Wett fork/ of Swift Creek/ T tmber Sales Prefect fl¥U^WiwU^mme^ta^Inipa^ Statem&rtt; etource/ App&ndCc&y CMuaty ZOOS SMTr DOCUMENTS COLLECTION FFB 2 5 2005 M0N]|WA STAU UfcfKARY 1515 E. 6th AVE. Vepartvnent of Matured/ 'Retourc&y and/ Con&ervattorv ^"'ana State Library 3 0864 1003 3258 7 APPENDIX RESOURCES TABLE OF CONTENTS Appendix A - Stipulations and Specifications Watershed and Fisheries A-l Wildlife A-2 Roads A- 3 Aesthetics A-3 Air Quality A-3 Soils A-4 Noxious Weed Management A- 5 Archaeology A-5 Appendix B - Vegetation Analysis Introduction B-l Analysis Method B-l Analysis Area B-2 Covertype B-2 Age-Class Distribution B-4 Old Growth B-4 Stand Development B-6 Alternative Effects B-9 Appendix C - Watershed and Hydrology Analysis Introduction C-l Analysis Methods C-l Analysis Area C-2 Existing Conditions C-2 Alternative Effects C-5 Appendix D - Soils Analysis Introduction D-l Analysis Methods D-l Analysis Area D-l Existing Condition D-l Alternative Effects D-2 Appendix E - Fisheries Analysis Issue E-l Introduction E-l Species E-2 Analysis Methods and Subissues E-3 Summary of Alternatives E— 4 Existing Conditions E-7 Alternative Effects E-28 Appendix F - Wildlife Analysis Introduction F-l Methods F-l Coarse-Filter Assessment F-l Fine Filter Assessment F-10 Threatened and Endangered Species F-10 Sensitive Species F-26 Big Game Species F-31 Appendix G - Economic Analysis Introduction G-l Existing Conditions G-l Alternative Effects G-3 Appendix H - Comments and Responses The Ecology Center C&R-3 Jane Adams C&R-64 Owens and Hurst Lumber Company, Inc C&R-67 Appendix I - People Contacted \ APPENDIX RESOURCES TABLE OF CONTENTS Appendix A - Stipulations and Specifications Watershed and Fisheries A-l Wildlife A-2 Roads A- 3 Aesthetics A-3 Air Quality A-3 Soils A-4 Noxious Weed Management A- 5 Archaeology A- 5 Appendix B - Vegetation Analysis Introduction B-l Analysis Method B-l Analysis Area B-2 Covertype B-2 Age-Class Distribution B-4 Old Growth B-4 Stand Development B-6 Alternative Effects B-9 Appendix C - Watershed and Hydrology Analysis Introduction C-l Analysis Methods C-l Analysis Area C-2 Existing Conditions C-2 Alternative Effects C-5 Appendix D - Soils Analysis Introduction D-l Analysis Methods D-l Analysis Area D-l Existing Condition D-l Alternative Effects D-2 Appendix E - Fisheries Analysis Issue E-l Introduction E-l Species E-2 Analysis Methods and Subissues E-3 Summary of Alternatives E— 4 Existing Conditions E-7 Alternative Effects E-28 Appendix F - Wildlife Analysis Introduction F-l Methods F-l Coarse-Filter Assessment F-l Fine Filter Assessment F-10 Threatened and Endangered Species F-10 Sensitive Species F-26 Big Game Species F-31 Appendix G - Economic Analysis Introduction G-l Existing Conditions G-l Alternative Effects G-3 Appendix H - Comments and Responses The Ecology Center C&R-3 Jane Adams C&R-64 Owens and Hurst Lumber Company, Inc C&R-67 Appendix I - People Contacted > ? APPENDIX A STIPULATIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS i ? ■■: X Stipulations and specifications for the action alternatives were identified or designed to prevent or reduce potential effects to resources considered in this analysis. In part, stipulations and specifications are a direct result of issue identification and resource concerns. This section is organized by resource. Stipulations and specifications that apply to operations required by and occurring during the contract period would be contained within the timber sale contract; as such, they are binding and enforceable. Stipulations and specifications relating to activities that may occur during or after the contract period (hazard reduction, site preparation, planting) would be enforced by project administrators. The following stipulations and specifications are incorporated to mitigate effects on resources involved with action alternatives considered in this proposal. WATERSHED AND FISHERIES • Planned erosion-control measures and BMPs include: - installing grade breaks on roads , - installing water-diverting mechanisms on roads, - installing slash-filter windrows , and - grass seeding. Details for these control measures would be included in APPENDIX B of the TIMBER SALE AGREEMENT. • SMZs and RMZs would be defined along those streams that are within or adjacent to timber- harvesting areas. Harvesting operations would be a minimum of 100 feet from the West Fork and Stryker Creek to protect areas adjacent to streams and maintain water quality. • Culvert sizing for all road projects would be as recommended by the DNRC hydrologist for a 50- year flood period. • Stream crossings, where culvert or bridge removals and installations are planned, would have the following requirements, as needed, to meet the intent of water- quality permits and BMPs and protect water quality: - Slash-filter windrows would be constructed on the base of the fill slopes. - Silt fences would be installed along the streambanks prior to and following excavation at crossing sites. - Filter-fabric fences would be in place downstream prior to and during culvert installation. - Bridge work within the stream area of the West Fork stream crossing would be limited to the period of July 15 through August 20 in order to avoid the bull trout spawning period. • Water-quality monitoring would continue in the Swift Creek and Fitzsimmons drainages to assess and track water quality and resource values associated with water quality. In addition, the monitoring would provide data for water-quality studies being conducted in the Flathead Basin. • Brush would be removed from existing road prisms to allow effective maintenance. Improved road maintenance would reduce sediment delivery. • The contractor would be responsible for the immediate cleanup of any spills (fuel, oil, dirt, etc.) that may affect water quality. • Leaking equipment would not be permitted to operate in stream- crossing construction sites. • Included in the project proposal are the following pertinent recommendations of the Flathead Basin Forest Practices , Water Quality, Fisheries Cooperative Program Final Report (June 1991) . • The following numbers correspond to the numbering of recommendation items contained within the aforementioned document, included in pages 154 through 162 of the final report: 1 . BMPs are incorporated into the project design and operations of the proposed project. 2 . Riparian indicators would be considered in the harvest unit layout . 3 . Management standards of the SMZ Law (7 5-5-301 MCA) are used in conjunction with the recommendations of the study. 4 . The BMP audit process will continue. This sale would likely be reviewed in an internal audit and may be picked at random as a State- wide audit site. 7. SMZs will be evaluated as a part of the audit process. 11. Swift Creek monitoring is part of the Flathead Basin monitoring effort. 12. Watershed-level planning and analysis are complete. Logging plans of Plum Creek Timber Company, USFS, and Stoltze Land and Lumber Company, as reported to the Cumulative Watershed Effects Cooperative, are used. 14. DNRC is cooperating with DFWP on a further study of the fish habitat and population for Swift Creek and its tributaries . 15. DNRC would use the best methods available for logging and road building for this proposal . 16A. Existing roads are fully utilized for this proposal. 17. DNRC requested inventory information from DFWP. DNRC's mitigation plan for roads fits all recommendations for "impaired streams" . Using "worst-case scenario" criteria provides for conservative operations in this proposal. 18. Provisions in the Timber Sale Agreement address BMPs that are rigidly enforced. 20. Planning for long-term monitoring of Swift Creek is in place . 29-34. DNRC has cooperated with DFWP to continue fisheries work. DNRC will continue to monitor fisheries in the future as funding allows. WILDLIFE GRIZZLY BEARS The following items are incorporated into this proposal: • The grass seeding plans to revegetate roads include a combination of seed mixtures that have different palatability in relation to grizzly bears. The less palatable species are planned for areas where bear use is to be discouraged to minimize the potential for bear/human conflicts . • No logging camps would be allowed in the sale area. • Garbage hauling would be required daily . Page A-2 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS • The Forest Officer would, if necessary, immediately suspend any or all activities directly related to the proposed action to prevent imminent confrontation or conflict between grizzly bears (or other threatened or endangered species) and humans . • Vigorous patches of Vaccinium sp . (huckleberry) would be avoided during scarification when possible . • Contractors would be prohibited from carrying firearms while working under contract . • All gates would be closed after each entry during the general big game hunting season. • Road management would vary by alternative and includes proposals given in CHAPTER II - ALTERNATIVES . • A vegetative screen would be retained along open roads . WOLVES A contract provision would be included to protect any wolf den or rendezvous site within the gross sale area that may be discovered during implementation of this proposal . CANADA LYNX During site preparation, available cull logs would be piled to provide future habitat . SNAG RETENTION • Wildlife trees of high quality, such as large broken-topped western larch, would be designated for retention and given special consideration during yarding operations to prevent loss. • Snag retention and recruitment: All cull snags that are safe to operate near and a minimum of 1 to 2 of the larger trees per acre, preferably greater than 21 inches dbh, would be retained. The number of trees and snags larger than 21 inches dbh is dependent on habitat group. BALD EAGLE • Timing restrictions would be implemented on the Whitefish Saddle Road; log hauling is restricted to August 15 through February 1 . • Timing