LOGAN RANGER DISTRICT UINTA-WASATCH-CACHE NATIONAL …a123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic... · DECISION MEMO PLEASANT VALLEY JUNIPER TREATMENT II LOGAN RANGER DISTRICT,

DECISION MEMO

PLEASANT VALLEY JUNIPER TREATMENT II

LOGAN RANGER DISTRICT, UINTA-WASATCH-CACHE NATIONAL FOREST CACHE COUNTY, UTAH

SEPTEMBER 2017

1.0 INTRODUCTION This document details my decision regarding the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources proposal to conduct a joint habitat restoration project that would lop and scatter juniper (Juniperus spp.) on National Forest System (NFS) lands within the Mahogany Range Inventoried Roadless Area and adjacent Hardware Ranch Wildlife Management Area administered by the State of Utah, Utah Division of Wildlife Resources.

2.0 BACKGROUND Wildfire is a natural part of Utah’s ecosystems, but wildfire suppression since European settlement, coupled with changes in grazing systems, has resulted in changes in vegetation composition and community type within and around Hardware Ranch. Historically, wildfire previously maintained mountain big sage brush communities by preventing establishment and progression of juniper and pinyon woodlands. Tree ring research throughout the Great Basin and Intermountain west have documented changes in fire frequency shortly after settlement wherein time between fire intervals increased. These same studies have also shown that across the west, 90 percent or more of existing juniper woodlands and individual trees were established after the commencement of fire suppression and settlement after 1860 (Miller and Tausch, 2002). Western and Utah junipers can easily attain ages exceeding 1,000 years (Tausch et al. 1981) when protected from fire. The majority of the juniper trees on the Logan Ranger District are comparatively young and follow post fire suppression establishment trends. The continued expansion of juniper into sage brush habitat near Hardware Ranch has reduced and degraded habitats for the greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus), classified as a sensitive species by the Regional Forester for the Intermountain Region (Region 4), reduced winter forage for big game, and reduced water availability for springs that contain Bonneville cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki utah).

Within and around Hardware Ranch, juniper trees have encroached into the mountain big sage communities and meadow areas. They are now in a state of Phase II juniper invasion as evident by the presence of mid-aged successional juniper and a number of juniper seedlings growing within the sagebrush and meadow habitat types. Juniper invasion progresses from Phase I where a few dispersed juniper trees transition into high densities of large juniper trees. As the transition occurs, the understory vegetation is lost as it transitions from shrub steppe and meadow habitat to juniper forest with bare soil in the understory. This is because junipers compete for moisture, nutrients, and sunlight with understory plants. These understory plants provide habitat for the greater sage-grouse and provide the crucial forage for wintering wildlife as well as forage for livestock. Treating Phase I and II juniper invasion with a lop and scatter treatment is successful because there is still an understory present, however, once the understory is lost, and the area transitions into Phase III invasion, and restoration becomes expensive and success difficult. A juniper invasion would reduce the properly functioning condition or would result in

Decision Memo – Pleasant Valley Juniper Treatment II Logan Ranger District, Uinta Wasatch Cache National Forest

September 2017, Page 2

the area not functioning properly, and would be outside of the historic range of variability for the area.

General Location: Near Hardware Ranch Wildlife Management Area and Pleasant Valley, approximately 15 miles southeast of Logan, Utah (Figure 1).

Legal Description: Township 11 North, Range 3 East, sections 23, 24, 25, 26 Salt Lake Meridian

Project number in the Planning, Appeals, and Litigation System database: 51997

3.0 PURPOSE AND NEED The purpose of this project is to improve wildlife habitat by preventing loss of understory by reducing juniper expansion. The area is important for both summer and winter habitat for greater sage-grouse and for big game winter habitat. The invading junipers are creating a barrier for greater sage-grouse moving between the Hardware Ranch/Ant Flat sage grouse population area and Rich County, Utah. The area also provides range resources that support grazing. The watershed within the project area drains into streams that contain Bonneville cutthroat trout. The treatment would allow more water to drain into these streams. The desired condition for this area is to be maintained as sagebrush and meadow habitats. Juniper invasion represents a threat to these resources.

