




will be excluded.

137 (RCA

Roadside;

Skyline)

Claytonia palustris


Occurrence: 009

Sub-occurrences: A

& B (each has a small

area within unit)




will be excluded.

157 (Roadside;

Skyline) and

Haul Route (27N21B)


hutchisonii


Occurrence: 010

Sub-occurrences:

C (~0.2 acres)

F (~100 sq ft,

adjacent to unit and

on haul route)

A (~500 sq ft; plants

growing in road cut

26,

27

Occurrences are designated



will be excluded.


Appendix B 15


of haul route)

212 (Roadside

and RCA

Roadside;

Skyline)



Occurrence: 052

Sub-occurrences: A-I

(~1.0 acres total)




will be excluded.

297 (Roadside

and RCA

Roadside;

Skyline)



Occurrence: 141

Sub-occurrences:

B, E, F, I, M, N, O, P,

& JJ

(~2.0 acres total)




will be excluded.

306 (RCA

Roadside;

Tractor)

Claytonia palustris


Occurrence: 009

Sub-occurrence: B

(~0.45 acres)




will be excluded.

375 (RCA

Roadside;

Tractor)



Occurrence: 146

Sub-occurrence: C

(~0.1 acre inside unit)

20,

14

Occurrence is designated



will be excluded.

396 (Roadside;

Skyline)



Occurrence: 143

(~600 sq ft)




will be excluded.

496 (Roadside;

Tractor)



Occurrence: 032

Sub-occurrence: D

(~50 sq ft; plants

outside unit but

control area is inside

unit)




will be excluded.

Haul Route

(26N67)



Occurrence: 071

(~200 sq ft; plants

and control area near

haul route road)




will be excluded.


16 Appendix B

Sensitive Species Control Area Maps

!

!

!

!

!!

17

47

32

77

3277

17

77

17

250

77

77

244

7732

17

47

77

32

47

77

32

333

331

32

32

32

77

333

77

244

3277

32

77

17

333

32

244

244

3277

77

32

77

77

32

77

17

244

17

250

32

77

244

332

244

32

77

32

77

32

244

CLPA10

CLPA10

CLPA10

051102_CLPA10_007C

051102_CLPA10_007D

Proposed Units

Roadside

Salvage

Salvage - Roadside

Revisit Locations

RE_LOCATED

NO

NOT REVISITED

YES

New Occurrences

0 0.1 0.20.05 Miles²

All Chipmunk Units

Vicinity Map

Chipmunk Project Sensitive Species

Claytonia palustris present in units 32, 77

Map 1


Appendix B 17


18 Appendix B

Map 2


Appendix B 19

Map 5


20 Appendix B

Map 6

Map 7


Appendix B 21

!

!

CYFA_032E

71

496

70

7156

5656

293

70

71

71

71

71 71 71

70

71

71

71

71

71 7171

71

71

70

56

71

496

136

70

70

71

496

71

56

496

CYFA_032D

Proposed Units

Roadside

Salvage

Salvage - Roadside

Revisit Locations

RE_LOCATED

NO

NOT REVISITED

YES

New Occurrences

0 0.15 0.30.075 Miles²

All Chipmunk Units

Vicinity Map


Cypripedium fasciculatum present in units 496


22 Appendix B

Map 10

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!!!

!!

!!

!