restrictions would be implemented for logging operations in Harvest Area II-A, with logging restricted to the period between August 15 through February 1. ROADS • Road reconstruction activities and road use associated with road construction activities would be relayed to the general public. • BMPs would be incorporated in all planned road construction. AESTHETICS • Damaged residual vegetation would be slashed. • Landings would be limited in size and number and located away from main roads when possible. • Disturbed sites along road rights- of-way would be grass seeded. AIR QUALITY The first item is designed to prevent individual or cumulative effects during burning operations. The next 3 items are designed to reduce effects from burning operations . • Burning operations would be in compliance with the Montana Airshed Group reporting regulations and any burning restrictions imposed in Airshed 2 . This would provide for burning during acceptable ventilation and dispersion conditions. • Excavator, landing, and roadwork debris would be piled clean to allow ignition to occur during fall and spring when ventilation is good and surrounding fuels are wet. The Forest Officer may Appendix A — Stipulations and Specifications Page A- 3 require that piles be covered to reduce dispersed (unentrained) smoke. Covered piles are drier, ignite easier, burn hotter, and extinguish sooner. • In order to reduce smoke production, the number of burn piles would be minimized by leaving large woody debris on site . • Dust abatement may be applied on some of the segments of Upper Whitefish Road that would be used during hauling; whether dust abatement would be applied depends on the season of harvest and level of public traffic. SOILS COMPACTION • Logging equipment would not operate off forest roads unless: - soil moisture is less than 20 percent , - soil is frozen to a depth that would support machine operations, or - soil is snow covered to a depth that would prevent compaction, rutting, or displacement. • Existing skid trails and landings would be used where their design is consistent with prescribed treatments and meets current BMP guidelines . • Designated skid trails would be required where moist soils or short steep pitches (less than 300 feet) would not be accessed by other logging systems. This would reduce the number of skid trails and the potential for erosion. • Skid-trail density in a, harvest area would not exceed 20 percent of the total area in a cutting unit . SOIL DISPLACEMENT • Conventional ground-based skidding equipment would not be operated on sustained steep slopes (greater than 40 percent) . Soft-tracked yarders are suitable on slopes up to 55 percent with less impact than conventional tractor skidding. Cable yarding would be used on sustained steeper slopes. • Piling and scarification would be completed with a dozer where slopes are gentle enough to permit. Steeper slopes would have slash treatment and site preparation done by using an excavator or broadcast burning. EROSION • Ground skidding machinery would be required to be equipped with a winchline to limit equipment operation on steeper slopes. • Roads used by the purchaser would be reshaped and the ditches redefined prior to and following use to reduce surface erosion. • Drain dips, open- topped culverts, and gravel would be installed on roads as needed to improve road drainage and reduce maintenance needs and erosion. • Some road sections would be repaired to upgrade the roads to design standards that reduce erosion potential and maintenance needs . • The prompt and timely application of certified weed-free grass seed and fertilizer would be applied to newly constructed road surfaces and cut-and-fill slopes. These applications would also be applied to any existing disturbed cut-and- fill slopes and landings immediately adjacent to open roads . These would be done to stabilize soils and reduce or prevent noxious weed establishment and would include : - seeding all road cuts and fills concurrent with construction, - applying "quick-cover" seed mix within 1 day of work completion at culvert installation sites, and seeding all road surfaces and reseeding culvert installation Page A- 4 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS sites when the final blading is completed for each specified road segment . • Water bars, logging-slash barriers, and, in some cases, temporary culverts would be installed on skid trails where erosion is anticipated, based on ground and weather conditions and as directed by the forest officer. These erosion-control features would be periodically inspected and maintained throughout the contract period or extensions thereof . NOXIOUS WEED MANAGEMENT • Surface blading on roads affected by the proposal may be required to remove weeds before the seed-set stage . • All tracked and wheeled equipment would be cleaned of noxious weeds prior to beginning project operations. The contract administrating officer would inspect equipment periodically during project implementation. • Prompt revegetation of disturbed roadside sites would be required. • Roads used and closed as part of this proposal would be reshaped and grass seeded. ARCHAEOLOGY A review of the project was conducted by a DNRC archaeologist. A contract clause provides for suspending operations if cultural resources were discovered and operations would only resume as directed by the Forest Officer. Appendix A — Stipulations and Specifications Page A- 5 \\ »fi APPENDIX B VEGETATION ANALYSIS v r v y % INTRODUCTION This section will provide a description of the present vegetative conditions of the forest and address the potential effects of the proposed alternatives related to the following issues: • Covertype and age-class distributions through a landscape- level analysis of timber stands. • Old-growth-stand distribution at a landscape level and old-growth- stand attributes . • Stand development in relation to natural disturbances and management activities . ANALYSIS METHOD The SFLM Rules direct DNRC to take a landscape-level or coarse-f ilter approach to biodiversity. To promote biodiversity, an appropriate mix of stand structures and compositions on State land should be favored ( Montana DNRC 1996 ) . To implement a coarse-f ilter approach, landscape analysis techniques were used to determine an appropriate mix of stand structures and compositions based on ecological characteristics, such as landtypes, climatic sections, habitat types, disturbance regimes, and other unique characteristics, on Stillwater State Forest . Covertype representations and age-class distributions are general characteristics shown in the landscape-level analysis. This analysis will compare the desired stand conditions that DNRC believes to be appropriate for the site with current stand conditions. A forest inventory from the 1930s was used in Losensky' s 1993 data to estimate the proportion of various stand-structure stages by covertype and age class as they were historically represented throughout the Inland Northwest. This provides an estimate of the natural characteristics of forests prior to fire suppression and extensive logging. Losensky (1997) worked with DNRC to complete an analysis for the entire State; some vegetation types specific to that work are included in this analysis. The protocol used to assign covertypes on DNRC forested lands, including Stillwater Unit, is explained in detail in the SFLM Rules {ARM 36 . 11 . 405) . The SLI database used for this analysis is the September 15, 2003 version of "main block and scattered north. dbf" {STW 2003 SLI data) . This data is available at the Stillwater Unit office at Olney. The methodology used to analyze current and appropriate stand conditions follows : Two filters were developed and applied to Stillwater State Forest's SLI data ( STW 2003 SLI) . The filters were assigned covertypes similar to those used in the inventory of the 1930s. The first filter followed the 1930s criteria exactly, or as closely as possible, representing current conditions. The other filter for appropriate conditions assigns covertypes using criteria primarily designed to help address the situation where succession from one covertype to another was occurring. The successional filter was developed to indicate that those areas in the absence of fire suppression, introduced pathogens, and timber harvesting would likely have been assigned to a different covertype than the current covertype filter would suggest . The appropriate filter then estimates, from the current condition of the stand, what the stand would have looked like in 1900 . The methods to identify old-growth timber stands are initiated from modeling based on the STW 2003 SLI data. The query primarily sorts for stands that meet the age criteria and number of trees greater than a certain dbh based on habitat-type groups ; refer to the GLOSSARY for DNRC's old-growth definition. Field surveys were used to verify those modeled old-growth stands and determine if additional stands meet the definition within the project area . The analysis on stand development will be a qualitative discussion of the conditions of timber stands, including how various natural and man-caused disturbances and site factors have affected, and may continue to affect, timber-stand development . ANALYSIS AREA The vegetation analysis includes 3 geographic scales : • Upper Flathead Valley - Historic conditions refer to those from Climatic Section 333C of the Upper Flathead Valley ( Losensky 1997) . For this analysis, the historic conditions for Climatic Section 333C relate to forest covertypes and age-class distributions only. • Stillwater State Forest management block - Current and appropriate conditions were analyzed on the scale of the entire Stillwater State Forest and scattered outlying sections in northeastern Lincoln County (approximately 100,208 forested acres). Current and appropriate conditions for covertype, age, and old-growth distribution were analyzed