There is a need to manage forest terrestrial habitats to provide for sustained diversity of species that will contribute to achievement of goals and objectives identified in the 2003 Revised Land and Resource Management Plan [for the] Wasatch-Cache National Forest, as amended through September 2015 (“Forest Plan”). The project is within the Cache-Box Elder Management Area as described in the Forest Plan. Management prescriptions provide the framework to accomplish overall management objectives and emphasis. The project falls within the following management prescriptions:

• 3.2d – Terrestrial Habitat Emphasis-Developed • 3.2u – Terrestrial Habitat Emphasis-Undeveloped

4.0 PROPOSED ACTION The entire project area is about 870, of which 370 acres is on National Forest System lands and the remainder is state land. The proposal is to use hand crews to lop and scatter all juniper trees, within the project area, except in areas identified as persistent juniper woodlands, to maintain and enhance sagebrush, and meadow habitats. The trees would need to be lopped and cut low to prevent negative visual and other effects. Crews would use existing designated National Forest System roads and trails to access the project area; no new road construction is proposed. Implementation would occur after August 1 or before May 1of the implementation year to avoid impacts to migratory birds.

Prescribed fire is not a preferred treatment in this area because of the potential for invasion by non-native grasses, which would result in an undesirable outcome, and a desire to maintain the shrub component for the benefit of sage grouse and big game winter forage. Therefore the preferred course of action is a mechanical lop and scatter of junipers by hand crews.



Figure 1. Pleasant Valley Juniper Treatment II project area map.



4.1 DESIGN FEATURES 1. Lop and scatter up to 370 acres on National Forest System lands adjacent to Hardware Ranch

Wildlife Management Area. • Cause up to 100 percent mortality of junipers in areas that have Phase I or II juniper

encroachment.

4.2 MITIGATION MEASURES Wildlife

• Avoid cutting vegetation within the migratory bird breeding season, which is between May1 - August 1 each year.

• The 2003 Revised Land and Resource Management Plan [for the] Wasatch-Cache National Forest has been amended several times, beginning in 2004 and most recently in September 2015. Amendments that provide additional management direction pertinent to the Pleasant Valley Juniper Treatment II project include the Greater Sage-grouse Record of Decision for Idaho and Southwest Montana, Nevada, Utah and Attachment C – Greater Sage-Grouse Utah Plan Amendment (“Greater Sage-grouse ROD”; USDA 2015). The following Forest Plan guidelines for the protection of greater sage-grouse are applicable:

o GRSG-GRSGH-GL-029-Guideline – When removing conifers that are encroaching into greater sage-grouse habitat, avoid persistent woodlands (i.e. old growth relative to site, or more than 100 years old) (Greater Sage-grouse ROD, p. 146).

o GRSG-GRSGH-GL-033-Guideline – In priority habitat management areas, sagebrush focal areas, and Anthro Mountain, vegetation treatment projects should only be conducted if they maintain, restore, or enhance desired conditions (Greater Sage-grouse ROD, p. 146 and Table 1 (pp. 140-141)).

o GRSG-FM-GL-047-Guideline – In priority and general habitat management areas, sagebrush focal areas, and Anthro Mountain, fuel treatments should be designed to maintain, restore, or enhance greater sage-grouse habitat (Greater Sage-grouse ROD, p. 148).

Fuels • All juniper within the project shall be cut regardless of size. No other vegetation needs to be

treated. • Cut material shall be lopped and scattered so that slash height does not exceed 18 inches above

the ground. • Cut material left on site shall not exceed 48 inches in length. • Cut material shall be spread in ephemeral washes and draws where possible to help reduce

erosion. • Stump height shall be less than 6 inches above the ground. • Live browse species, shall not be cut or damaged. • Only established roads shall be used. No overland travel by vehicle will be allowed. • Trees identified as bearing trees, or any tree blazed or tagged to mark the line of any Government

survey, shall not be cut or destroyed under penalty of the law. Trees with reference tags will be left uncut.

• In areas where the juniper are relatively thin, they may be lopped and scattered if it can be done in



a which leaves slash heights of less than 18 inches and a stump height of less than 6 inches. • Remove as many juniper as needed to meet the objectives of the project.

Recreation • Protect any dispersed campsites if encountered within the project area.