!!!!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

86

6085

85

8686

85

60

85

209

85

85

86

299

60

60

11

299

CYFA

CYFA H1

CYFA K11

CYFA 050

CYFA 050B

CYFA 050K K9

CYFA 050K K8

CYFA 050K K7

CYFA 050K K6

CYFA 050K K5

CYFA 050K K4

CYFA 050K K3

CYFA 050K K2

CYFA 050K K1

CYFA 050K K14

CYFA 050K K13

CYFA 050K K12

CYFA_050K

CYFA_050G

CYFA_050H

CYFA_050D

CYFA_050I

CYFA_050F

CYFA_050B

CYFA_050E

CYFA_050A

CYFA_050J

CYFA_050C

CYFA_050K

CYFA_050B

CYFA_050J

CYFA_050A

CYFA_050I

CYFA_050H

CYFA_050F

CYFA_050E

Proposed Units

Roadside

Salvage

Salvage - Roadside

Revisit Locations

RE_LOCATED

NO

NOT REVISITED

YES

New Occurrences

0 0.1 0.20.05 Miles²

All Chipmunk Units

Vicinity Map


Cypripedium fasciculatum present in unit 60, 85, 86


Appendix B 23

Map 11:


24 Appendix B

Map 14:


Appendix B 25

Map 16

!

!

!

!

!!

!!

!

!!

2

3

2

208

2

2

188

3

2

300

188

2

188

207

300

188

207

300

208

207

208

37

208

37

188

207

208

2

259

188

37259

051102_CYFA_139A4051102_CYFA_139A2

051102_CYFA_139A8

051102_CYFA_139A1

051102_CYFA_139A7

Proposed Units

Roadside

Salvage

Salvage - Roadside

Revisit Locations

RE_LOCATED

NO

NOT REVISITED

YES

New Occurrences

0 0.1 0.20.05 Miles²

All Chipmunk Units

Vicinity Map


Cypripedium fasciculatum present in unit 3


26 Appendix B

Map 18:


Appendix B 27

Map 19:


28 Appendix B

Map 20:

!

!

279

375

375

279

157

279

276

375

275

377

279

375

375

279

375

276

276

279

377

276

377

276

CYFA_146C

CYFA_00150

CYFA_146C

Proposed Units

Roadside

Salvage

Salvage - Roadside

Revisit Locations

RE_LOCATED

NO

NOT REVISITED

YES

New Occurrences

0 0.1 0.20.05 Miles²

All Chipmunk Units

Vicinity Map


Cypripedium fasciculatum present in unit 365


Appendix B 29

Map 23:


30 Appendix B

Map 24:

!

62

372

18

113

63

18

323

120

113

121

113

21

21

18

62

67

120

503

281

373

24

43

325

21

62373

43

121

21

325

24

67

113

6324

113

325

43

25

372

282

120

24

373

121

25

324

373

322

324

62

113

323

282

281

113

6767

21

282

373

372

120 281

373

113

43

323

503

325

325

21

110

24

24

62

25

LEKEH_008

Proposed Units

Roadside

Salvage

Salvage - Roadside

Revisit Locations

RE_LOCATED

NO

NOT REVISITED

YES

New Occurrences

0 0.15 0.30.075 Miles²

All Chipmunk Units

Vicinity Map



Appendix B 31

Map 25:

Map 26:

! !

!

!

!!

!

!

!

! !

!

CYFA_038B

CYFA_00145A

CYFA_041C

CYFA_041B2

89

34

89

89

80

80

80

14

53

79

89

8989

79

80

89

80

508

14

34

89

319

53

80

34

158

80

53

319

1414

25

80

34

80

89154

14 273

79

320

44

14

34

80 8989

80

80

80

80

89

79

8980

34

89 317

14

53

80

89

34

80

89

80

80

80

158

34

80

25

80

321

80

80

312

500

34

89

80

309

89

34

80

311

80

309

25

34

14

312

89

319

34

3480

14

34

34

80

89

80

34

80

89

89

3480

80

309

32114

89

321

53

312

317

321

44

158

89

79

79

158

312

80

321

319

89

89

312

319

53

34

89

53

317

154

25

311

CYFA_038A

CYFA_041B1

CYFA_038D

CYFA_038C

LEKEH_009

CYFA_038E

CYFA_038B

CYFA_00145B

Proposed Units

Roadside

Salvage

Salvage - Roadside

Revisit Locations

RE_LOCATED

NO

NOT REVISITED

YES

New Occurrences

0 0.25 0.50.125 Miles²

All Chipmunk Units

Vicinity Map



32 Appendix B


Appendix B 33

Map 27:


34 Appendix B

Map 28:


Appendix B 35

Noxious Weeds The following SMRs adopted in full will reduce the risk factors described in this document

resulting in a reduced risk of noxious weed invasion and spread of existing populations. These

SMR’s are consistent with the SNFPA FSEIS (USDA Forest Service 2004), USDA Forest

Service Strategy for Noxious and Nonnative Invasive Plant Management (USDA Forest Service

1996), and Region 5’s Regional Noxious Weed Strategy (USDA Forest Service 2000).

Furthermore, these SMR’s are the means by which the strategic objectives and policy outlined in

FSM section 2900, Management of Invasive Species, are fulfilled.

The project standard management requirements are designed to minimize risk of new weed

introductions, minimize the spread of weeds within units, and minimize the spread of weeds

between units.

Prevent the introduction of new invaders:

1. Use agreement clauses to require contractors to meet Forest Service-approved vehicle

and equipment cleaning requirements/standards prior to using the vehicle or equipment in

the National Forest System to prevent and control the introduction, establishment, and

spread of aquatic and terrestrial invasive species.

2. Use weed-free equipment, mulches, and seed sources. Avoid seeding in areas where

revegetation will occur naturally, unless noxious weeds are a concern. Save topsoil from

disturbance and put it back to use in onsite revegetation, unless contaminated with

noxious weeds. All activities that require seeding or planting will need to use only

locally collected native seed sources. Use seed zones for grasses when possible

otherwise plant and seed material should be collected from as close to the project area as

possible, from within the same watershed and at a similar elevation whenever possible.

As necessary, Plumas National Forest botanists will develop project and site-specific

revegetation and seeding guidelines that will be customized from existing general

guidelines.

3. Post project monitoring will facilitate the early detection of new populations and allow

for developing proposals for treatment before populations get large.

Reduce the likelihood of spreading known infestations:

4. Do not stage equipment, materials, or crews in noxious weed infested areas. Do not stage

equipment in areas adjacent to the paved portions of Caribou Rd.

5. Flag and Avoid known weed sites in and near proposed treatment units.

6. Flag and Avoid noxious weed locations discovered during project implementation.

Control Areas. The noxious weed sites listed in Table 5 will be designated as Control Areas,

where equipment and soil-disturbing project activities would be excluded. These areas will be

identified on project maps and delineated in the field with day-glow orange noxious weed

flagging.

Table 5: Noxious weed species in designated Control Areas

Planning Unit Noxious Weed Species Occurrence Map Measure to Prevent Expansion


36 Appendix B

Planning Unit Noxious Weed Species Occurrence Map Measure to Prevent Expansion

34 (Salvage-

Roadside;

Skyline)

Rubus armeniacus

(Himalayan blackberry)

Occurrence:

0007

(~450 sq ft)

1 Occurrence is designated as a control

area where all ground disturbing

activities will be excluded.

305 (Roadside;

Tractor)

Rubus armeniacus

(Himalayan blackberry)

Occurrence:

0009

(~675 sq ft)




375 (Roadside;

Tractor)

Cirsium arvense

(Canada thistle)

Occurrence:

0781

(~35 sq ft)




375 (RCA-

Roadside;

Tractor)

Cirsium arvense

(Canada thistle)

Occurrence:

0783

(~35 sq ft)




Haul Route

(27N26)

Centaurea solstitialis

(yellow starthistle) and

Elymus caput-medusae

(medusahead)

CESO3_796

(~0.8 acres)

and

TACA8_247

(~0.25 acres)

6 Both occurrences are on a landing

adjacent to a haul route, and are

together designated as a control area

where all ground disturbing activities

will be excluded.