at this scale . • Project level - Stand attributes related to old growth, species composition, and stand development will be analyzed by harvest area. COVERTYPE FIGURES B-l through B-3 - PERCENTAGE OF FORESTED ACRES BY COVERTYPE illustrate the percentage of forested ground that is/was occupied by a particular covertype. The comparison shown includes the Upper Flathead Valley historic covertype data and current and appropriate covertype conditions on the scale of the analysis area (Stillwater Unit) . The chart displaying historic conditions is from Lozensky' s data and covers forested types of a much larger scale than do the current and appropriate conditions . Data indicates, as illustrated by FIGURES B-2 and B-3, that mixed- conifer stands are currently overrepresented in reference to both historic conditions and conditions that DNRC feels appropriate by using historic data (desired future covertype conditions) . Many of the species that make up the mixed- conifer covertype are shade tolerant and their representation increases as the intervals between disturbances, such as wildfires, lengthens . The western larch/Douglas-f ir and lodgepole pine covertypes are currently underrepresented on the forest in reference to appropriate conditions ; western larch and lodgepole pine are not shade tolerant and, historically, the species have been perpetuated through fairly intensive disturbances, such as wildfires. The data sort indicates the amount of western white pine covertype is slightly lower than what occurred historically. The white pine blister rust infection has drastically affected the western white pine. In reality, the number of healthy western white pine that occupy the canopy as overstory dominants has been on the decline across most of the Pacific Northwest for several decades. Page B-2 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS FIGURES B-l THROUGH B-3 - PERCENTAGE OF FORESTED ACRES BY COVERTYPE ON STILLWATER UNIT Historic Covertype Distribution in Flathead Valley Lodgepole pine 27% Western larch/ Douglas- f ir 28% Western white pine 1% Mixed •conifer 6% Current Covertype Distribution on Stillwater Unit Analysis Area Western Douglas- white pine 3% Appendix B Vegetation Analysis Page B-3 AGE-CLASS DISTRIBUTION OLD GROWTH Age-class distributions delineate another characteristic important for determining trends on a landscape level . Inventories of the 1930s quantified the ages of the forest stands. To arrive at age estimates, Losensky examined the data and projected the stands back in time to the early 1900s. This data is useful in setting baseline conditions for determining the extent that current forest age-class distribution deviates from average historical conditions . Comparing the entire Stillwater State Forest with historical data from the Upper Flathead Valley, TABLE B-l - DISTRIBUTION OF AGE CLASSES ON THE CONTIGUOUS STILLWATER STATE FOREST shows that Stillwater State Forest is low in stands of the seedling-sapling age class and higher is stands that are in the 40- years-and-older age classes. TABLE B-l - DISTRIBUTION OF AGE CLASSES ON THE CONTIGUOUS STILLWATER STATE FOREST AGE HISTORIC CURRENT CLASS PERCENT PERCENT 0 to 39 years 36 10 40 to 99 years 12 23 100 to 150 years 22 19 150+ years 29 48 OLD -GROWTH DISTRIBUTION Old growth, for this analysis, is defined as stands that meet the minimum criteria (number of trees per acre that have a minimum dbh and a minimum age) for a given site, which is based on habitat- type grouping . The criteria can be found in Green et al (Old Growth Forest Types of the Northern Region) . Based on SLI data, field surveys within the project area, and the effects of other timber sales on SLI old-growth data, approximately 8,679 acres, or 8.7 percent, of the coarse-f ilter analysis area can be classified as old-growth. The amount of old growth present in the Stillwater analysis area is within an expected range of natural variation of old-growth levels based on previous DNRC analysis . Similar to the restrictive definition DNRC currently uses, the analysis using Option 2 was based on a narrower range of old-growth conditions emphasizing stands with higher old-growth attribute levels (DNRC 2000). No field- verified old growth or SLI potential old growth has been identified in the northern scattered sections; therefore, those areas are not displayed in FIGURE B-4 - OLD-GROWTH ON MAIN BLOCK OF STILLWATER STATE FOREST. . TABLE B-2 - OLD -GROWTH ACRES BY COVERTYPE displays old growth by TABLE B-2 - OLD-GROWTH ACRES BY COVERTYPE CURRENT COVERTYPE DOUGLAS - FIR LODGEPOLE PINE MIXED CONIFER SUB ALPINE FIR WESTERN LARCH/ DOUGLAS - FIR WESTERN WHITE PINE TOTALS Gross acres by SLI 44 398 1,802 3,139 2,432 481 8,296 Addi tional old growth confirmed by West Fork Proj ect 183 200 383 Totals 44 398 1,985 3,339 2,432 481 8,679 Page B-4 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS FIGURE B-4 Old Growth on Main Block of Stillwater State Forest Upper Whitefish Lakel Legend | | Stillwater State Forest Old Growth Stands I I Water Roads /\y Highway /V Gravel/Dirt Appendix B - Vegetation Analysis Page B-5 TABLE B-2 - OLD-GROWTH ACRES BY COVERTYPE displays old growth by forest covertype. Covertype is related to habitat type, habitat- type groups, and successional stages. Covertype is used when presenting old growth because the amount can be correlated to Lozensky's historic information. Subalpine fir and western larch/Douglas -f ir (as displayed below in TABLE B-2 - OLD-GROWTH ACRES BY COVERTYPE) are the 2 dominant old-growth covertypes on Stillwater State Forest. Old growth within the project area can be viewed in FIGURE B-5 - WEST FORK OLD -GROWTH MAP under ALTERNATIVE EFFECTS (page B-12) . In addition to old-growth stands identified by SLI in the project area, approximately 383 field- verified acres of old growth have been identified. OLD -GROWTH ATTRIBUTES DNRC is in the process of developing a tool to assign old-growth attribute levels to stands by sorting SLI data. The attributes considered are: - number of large live trees, - amount of coarse woody debris, - number of snags, - amount of decadence, - multistoried structures, - gross volume, and - crown density. This data sort assigns a value or an index rating to an old-growth stand that indicates its total score. These scores can be grouped into low, medium, and high categories. This provides an indication of the condition of the stand in reference to attributes that are often associated with old-growth timber stands. These attribute levels are not necessarily an indication of quality, but are tools to compare and classify a collection of older stands over the landscape. The expected variation of levels are based on numerous factors, including habitat groups, tree species, covertype, altitude, past management activities, and proximity to roads. Many of these attributes will relate to wildlife and be discussed within APPENDIX E - WILDLIFE ANALYSIS. Within the project area, the attribute index ratings are primarily medium. The SLI category for most of the field-verified, old- growth stands was low, but based on data collected on these areas (number of larger diameter trees per acre and gross volume per acre) , those stands should be within the medium attribute levels. Some of the old-growth characteristics within the project area : • Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir are the dominant tree species in all of the old-growth stands, which total 777 acres. • Whitebark pine is a component of the overstory and snag attributes in 7 old-growth stands, which amounts to approximately 313 acres . • The stand structures are all multistoried, with seedlings to large sawtimber-sized trees. • Vigor is average to poor in all stands . • Snag levels are generally high, with greater than 3 snags per acre . STAND DEVELOPMENT Natural processes of stand development and disturbance are influenced by environmental conditions and site characteristics, such as soils, stand covertype, forest health, elevation, and stand structure. The stand structures and species component can be greatly modified by natural disturbances, such as wildfire and blowdown Page B-6 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS STAND COVERTYPE Site factors, such as soil type, aspect, elevation, growing season, and moisture availability, are combined to develop habitat-type classifications, which are then used to describe successional development and timber productivity, among other things (Pfister et al, 1977). For the project area, 95 percent of the acreage is categorized in the "cool and moist" habitat group, and 99 percent of the area is currently represented by the subalpine fir and mixed-conifer covertypes . TIMBER -STAND HEALTH Damage and mortality from insects and diseases are relatively minor in forest types that exist in this area. A rise has occurred in the incidence of western balsam bark beetles, mountain pine beetles, and white pine blister rust, as well as minor levels of infestations of spruce bark beetles, Douglas-fir beetles, and fir engravers. Indian paint fungus is common in subalpine fir throughout this area. In addition to the insects and pathogens listed above, trees throughout the project area have mechanical damage caused by previous logging, as well as damage caused by wind, snow, and ice, which has allowed rot to develop in the boles of the trees and value to be lost. Also, stands where tree crowns appear sparse and ratty reflect poor vigor and slow growth. ELEVATION/ASPECT The elevation of a stand has great importance in determining not only what tree and shrub species are present, but also how fast or slow changes take place. Elevations in the project area range from 4,300 feet to 6,500 feet above sea level. Based on measurements taken over the last 27 years, the average snow depth for the Herrig snow-course survey, which is located in Harvest Area II-P, is 65 inches. A large portion of the project area has a northeast