Soils • Ensure that the juniper are scattered and not stacked or creating a barrier of some kind. • On steeper slopes, ensure that the cut junipers act as a barrier to erosion until the site can

revegetate. That the trunks and branches make contact with ground surface or some sort of ground cover is in place to prevent surface runoff and loss of nutrient rich A-horizon.

Range • The proposed action includes 370 acres of National Forest System lands located entirely within

the South Cache Allotment (19,594 acres) which accounts for 1.9 percent of the allotment. Notify Range staff of scheduled treatments so any necessary coordination with grazing permittees can occur.

5.0 DECISION I have decided to approve the Pleasant Valley Juniper Treatment II as described above in the proposed action and with the required design features and mitigation measures. I believe this project is needed to improve wildlife habitat by preventing further encroachment of juniper within sagebrush and meadow areas. After review of the proposed action, I have determined that the Pleasant Valley Juniper Treatment II is consistent with the Forest Plan. Based on the findings summarized below, I am categorically excluding this decision from documentation in an environmental impact statement or environmental assessment. Based on experience with management activities similar to this, and upon the environmental analysis conducted for this project, the effects of implementing this action will be limited in context and intensity. Connected and cumulative actions have been appropriately addressed, an appropriate category for exclusion has been established by law and documented in Forest Service Handbook, and our review indicates no extraordinary circumstances to preclude its application.

5.1 CATEGORY OF THE PROPOSED ACTION

This decision may be categorically excluded from documentation in an environmental impact statement or environmental assessment because the proposed action fits within the following category of actions for which a supporting record and decision memo are required:

36 CFR 220.6(e)(6): Timber stand and/or wildlife habitat improvement activities that do not include the use of herbicides or do not require more than one mile of low standard road construction.

5.2 FINDINGS THAT NO EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES EXIST

Forest Service Handbook 1909.15 (Chapter 30, Section 31.2) lists several resource conditions that should be considered in determining whether “extraordinary circumstances” warrant further analysis. I have concluded that the resources are either not present or that the degree of potential effects are not significant. Thus use of a categorical exclusion is appropriate in this situation because there are no extraordinary circumstances related to the proposed action. The findings of Forest Service interdisciplinary team member are summarized below: A. Federally listed threatened or endangered species or designated critical habitat, species proposed



for Federal listing or proposed critical habitat, or Forest Service sensitive species. An endangered, threatened and sensitive species checklist was prepared for this project. This checklist will be considered as documentation for assessment of these species. Pertaining to plant and aquatic species, there are no federally listed, proposed species or critical habitat, or sensitive species within the project area. Pertaining the wildlife species, there are no federally listed threatened or endangered species or designated critical habitat, species proposed for federal listing or proposed critical habitat. North American wolverine (Gulo gulo) occurs in alpine tundra and montane forest and Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis) occurs in subalpine conifer usually consists of older successional stands or mature stands. Northern goshawk (Accipiter gentilis), one of the Forest Service sensitive species occurs in mature conifer/aspen habitat. The project area is mountain big sagebrush community with phase II juniper invasion. There are greater sage-grouse, one of the Forest Service sensitive species. Greater sage-grouse are a sagebrush obligate species that require large contiguous tracts of sagebrush habitat. They use sagebrush for both food and cover with their winter diet being comprised almost entirely of sagebrush (Connely et al. 2004). Conversion of sagebrush habitat by invasion of junipers is one of the threats to greater sage-grouse (Connelly et al. 2004). This project would benefit greater sage-grouse by removing invasive junipers into sagebrush habitat. The determination reached was that no federally listed or candidate animal species or critical habitat will be affected by this proposal.

B. Flood plains, wetlands, or municipal watersheds. The approved project will have no detrimental effects to wetlands. Where treatment lies directly adjacent to streams, implementation of mitigation measures should limit effect to flood plains, wetlands, or municipal watersheds affected by this proposal.

C. Congressionally designated areas, such as wilderness, wilderness study areas, or national recreation areas. The project area does not include any designated wilderness, wilderness study area, or national recreation area, so such areas do not constitute an extraordinary circumstance for this proposal.