Noxious Weed Species Control Area Maps

Map 1


Appendix B 37

Map 2


38 Appendix B

Map 3


Appendix B 39

Map 6


40 Appendix B


Appendix B 41

Heritage Resources

These heritage SMRs are displayed in the Chip-munk Recovery and Restoration Project Heritage

Resource Inventory Report. This report is part of the Chip-munk Project record on file at the Mt.

Hough Ranger District; a copy is available upon request.

1. All proposed activities, facilities, improvements, and disturbances would avoid heritage resource

sites. “Avoidance” means that no activities associated with the project that may affect heritage

resource sites would occur within a site’s boundaries, including any defined buffer zones.

Portions of the project may need to be modified, redesigned, or eliminated to properly avoid

heritage resource sites.

2. All heritage resource sites within the area of potential effect would be clearly delineated prior to

implementing any associated activities that have the potential to affect heritage resource sites.

3. Buffer zones may be established to ensure added protection where the Forest or District

archaeologist determines that they are necessary. The use of buffer zones in conjunction with

other avoidance measures are particularly applicable where setting contributes to the property's

eligibility under 36 CFR 60.4, or where it may be an important attribute of some types of heritage

resource sites (e.g., historic buildings or structures; historic or heritage properties important to

Native Americans). The size of buffer zones needs to be determined by the Forest or District

archaeologist on a case-by-case basis.

4. When any changes in proposed activities are necessary to avoid heritage resource sites (e.g.,

project modifications), these changes would be completed prior to initiating any activities.

5. Monitoring during project implementation, in conjunction with other measures, may be used to

enhance the effectiveness of protection measures.

6. If heritage resources are inadvertently discovered during project implementation, the Mt. Hough

Ranger District archaeologist would be contacted immediately. The heritage resources would be

recorded, clearly delineated, and protected.

Treatment Implementation

Pre-existing skid trails and landings would be used whenever available, feasible, and in a

desirable location. In order to avoid loss of land base productivity, no more than 15 percent of

timber stands would be dedicated to landings and permanent skid trails (USDA 1988). In areas

where pre-existing skid trails and landings are not present, construction of such facilities would

occur as agreed upon by the Forest Service and purchaser. All landings and skid trails utilized

would conform to the standards and guidelines set forth in the Timber Sale Administration

Handbook (FSH 2409.15) and the Forest Plan.


42 Appendix B

Monitoring

Soils The Forest Plan sets out objectives and protocol for monitoring of plan standards and guidelines,

BMP compliance and effectiveness, and soil productivity parameters. Monitoring is to be

completed by Forest staff on a per annum basis, either project by project, or a sampling of

projects. Sampling should include at least five units each on granite and metasedimentary rock

soils for a total of ten units for implementation monitoring. Specific methods would be defined by

district watershed personnel. In addition, effectiveness and forensic monitoring would occur on

watersheds that exceed the threshold of concern, as required by California Central Valley

Regional Water Quality Control Board Resolution R5-2005-0052, “Conditional Waiver of Waste

Discharge Requirements for Discharges Related to Timber Harvest Activities”.

Heritage Resources Monitoring during project implementation, in conjunction with other measures, may be used to

enhance the effectiveness of protection measures.

Noxious Weeds Monitoring during and after project implementation would be used to assess the effectiveness of

the SMRs and the control measures at preventing the introduction and spread of noxious weed

species in the project area. The measurement indicators described in this analysis—for example,

the number of existing infestations and the number of acres treated—would be used in this

assessment. Post-treatment monitoring would identify the need for follow-up treatment, assess the

effectiveness of the different treatment methods, and/or identify the need for alternative methods

of control. Monitoring would be conducted by District personnel during and following project

implementation and is expected to greatly reduce the likelihood of uncontrollable weed spread in

the Chip-munk Project area.

Documents

Appendix B Standard Management Requirements and Monitoringa123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic... · 2013. 8. 1. · temperature, relative humidity, wind speed, and radiation