aspect. This exposure, together with high elevations, account for the high moisture availability, as well as the long duration snow is on the ground. These 2 factors, elevation and aspect, are also the main reason for the presence of whitebark pine. Within the project area are a total of 882 acres in 18 stands that have whitebark pine older than 150 years in the upper level canopy. STAND STRUCTURE Stand structure indicates a characteristic of stand development and how the stand will continue to develop . Single-storied stands are most often associated with stand-replacement events, such as severe fires or clearcut harvesting. Two-storied stands are often associated with areas of less severe fire and usually have more fire- resistant trees, such as western larch or Douglas-fir, left in the overstory. Regeneration harvests that retain approximately 10 percent crown cover in the overstory and have seedling/sapling understory are also classified as 2-storied stands. The multistoried condition arises when a stand has progressed through time and succession to the point that shade-tolerant species are replacing a shade-intolerant overstory. Often a long interval of time occurs between major disturbances . TABLE B-3 - PERCENT OF STAND STUCTURES IN THE PROJECT AREA AND ENTIRE STILLWATER STATE FOREST displays the percent of stands in the single-storied, two-storied, and TABLE B-3 - PERCENT OF STAND STUCTURES IN THE PROJECT AREA AND ENTIRE STILLWATER STATE FOREST STAND STILLWATER PROJECT STRUCTURE UNIT AREA Single- storied 18% 6% Two-storied 6% Trace Multistoried 76% 93% Appendix B Vegetation Analysis Page B-7 multistoried levels on Stillwater Unit and within the project area. PAST MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir have always been the predominate species in the project area. According to past inventory records, western larch, Douglas-fir, and western white pine were present in many of the stands in Harvest Area II, as they are today, but Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir have always been the predominate species . In Harvest Area III, the serai species are a minor component with less than 15 percent canopy composition. Major timber harvesting has been ongoing in the project area since the late 1940s. Many of the stands in Harvest Area II were selectively logged in the late 1940s and early 1950s, targeting Douglas-fir, Engelmann spruce, and western larch, where available, for use as railroad ties. Minimal site preparation was completed following harvesting; therefore, the progression of these stands leans toward the shade- tolerant species of Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir. Over time, salvage logging has occurred in many of the stands in order to remove blowdown or beetle - infested trees, mainly Engelmann spruce . Overall, there are approximately 1,600 acres in the project area that have more than 30 -percent crown removal. Most (76 percent) of the acres were harvested in the 1950s and 24 percent was salvaged and clearcut. Where the ground was scarified, desired tree species were able to regenerate. However, without scarification and planting, many of these areas were Daken over by shrub species, causing regeneration to be slow and limited. FIRE REGIMES The fire regimes across Stillwater State Forest are variable. The forest, as a whole, has a mosaic pattern that developed from different fire frequencies and intensities. Areas of frequent fire have produced Douglas-fir, western larch, and ponderosa pine covertypes. As the intervals between fires become longer, the more shade-tolerant species (Engelmann spruce, subalpine fir, grand fir, western hemlock, and western red cedar) begin to develop. The higher elevations within the forest have longer fire intervals and the stands tend to be multistoried with a dominant shade- tolerant covertype. Where fire frequencies were short, the stands are open, single-storied, and, occasionally, 2-storied. With the arrival of aggressive fire- suppression efforts, covertypes and fire frequencies were altered. Stands of ponderosa pine, western larch, and/or Douglas-fir have become multistoried with shade- tolerant species. Stands that were once open, now have a thick understory of predominantly Douglas- fir, grand fir, Engelmann spruce, and subalpine fir. Fires are generally kept small, limiting natural fire effects. If a large- scale fire were to occur, many acres could be affected due to ladder fuels, heavy fuel accumulation, and other environmental factors . The West Fork Timber Sale Project area is primarily represented by Fire Group 9 Fire Regime (87 percent of the project area gross acreage) , with minor representation in Fire Groups 10 (8 percent) , 8 (5 percent) , and 7 (less than 1 percent) ( Fischer and Bradley, 1987) . All stands in Harvest Area II and most stands in Harvest Area HI fall into Fire Group 9. Fire Group 9 represents moist, lower subalpine habitat types where fires are infrequent, but severe, and the effects are long lasting. Fire-free Page B-8 west Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Proi ect FEIS intervals range from 117 years in valleys to more than 146 years on lower alpine slopes. Within the project area, stand-replacing fires have been estimated to occur at moderately long to long intervals, 150 to 300 years. Fire history information for subalpine fir habitat types is limited, particularly for moist Fire Group 9 sites. Available evidence indicates that fires on such sites are infrequent and are mostly either low severity or stand replacing. Moderately severe fires are apparently less frequent, although they do occur. Therefore, the size of the fires in this fire regime will vary from small in the less severe fire conditions to large in the more severe fire conditions that have been experienced lately where thousands of acres in the later successional stages are burned in a stand-replacement fire. The next most common fire regime in the project area is Fire Group 10, which is characterized by high- elevation forests near and at timberline. Some stands in Harvest Area III are in this regime. Stand- replacing fires even in the more continuous forests range in frequency to more than 300 years. Fire Group 8 consists of dry, lower subalpine habitat types where Engelmann spruce, subalpine fir, or mountain hemlock are the indicated climax species. This group experiences more frequent fires that are generally less severe than Fire Group 9. Intervals range from 50 years in lodgepole pine stands to 130 years for the more moist, lower subalpine types . No harvest areas are proposed in Fire Group 7; this group is less than 1 percent of the project area; therefore, this group will not be discussed further. ALTERNATIVE EFFECTS COVERTYPES AND AGE CLASSES Direct Effects • Direct Effects oJWo-. let ion . J/fernafive . 1 to ( overtype* and . lye Ctasse s Covertypes and age classes on Stillwater State Forest would not be directly affected. • Direct Effects of fiction . Alternative 11 to Covertypes and .dye Classes This alternative proposes: - a commercial-thin harvest on 73 acres in Harvest Area I. - regeneration harvests, including group- select ion and overstory- removal treatments, on approximately 1,174 acres in Harvest Areas II and III. Approximately 138 acres of the mixed-conifer covertype would likely be converted to a western larch/Douglas-f ir covertype through the planting of western larch or the harvesting of subalpine fir and Engelmann spruce. An additional 351 acres of the subalpine fir covertype and 779 acres of the mixed-conifer covertype would be harvested, but no change in covertype is expected. The representation of western larch and western white pine would likely increase due to planting; Douglas-fir and whitebark pine representation should remain similar to current numbers . With the group- selection/ overstory-removal treatments planned for Harvest Area II, approximately 713 acres would be regenerated and 153 acres would be retained in a stocked stand of saplings and pole-sized trees in the 40-to-99-year age class. Approximately 190 acres would change from the 40-to-99- year age class to 0 years, 160 acres would change from the 100- to-150-year age class to 0 years, and 695 acres would change from Appendix B Vegetation Analysis Page B-9 the old-stand age class to 0 years . Following site preparation and planting of Harvest Areas II and III, representation of the 0-to- 39-year age class on Stillwater Unit would increase by 1 percent, or 1,045 acres, and representation of 150+-year-old stands would be reduced by 0 . 