D. Inventoried roadless areas or potential wilderness areas. The proposed action includes 370 acres of National Forest System lands located entirely within the Mahogany Range Inventoried Roadless Area (IRA) (approximately 11,401 acres) and accounts for 3.2 percent of the IRA (Figure 2), however the actual number of acres treated would be less; there are no potential wilderness areas in the project area. The action is consistent with the exception to the prohibition on timber cutting, sale, or removal in inventoried roadless areas pursuant to 36 CFR §294.13(b)(1)(ii)1. The cutting of generally small diameter timber is needed to improve threatened, endangered, proposed, or sensitive species habitat and will maintain or improve one or more of the roadless characteristics as defined in 36 CFR §294.11.

1) High quality or undisturbed soil, water, and air – there are no unique or critical watershed resources.

2) Sources of public drinking water – there no public drinking water systems or sources within the project area that would be affected by the project.

3) Diversity of plant and animal communities – the project area is mainly mountain big sage community; however, juniper trees have encroached into the mountain big sage communities. The area is important for both summer and winter habitat for greater sage-

1 USDA Forest Service 2001. “36 CFR Part 294 Special Areas; Roadless Area Conservation; Final Rule.” Published in the Federal Register, January 12, 2001.



grouse and for big game winter habitat. The invading junipers are creating a barrier for greater sage-grouse moving between the Hardware Ranch/Ant Flat sage grouse population area and Rich County, Utah. The project would improve wildlife habitat by preventing loss of understory by reducing juniper expansion.

4) Habitat for threatened, endangered, proposed, candidate, and sensitive species and for those species dependent on large, undisturbed areas of land – Greater sage-grouse, one of the Forest Service sensitive species occurs in the area. Greater sage-grouse are a sagebrush obligate species that require large contiguous tracts of sagebrush habitat. They use sagebrush for both food and cover with their winter diet being comprised almost entirely of sagebrush (Connely et al. 2004). Conversion of sagebrush habitat by invasion of junipers is one of the threats to greater sage-grouse (Connelly et al. 2004). This project would benefit greater sage-grouse by removing invasive junipers into sagebrush habitat.

5) Primitive, semi-primitive nonmotorized and semi-primitive motorized classes of dispersed recreation – current recreation opportunities within this portion of the IRA include hiking, hunting, and wildlife viewing. There would be no effect to these activities and similar experiences are available in surrounding areas.

6) Reference landscapes – the IRA does not contain any unique reference landscape. The adjacent land managed by the State of Utah is within the Hardware Ranch Wildlife Management Area; considering the broader landscape, the project will improve habitat for greater sage-grouse and several big game species.

7) Natural appearing landscapes with high scenic quality – the area retains high quality scenery, especially scenery with natural-appearing landscapes. In the short term, the proposed action may be evident to the causal users until lopped and scattered limbs grey out. In the long term, the understory vegetation, shrub steppe and meadow habitat would be retained, thereby improving scenic quality.

8) Traditional cultural properties and sacred sites – there are no known cultural properties or sacred sites.

9) Other locally identified unique sites – no unique sites are present.





The project would not have an adverse effect on any of the above categories. The proposed action would benefit roadless characteristics (i.e. diversity of plant and animal communities, habitat for threatened, endangered, proposed, candidate, and sensitive species, reference landscapes, and natural appearing landscapes with high scenic quality) of the inventoried roadless area.

On August 28, 2017, the Region 4 Deputy Regional Forester was briefed on the Pleasant Valley Juniper Treatment II project. The actions proposed in the inventoried roadless area were reviewed for consistency with the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule (RACR). On August 29, 2017, the deputy provided written concurrence that the project complies with the 2001 RACR.

E. Research Natural Areas. The project area does not include any Research Natural Areas, so such areas do not constitute an extraordinary circumstance for this action.

F. American Indians and Alaska Native religious or cultural sites. The Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest’s Heritage Program conducted a Class I File search in response to this project. The Class I record search indicated that surveys have occurred with the Area of Potential Effect (APE), however no eligible sites are located within the APE. No Historic Properties Affected as per 36 Code of Federal Regulations 800.4(d)(1).

G. Archaeological sites, or historic properties or areas. The Forest Archeologist was consulted and reviewed the proposal and determined that no cultural resources were located in the APE. The Utah State Historic Preservation Office concurred with the determination of No Historic Properties Affected.