7 percent . • Dit'ect Effects of Action Alternative C to Covertypes and Age Classes Action Alternative C proposes a commercial -thin harvest on 73 acres and group-selection and overstory-removal treatments on approximately 866 acres. Through the planting or removal of subalpine fir and Engelmann spruce during the thinning harvest, approximately 46 acres of the mixed-conifer covertype would likely be converted to the western larch/Douglas-f ir covertype. Approximately 139 acres of the subalpine fir and 753 acres of the mixed-conifer covertypes would be harvested, but no covertype change is expected. The representation of western larch and western white pine would likely increase due to planting; Douglas-fir and whitebark pine representation should remain similar to the current numbers . With the group - selection/ overstory- removal treatments planned for Harvest Area II, approximately 713 acres would be regenerated and 153 acres would be retained in a stocked stand of saplings and pole-sized trees in the 40-to-99-year age class. Approximately 190 acres would change from the 40-to-99- year age class to 0 years, 160 acres would change from the 100- to-150-year age class to 0 years, and 695 acres would change from the 150-year-plus age class to 0 years . Following the site preparation for Harvest Area II, the representation of the 0-to-39-year age class on Stillwater Unit would increase by 0.7 percent or 713 acres and the representation of 150+-year-old stands would be reduced by 0.4 percent . Indirect Effects • Indirect /Effects of JXo-*Eetion Alternative A to Covertypes and Age Classes Overtime, natural forest succession and fire suppression would reduce the variability of covertypes and age classes, thus, reducing biodiversity. • Indirect Inflects of Action Alternative It to Covertypes and Age Classes Harvesting trees would move the representation of age classes and covertypes would move representation toward historical distribution. In total, representation of the 0-to-39-year age class on Stillwater State Forest would increase by 1 percent, or 1,045 acres, and the old-stand representation would be reduced by 0.7 percent . • Indirect Effects of Action Alternative C to Covertypes and Age Classes The representation of age classes and covertypes would move representation toward historical distribution. In total, representation of the 0-to-39-year age class on Stillwater State Forest would increase by 0.7 percent, or 713 acres, and the 150 -year- age -class representation would be reduced by 0.4 percent. Cumulative Effects • Cumulative Effects of All . Jlternatives to Covertypes and Age Classes The cumulative effects of timber- stand management on Stillwater State Forest is a trend toward increasing serai covertypes in areas where recent forest- management activities have taken Page B-10 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Proi ect FEIS place. Since the Chicken/Werner Timber Sale Project EIS in 1999, the western larch/Douglas-f ir covertype has increased by 6 percent . In addition to the changes in covertype distributions from the proposed alternatives, other timber sale projects have been initiated, but have not been completed; therefore, their effects are not represented in the STW 2003 SLI . Scheduled updates of the SLI will begin to capture the trend toward more western larch/Douglas - f ir, lodgepole pine, and western white pine covertypes on Stillwater State Forest, as well as the trend toward increasing the amount of acres in the 0-to-39-year age class. OLD -GROWTH DISTRIBUTION AND ATTRIBUTES Direct Effects • Direct Effects of JVo-Action Jtltemattve A to Old- Gro u'th Distribution and Attributes The distribution or attributes of old-growth stands would not be affected . • Direct Effects of Action Alternative B to Old- Growth Distribution and Attributes Approximately 286 acres of old- growth would be harvested with regeneration treatments on areas typically suited to stand- replacement fire regimes. The posttreatment timber stand would no longer meet DNRC's criteria for old growth. Those portions of the original stand that are not harvested would likely continue to meet DNRC's old-growth definition. Future SLI updates would be made on the remaining portions of the timber stands. Implementation of Action Alternative B would decrease Stillwater Unit's old-growth levels by 286 acres and retain an estimated 8,393 acres of potential old growth. Recognizing that the amounts and distributions of all age classes will shift and change over time, the amount of old growth remaining is within an expected range of natural variation . This harvest would remove 118 acres from the mixed-conifer covertype and 168 acres from the subalpine fir covertype . FIGURE III -6 - WEST FORK OLD- GROWTH MAP (next page) shows the locations where harvesting would affect the distribution of old- growth stands . Most attributes associated with old-growth stands would be removed. Structure would be retained in small areas where existing trees would not be harvested, such as near springs, areas that are not feasible to skid or yard, or areas that are marked with leave trees. A minimum of 1 large (greater than 21-inches dbh) snag and 1 large - diameter snag-recruitment tree per acre would be retained within the harvest areas. If no snags this size are available, the next largest size would be retained. In addition to live recruitment trees, up to 10 western larch, Douglas -fir, and whitebark pine trees per acre that are suitable for seed dispersal would be retained . • Direct Effects of Action Alternative C to Old- Growth Distribution and Attributes The distribution or attributes of old-growth stands would not be affected . Indirect Effects • Indirect Effects Common of All Alternati ves to Old-Growth Distribution and Attributes Stands currently meeting DNRC's old-growth definition and not proposed for harvesting would become more decadent. Stocking levels and the loading of down woody debris would increase in some stands and covertypes, increasing wildfire hazards. Appendix B Vegetation Analysis Page B-ll ;To Rolebridg4 Figure B-5 WEST FORK OLD -GROWTH MAP Legend Project Area Old-Growth Areas Proposed Harvest Areas Page B-12 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS Shade- tolerant species would remain dominant in stands. Various factors, such as insects, diseases, and decreasing vigor, would eventually cause more snags to occupy portions of the stands. Within the project area, white pine blister rust, mountain pine beetles, and weather-related damage has increased the amount of snags in old-growth stands . • Indirect Effect# of fiction Alternative II to Old-Growth Distribution and Attributes Action Alternative B would harvest timber near old-growth stands and structurally create more abrupt stand edges. If the proposed units in Harvest Area III are harvested , an increase in sunlight would occur along the edges of harvested and unharvested areas. This additional sunlight would increase the growth of small trees established in that zone. Regeneration may also occur , but due to site preparation not occurring , the species regenerating would likely be subalpine fir or Engelmann spruce. Potentially, the risk of blowdown along the proposed unit boundaries would increase and likely add to the down fuel loading. Harvest areas next to old-growth stands could possibly act as fuel breaks, which could slow or stop wildfires before they could burn the old-growth. Cumulative Effects • Cumulative Effect# Common to All Alternatives to Old-Growth Distribution and Attributes Approximately 48 acres of field- verified old growth of the Taylor South Timber Sale Project area are planned for harvesting in Sections 20, 29, and 32, Township 32 north. Range 22 west; the EIS for this project covered the harvesting of these acres. Approximately 104 acres of old growth, both field verified and SLI identified, have been harvested in the Chicken/Werner Timber Sale Project area. No additional old growth is proposed for harvesting in the Ewing Middle Ridge or Point of Rocks timber sale projects. In total, an estimated 59 acres of old growth would be removed from the mixed-conifer covertype, 81 acres from the western white pine covertype, and 12 acres from the Douglas -fir covertype. SLI originally classified these 152 acres as having medium attribute levels. These stands would no longer meet DNRC's old- growth definition following harvesting, and, at the most, they would have low attributes. • Cumulative Effects Common of 'JVo-» let ion Alternative A and Action Alternative C to Old-Growth Distribution anti Attributes The estimated acres of old-growth on Stillwater Unit would be reduced to 8,527 acres; approximately 8.5 percent of the analysis area. The percentage of old-growth acres by covertype would change very little. • Cumulative Effects of Action Alternative II to Old-Growth Distribution and Attributes Old-growth on Stillwater Unit would be reduced to an estimated 8,241 acres; approximately 8.2 percent of the analysis area. Recognizing that the amounts and distributions of all age classes will shift and change over time, the amount of old growth remaining is within an expected range of natural variation . The representation of the mixed-conifer old-growth area would be reduced by about 2 percent; the representation of both the western larch/Douglas-f ir and subalpine fir covertypes would increase by approximately 1 percent . Appendix B Vegetation Analysis Page B-13 STAND DEVELOPMENT Direct Effects • Direct Inflects of JVo-Action Alternative A to Stand Development Stand development within the project area would not be directly affected . • Direef Effect# of Action Alternative It to Stand Development This alternative would directly affect stand development by taking on the role of a stand-replacing fire in Area III, and a moderately-severe fire in Area II; a vegetative mosaic would be created by removing some overstory trees and reducing fuels . The climax species of Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir, which are easily killed by fire, would be removed, thereby allowing the regeneration of those species that require more sunlight. This alternative would likely convert approximately 138 acres of the mixed-conifer covertype to the western larch/Douglas - fir covertype (see Direct Effects to Covertypes and Age Classes) . By removing trees that are affected by insects and diseases, the vigor and health of the residual trees, adjacent stands, and future forest would all be directly affected. In stands with whitebark pine, the desired future condition is a healthy, virile stand of trees with some degree of rust resistance. The cones and seeds from these trees are beneficial to wildlife. The regeneration harvests and subsequent site preparation in Areas II and III would enhance the regeneration of the serai species. The v«eral species are western larch, Douglas-fir, and western white pine in the stands of lower elevation and whitebark pine in the stands of higher elevations. Broadcast burning would be a benefit for reestablishing whitebark pine in these stands . • Direct Effect# of Action Alternative C to Stand Development This alternative would directly affect stand development by taking on the role of a moderately severe fire in Area II, creating a vegetative mosaic by removing some overstory trees, and reducing fuels. The climax species of Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir, easily killed by fire, would be removed, thereby allowing the regeneration of those species that require more sunlight. Action Alternative C would likely convert approximately 46 acres of the mixed-conifer covertype to the western larch/Douglas - fir covertype (see Direct Effects to Covertypes and Age Classes) . By removing trees that have been affected by insects and diseases, the vigor and health of the residual trees, present adjacent stands, and future forest would all be directly affected. The regeneration harvests and subsequent site preparation in Area II would enhance the regeneration of the serai species. The serai species are western larch, Douglas-fir, and western white pine. Indirect Effects • Indirect Effect# of JVo-aetion Alternative A to Stand Development As stands age over time, natural forest succession and fire suppression would reduce the variability of covertypes both on the forest landscape and in the project area. Coupled with the effects of mountain pine beetles and white pine blister rust, the representation of whitebark pine would diminish over the landscape, and the benefits to wildlife would diminish as well. Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir would continue to replace the serai species until a stand-replacing fire develops some day and allows the process of succession to begin Page B-14 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS again. Hundreds of years may pass before this happens. With current fire-suppression efforts, surface fires that act as underburns would more likely occur, reducing fuels and killing some overstory trees. Less frequent, more severe fires could occur over small areas, but their effect would usually be limited to the creation of vegetative mosaics. • Indirect bjffeets qf Action Alternative It to Stand Development In Harvest Area III, logging takes on the role of a stand-replacing fire that probably would not naturally occur except at 150- to 300-year intervals. The shade- tolerant climax species (Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir) are removed, shrub competition is reduced, and some soil is exposed to allow the seeds from the more shade-intolerant species of whitebark pine, western larch, and Douglas -fir to germinate. All proposed harvest units in Area II are in the Fire Group 9 fire regime, where logging imitates more of a moderately severe fire. A fire in this regime is less intense, but still effective in removing the shade -tolerant and least fire-resistant species of Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir. The resultant indirect effect on stand development across the project area is that the forest would contain a mosaic of structures to include single- storied, two-storied, and multistoried conditions . The structure changes through harvesting would emulate the type of fire regime associated with the cover type . Fire regime simulations would range from stand-replacing to mixed- severity, depending on the site preparation used and the extent that it could be employed . • Indirect Ifflect# of diction Alternative C to Stand Development All of the proposed harvest units in Area II are in the Fire Group 9 fire regime, where logging would imitate more of a mixed- severity fire. A mixed- severity fire is less intense, but still effective in removing the shade- tolerant and least fire-resistant species of Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir. The resultant indirect effect on stand development across the project area is that the forest would contain a mosaic of structures to include single- storied, two-storied, and multistoried conditions . The changes in structure through harvesting would emulate the type of fire regime associated with the habitat type. Fire regime simulations would range from stand-replacing to mixed- severity, depending on the type of site preparation used and the extent that it could be employed . Cumulative Effects • Cumulative Effects of JVo-action Alternative A to Stand Development Forest succession and fire suppression would continue; whitebark pine representation would continue to diminish from the landscape . Even if a fire were allowed to burn in the higher elevations , a stand- replacing fire would not likely develop. The conditions required for this type of fire are extensive drought and a severe wind-driven crown fire. The political , social, and environmental consequences are much too great for any land manager to allow this kind of Appendix B Vegetation Analysis Page B-15 " let-burn " action to happen. This type of fire only occurs naturally, and the likelihood for this is small, even with the climatic conditions experienced in the recent past. • Cumulative l^ffeets of. lefion Alternative It to Stand Development Natural stand development , past timber sales, and wildfires have created the current vegetative mosaic in this area. Future timber sale projects would likely continue to be planned with the potential to modify the distribution of stand development within stands. Seedling/sapling stands would continue to develop . Action Alternative B is an opportunity to reestablish whitebark pine seedlings on the landscape . Recent fires on higher elevation sites have also provided opportunities to reestablish whitebark pine. • Cumulative Jtffecf# of Action Alternative Cto Stand Development Natural stand development , past timber sales, and wildfires have created the current vegetative mosaic in this area. Future timber sales would likely continue to be planned with the potential to modify the distribution of stand development within stands. Seedling/sapling stands would continue to develop. Recent fires on higher elevation sites have provided opportunities to reestablish whitebark pine. K Page B-16 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS APPENDIX C WATERSHED AND HYDROLOGY ANALYSIS 1 T X INTRODUCTION SEDIMENT DELIVERY Timber harvesting and related activities, such as road construction, can lead to water- quality impacts by increasing the production and delivery of fine sediment to streams . The construction of roads, skid trails, and landings can generate and transfer substantial amounts of sediment through the removal of vegetation and exposure of bare soil. In addition, removal of vegetation near stream channels reduces the sediment-filtering capacity and may reduce channel stability and the amounts of large woody material. Large woody debris, which creates natural sediment traps and energy dissipaters to reduce the velocity and erosiveness of stream flows, is a very important component of stream dynamics . WATER YIELD Timber harvesting and associated activities can affect the timing, distribution, and amount of water yield in a harvested watershed. Water yields increase proportionately to the percentage of canopy removal, because removal of live trees reduces the amount of water transpired, leaving more water available for soil saturation and runoff. Canopy removal also decreases interception of rain and snow and alters snowpack distribution and snowmelt, which lead to further water-yield increases . Higher water yields may lead to increases in peak flows and peak-flow duration, which can result in accelerated streambank erosion and sediment deposition. ANALYSIS METHODS SEDIMENT DELIVERY Methodology for analyzing sediment delivery was completed using a sediment -source inventory. Roads and stream crossings within the project area were evaluated to determine sources of introduced sediment. In addition, in-channel sources of sediment were identified using channel -stability rating methods developed by Pfankuch and through the conversion of stability rating to reach condition by stream type developed by Rosgen (1990) . These analyses were conducted in 1999 by a contracted firm and verified by a DNRC hydrologist. In addition, data was collected in 2003 to quantify sediment delivery using procedures adapted from the Washington Forest Practices Board (Callahan, 2000) . WATER YIELD The water-yield increase for the watershed in the project area was determined using the equivalent clearcut area (ECA) method as outlined in Forest Hydrology Part II (1976) . ECA is a function of total area roaded and harvested, percent of crown removal in harvesting, and amount of vegetative recovery that has occurred in harvested areas . This method equates area harvested and percent of crown removed with an equivalent amount of clearcut area. For example, if 100 acres had 60 percent crown removed, ECA would be approximately 60, or equivalent to a 60-acre clearcut. The relationship between crown removal and ECA is not a 1 - to - 1 ratio, so the percent ECA is not always the same as the percent of canopy removal. As live trees are removed, the water they would have evaporated and transpired either saturates the soil or is translated to runoff. This method also calculates the recovery of these increases as new trees vegetate the site and move toward preharvest water use. In order to evaluate the watershed risk of potential water-yield increase effectively, a threshold of concern must be established. Acceptable risk level, resource value, and watershed sensitivity are evaluated according to Young (1989) in order to determine a threshold of concern. The watershed sensitivity is evaluated using qualitative assessments, as well as procedures outlined in Forest Hydrology Part II (1976). The stability of a stream channel is an important indicator of where a threshold of concern should be set. As water yields increase as a result of canopy removal, the amount of water flowing in a creek gradually increases. When these increases reach a certain level, the bed and banks may begin to erode . The more stable streams will be able to handle larger increases in water yield before they begin to erode, while less stable streams will experience erosion at more moderate water-yield increases. ANALYSIS AREA SEDIMENT DELIVERY The analysis area for sediment delivery is the West Fork Timber Sale project area and the proposed haul routes. The West Fork watershed is a 10,669-acre, perennial, third-order tributary to Swift Creek and Whitefish Lake and includes Stryker Creek. The Antice/ Johnson watershed is a 7,289- acre tributary to Swift Creek. Analysis will cover stream segments within these watersheds that may be affected by the proposed project and all roads and upland sites that may contribute sediment to the West Fork or Johnson Creek. WATER YIELD The analysis area for water yield is the West Fork and Antice/ Johnson Creek watersheds. Precipitation in both watersheds range from 30 inches in the Antice/ Johnson watershed in the lower elevations to 80 inches at the ridgetops. In addition, the water yield of the entire Swift Creek watershed will be analyzed to determine the effects of the proposed project on the receiving waters . EXISTING CONDITIONS REGULATORY FRAMEWORK Montana Surface Water-Quality Standards According to ARM 17.30.608 (1) (c) , the Whitefish Lake drainage, including Swift Creek, is classified as A- 1 . Among other criteria for A- 1 waters, no increases are allowed above naturally occurring levels of sediment or turbidity. "Naturally occurring, " as defined by ARM 17.30.602 (17), includes conditions or materials present during runoff from developed land where all reasonable land, soil, and water conservation practices (commonly called BMPs) have been applied. Reasonable practices include methods, measures, or practices that protect present and reasonably anticipated beneficial uses. These practices include, but are not limited to, structural and nonstructural controls and operation and maintenance procedures . Appropriate practices may be applied before, during, or after completion of potentially impactive activities. Designated beneficial water uses within the project area include cold-water fisheries and recreational use in the streams, wetlands, lake, and surrounding area . Page C-2 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS Water-Quality- Limited Waterbodies Swift Creek and the West Fork of Swift Creek are currently listed as a water-quality- limited waterbodies in the 1996 and 2004 303(d) list. The 303 (d) list is compiled by DEQ as required by Section 303 (d) of the Federal Clean Water Act and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Water Quality Planning and Management Regulations (40 CFR, Part 130 ) . Under these laws, DEQ is required to identify waterbodies that do not fully meet water-quality standards, or where beneficial uses are threatened or impaired. These waterbodies are then characterized as "water-quality limited" and thus targeted for TMDL development . The TMDL process is used to determine the total allowable amount of particulates in a waterbody of the watershed. Each contributing source is allocated a portion of the allowable limit. These allocations are designed to achieve water- quality standards. The Montana Water Quality Act ( MCA 75-5-701-705 ) also directs the DEQ to assess the quality of State waters, ensure that sufficient and credible data exists to support a 303 (d) listing, and develop TMDL for those waters identified as threatened or impaired. Under the Montana TMDL Law, new or expanded nonpoint -source activities affecting a listed waterbody may commence and continue provided they are conducted in accordance with all reasonable land, soil, and water conservation practices and BMPs. TMDLs have not been completed for the Swift Creek or West Fork drainages. DNRC will comply with the Law and interim guidance developed by DEQ through implementation of all reasonable soil and water conservation practices, including BMPs and Forest Management Rules . The current listed causes of impairment in Swift Creek are bank erosion, other habitat alterations, and nutrients . The probable source for Swift Creek is listed as silviculture. Current listed causes of impairment in the West Fork are flow alteration, other habitat alteration, and siltation. The probable sources for the West Fork are listed as silviculture, highway maintenance, and runoff. Montana SMZ Law By the definition in ARM 36.11.312 (3) , the majority of the West Fork and Johnson Creek watersheds are Class 1 streams. Johnson Creek, the West Fork, and many of their tributaries have flow for more than 6 months each year. Many of these stream reaches also support fish. Some of the smaller first-order tributaries may be classified as Class 2 or 3 based on site-specific conditions . SEDIMENT DELIVERY According to field reconnaissance in the summers of 1999, 2000, and 2003, stream channels in the West Fork watershed are primarily in good to fair condition. Six reaches were rated in poor condition. These 6 reaches represent approximately 7 percent of the identified reaches in the West Fork, and approximately 16 percent of the total length of streams in the watershed. The primary reason for poor reach ratings is movement of channel-bed material . Most reaches were rated as B3 and B4 channels by a classification system developed by Rosgen (1990) . Channel types rated as "B" are typically in the 2- to 4- percent gradient range and have a moderate degree of meander (sinuosity) . Channel-bed materials in B3 and B4 types are mainly cobble and gravel. Given the cobble and gravel beds, and the gradient of these stream types, bed materials commonly move. Gravel bars have formed on point bars in these reaches. No areas of down-cut channels were identified during field reconnaissance. Large woody debris was found in adequate supply to allow proper hydrologic function. Appendix C Watershed and Hydrology Analysis Page C-3 For further analysis of large woody debris, see APPENDIX E -FISHERIES ANALYSIS . Little evidence of past streamside harvesting was found, and, where past logging had taken place in the riparian area, the streams did not appear to be deficient in existing or potential downed woody material . The existing road system leading to and in the proposed project area was reviewed for potential sources of sediment. The road system in the West Fork watershed is contributing an estimated 25.5 tons per year of sediment to streams . Roads proposed for hauling in the project area in the Johnson Creek watershed are contributing an estimated 5.2 tons of sediment per year to streams . These sediment -delivery values are estimates based on procedures outlined above and are not measured values . Estimated sediment delivery occurs primarily at stream crossings and comes from a variety of sources. In the upper reaches of the West Fork in Stryker Basin, 3 existing crossings are constructed of wood and earth that are in various stages of decay; another structure is located on an unnamed tributary of the West Fork. Combined, these structures are contributing an estimated 2 . 8 tons of sediment per year. In addition, each site is at high risk for failure due to decaying wood. In total, these 3 structures are comprised of approximately 760 tons of sediment, most of which, upon failure, would be delivered to the West Fork and Stryker Creek. Other sources of sediment delivery found during the inventory were a result of sites k TABLE C-l - CURRENT WATER-YIELD AND ECA needing erosion-control devices installed on old roads that had been used before the adoption of forest management BMPs . Much of the existing road system in the proposed project area meets applicable BMPs. Past project work has installed surface drainage on the road systems in Stryker and Herrig basins, as well as on the major routes in the West Fork watershed. WATER YIELD The allowable water-yield increase for the West Fork watershed has been set at 10 percent based on channel- stability evaluations, watershed sensitivity, and acceptable risk. This water-yield increase would be reached when the ECA level in the West Fork reaches the allowable level of 2,667. Timber harvesting and associated road construction activities have taken place in the West Fork watershed since the 1930s. These activities, combined with vegetative recovery, have led to an estimated 3.4 percent water-yield increase over an unharvested condition in the West Fork watershed. Currently, the water yield increases in the Ant ice/ Johnson and Swift Creek watersheds are 3.5 percent and 3.4 percent, respectively. TABLE C-l - CURRENT WATER-YIELD AND ECA INCREASES BY WATERSHED summarizes the existing conditions for water yield in the 3 watersheds . INCREASES BY WATERSHED WEST FORK ANT ICE/ JOHNSON SWIFT CREEK Percent WYI 3.4 3.5 3.4 Allowable WYI 10 10 10 Existing ECA 876 641 4,833 Allowable ECA 2,667 1,822 12,362 Remaining ECA 1,791 1,181 7,529 Page C-4 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS ALTERNATIVE EFFECTS SEDIMENT DELIVERY Direct and Indirect Effects • Direct a ml Indirect Effect# o/’.Vkk Iction . llternutire .1 to Sediment Delivery No-Action Alternative A would have no direct effects to sediment delivery beyond those currently occurring. Existing sources of sediment, both in-channel and out of channel, would continue to recover or degrade based on natural or preexisting conditions. The indirect effects would be an increased risk of sediment delivery to streams from crossings that do not meet applicable BMPs. These sites would continue to pose a risk of sediment delivery to streams until other funding became available to repair them. • Direct and Indirect Effects Common to Both . Iction . Ulema tires Each of the proposed action alternatives would replace the wooden West Fork bridge on Stryker Basin Road. Each of the action alternatives would also remove and rehabilitate 3 log and earth-fill crossings in the upper reaches of Stryker Basin. Replacement of the existing bridge over the West Fork would involve removal of log-crib walls and the fill material that they are currently retaining. The existing structure is beginning to decay and, over time, would become an increasing risk of failure due to decay in the wood. A potential failure of the wood cribbing could allow several tons of sediment to enter the stream. The proposed new bridge would be designed to allow the stream to flow freely with no constriction of the bank-full channel. This would reduce the potential for bank erosion and channel down- cutting that may occur with vertical bridge abutments. The new crossing would also divert overland flow from the road surface away from the crossing site in both directions. This would lead to a decrease in delivery of approximately 0.11 tons of sediment per year at this site . Removal and rehabilitation of the 3 log/earth crossings in upper Stryker Basin would remove potential sources of sediment, as well as reduce current sediment delivery by approximately 2.22 tons per year for all 3 sites. As stated above, these 3 sites contain an estimated 750 tons of fill material. Removal and disposal of this material outside of the SMZ would remove the risk of this material being delivered to the West Fork and Swift Creek. Direct and Indirect Effects of ./Iction . Iltemafire B to Sediment Delivery Several stream crossings would be replaced in the West Fork and Johnson Creek watersheds and along the proposed haul route. Erosion control and BMPs would be improved on approximately 31 miles of existing road. This work would decrease the estimated sediment load to the West Fork by approximately 4 . 