6.0 SCOPING AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT This project was presented to the Forest Service Interdisciplinary Team members on March 23, 2017.

The project was scoped to the public by way of a postcard mailed to interested parties on June 30, 2017 informing them of the opportunity to comment on the project. On the same day, the scoping letter was posted on the project-specific information page on the Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest website at:

http://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=51997

Two responses were received during this public scoping period which closed on July 31, 2017.

In reaching my decision, I considered input from Forest Service Interdisciplinary Team members who analyzed the proposal, and public comments received during the scoping period. A comment letter from Yellowstone to Uintas et al. raised numerous concerns, most of which were outside the scope of the project. Concerns regarding federally listed threatened or endangered species or designated critical habitat, species proposed for federal listing or proposed critical habitat, or Forest Service sensitive species are addressed in the project record and in this decision memo.

A comment letter from the State of Utah Public Lands Policy Coordination Office included a recommendation from the Utah Department of Agriculture and Food to include reseeding as part of the proposed action. This recommendation was not included because monitoring has shown that reseeding is not needed in these type I and II juniper encroachment areas; the existing seed bed is adequate to establish native vegetation. The department also provided a comment regarding collaboration with permittees and AUMs; the Forest Service has addressed this comment through inclusion of a mitigation measure for range. As stated in the purpose and need, “these understory plants…provide the crucial forage for



wintering wildlife as well as forage for livestock” and suggested changes in livestock animal unit months are outside the scope of this project.

7.0 FINDINGS REQUIRED BY OTHER LAWS

A. Executive Order 11988, “Floodplain Management,” instructs federal agencies to avoid long- and short-term adverse impacts associated with occupancy and modification of floodplains, and to avoid direct or indirect support of floodplain development. This project involves no floodplain occupancy, modification, or development. My decision is consistent with this executive order.

B. Executive Order 11990, “Protection of Wetlands,” instructs federal agencies to avoid the long- and short-term adverse impacts associated with destruction or modification of wetlands, and to avoid direct or indirect support of new construction in wetlands. This project involves no destruction or modification of wetlands, or new construction in wetlands. My decision is consistent with this executive order.

C. Executive Order 12898, “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations,” instructs federal agencies to identify and address any disproportionally high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority and low-income populations. My decision is consistent with this executive order.

D. Executive Order 13112, “Invasive Species,” instructs federal agencies to prevent the introduction of invasive species and provide for their control and to minimize the economic, ecological, and human health impacts that invasive species cause. My decision is consistent with this executive order.

E. Executive Order 13186, “Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds,” instructs federal agencies taking actions that have, or are likely to have, a measurable negative effect on migratory bird populations to develop and implement a memorandum of understanding with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The project is expected to have no measurable negative effect on migratory bird populations. My decision is consistent with this executive order.

This decision is consistent with the Forest Plan, as required by the National Forest Management Act. The project was designed in conformance with Forest Plan direction relevant to project activities. This project is within the Cache Box Elder Management Area (Forest Plan, pp. 4-128 to 4-138). The following direction is specifically relevant to project activities:

Management Prescriptions 3.2D Terrestrial Habitat Emphasis – Developed and 3.2D Terrestrial Habitat Emphasis – Undeveloped which directs the Forest Service to, in part, “manage upland habitats to provide for sustaining and/or recovering desired plant and animal species and/or communities” (Forest Plan, p. 70):

• The forest plan prescription for the majority of the project area is 3.2D which “consists of those terrestrial habitat areas where development is allowed for the purpose of maintaining, improving or restoring key habitat elements.”

o (G3.2U-1) “Vegetation/fuel treatment, prescribed fire and wildland fire use are allowed for the purposes of maintaining, improving or restoring terrestrial habitat…”



In accordance with federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident.

Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English.

To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410; (2) fax: (202) 690-7442; or (3) email: [email protected].

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer and lender.

Documents

LOGAN RANGER DISTRICT UINTA-WASATCH-CACHE NATIONAL …a123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic... · DECISION MEMO PLEASANT VALLEY JUNIPER TREATMENT II LOGAN RANGER DISTRICT,