2 tons of sediment per year, and reduce the estimated sediment load to Johnson Creek by approximately 2.7 tons per year. See TABLE C-2 - SEDIMENT -DELIVERY ESTIMATES IN THE WEST FORK for a TABLE C-2 - SEDIMENT-DELIVERY ESTIMATES IN THE WEST FORK West Fork Johnson Creek Alternative Alternative A B C A B C Postproj ect delivery (tons per year) 25 . 5 21.3 22 . 9 5.2 2 . 5 5.2 Reduction (tons per year) 0 4.2 2.6 0 2.7 0 Reduction percent 0 16% 10% 0 52% 0 Appendix C Watershed and Hydrology Analysis Page C-5 summary of sediment -delivery estimates . Crossings proposed for replacement do not currently meet all applicable BMPs and require a new culvert or bridge in order to meet applicable standards. The replacement of existing stream crossings would contribute sediment directly to the West Fork. This sediment would be minimized through the application of standard erosion-control measures. The sediment delivery anticipated from this project would be short term and comply with all applicable permits and State water-quality laws. In addition, several sites would have additional erosion-control measures added to lower the risk of sediment delivery to a stream or draw. In some cases, the addition of erosion-control measures may increase the risk of sediment delivery in the short term by creating bare soil. However, as these sites revegetate, the long-term risk of sedimentation to a stream would be reduced to levels lower than the existing condition. This alternative would also construct approximately 1.0 mile of new road to access proposed Harvest Area I, approximately 2.1 miles of temporary road in proposed Harvest Areas II -C, and 0.3 mile of new road to Harvest Area III-J. Reclamation of the temporary roads would occur immediately following completion of activities in the proposed harvest areas. The reclaimed road would present an increased risk of sediment delivery until bare soil revegetated. \ Action Alternative B would have a very low risk of sediment delivery to streams as a result of the proposed timber-harvesting activities. Some harvesting activities may occur within designated SMZs . This harvesting activity would follow all requirements of the SMZ Law and have a low risk of affecting recruitment of large woody material to the West Fork, Johnson Creek, or their tributaries. The SMZ law, rules, and all applicable BMPs would be applied to all harvesting activities, which would minimize the risk of sediment delivery to draws and streams. • Direct and Indirect Inflects of Jlction Alternative C to Sediment Delivery Several stream crossings would be replaced in the West Fork watershed and along the proposed haul route, and erosion control and BMPs would be improved on approximately 25 miles of existing road. This work would decrease the estimated sediment load to the West Fork by approximately 2 . 6 tons of sediment per year. Crossings proposed for replacement do not currently meet all applicable BMPs; to meet applicable standards, a new culvert or bridge is required. The replacement of existing stream crossings would contribute sediment directly to the West Fork. This sediment would be minimized through application of standard erosion-control measures. The sediment delivery anticipated from this project would be short term and comply with all applicable permits and State water-quality laws. Also, additional erosion control would be added to several sites to lower the risk of sediment delivery to a stream or draw. In some cases, the addition of erosion-control measures may increase the risk of sediment delivery in the short term by creating bare soil. However, as these sites revegetate, the long-term risk of sedimentation to a stream would be reduced to levels lower than the existing condition. This alternative would also construct approximately 1.0 mile Page C-6 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS of new road to access proposed Harvest Area I and approximately 2.1 miles of temporary road in Harvest Area II-C of the proposed project area. Reclamation of the temporary road would occur immediately following completion of activities in the proposed harvest areas . The reclaimed road would present an increased risk of sediment delivery until bare soil revegetated . Action Alternative C would have a very low risk of sediment delivery to streams as a result of proposed timber-harvesting activities. Some harvesting activities may occur within designated SMZs; these harvesting activities would follow all requirements of the SMZ Law, and would have a low risk of affecting recruitment of large woody material to the West Fork, Johnson Creek, or their tributaries. The SMZ law, rules, and all applicable BMPs would be applied to all harvesting activities, which would minimize the risk of sediment delivery to draws and streams. (See TABLE C-2 - SEDIMENT-DELIVERY ESTIMATES IN THE WEST FORK for a summary of sediment-delivery estimates.) Cumulative Effects • Cumulative Ejff'ect# o/'JVo-lI ction .Iltemative . / to Sedimen t Delivery The cumulative effects of sediment delivery would be very similar to those described in the existing conditions portion of this analysis. All existing sources of sediment would continue to recover or degrade as dictated by natural and preexisting conditions until a source of funding became available to repair them. Sediment loads would remain at or near present levels . • Cumulative Effect# of. Action . Alternative It to Sediment Delivery Cumulative effects to sediment delivery would be primarily related to roadwork, stream- crossing replacements, and rehabilitations. The sediment generated from the replacement of existing culverts would increase the total sediment load in the West Fork for the duration of activity. These increases would not exceed any State water-quality laws and would follow all applicable recommendations given in 124 and 318 permit applications. In the long term, the cumulative effects to sediment delivery would be a reduction from approximately 25.5 tons of sediment per year to 21.3 tons of sediment per year in the West Fork, and a reduction from approximately 5.2 tons per year to 2 . 5 tons per year in Johnson Creek. A summary of sediment - delivery estimates is found in TABLE C-2 - SEDIMENT-DELIVERY ESTIMATES IN THE WEST FORK. As the sites stabilize and revegetate, sediment levels resulting from culvert replacements would decrease further from projected levels as work sites, and closed and reclaimed roads revegetate and stabilize. Over the long term, cumulative sediment loads would be reduced due to better designed crossings. Improved design would reduce the risk of structure failure, which would reduce the risk of sediment delivery to Swift Creek and other downstream waters . The installation and improvement of erosion-control and surface- drainage features on existing roads would also affect the cumulative sediment delivery to the West Fork and Johnson Creek, as described above. In the short term, the installation and improvement of surface-drainage features would expose bare soil. This would increase the risk of sediment delivery to the streams in and around the proposed project area. The application of all applicable BMPs during this work would make increased sediment Appendix C Watershed and Hydrology Analysis Page C-7 loads unlikely. Over the long term, with the installation of more effective surface-drainage and erosion-control features on the existing road system, cumulative sediment delivery to the West Fork and Johnson Creek is projected to be lower than existing conditions. Harvesting trees within an SMZ would have a low risk of adverse cumulative effects to downed woody material in the West Fork watershed. The tree-retention requirements of the SMZ Law and the application of Forest Management Rules would ensure a future supply of woody material to the creeks . None of the cumulative impacts described above are expected to adversely affect downstream beneficial uses. All activities would comply with applicable laws, rules, and regulations. • Cumulative Effect* of, let ion Alternative C to Seri intent Deli vert/ Cumulative effects to sediment delivery would be primarily related to roadwork and stream- crossing replacements. The sediment generated from replacing existing culverts would increase the total sediment load in the West Fork for the duration of the activity. These increases would not exceed any State water-quality laws, and would follow all applicable recommendations given in the 124 and 318 permit applications. In the long term, the cumulative effects to sediment delivery would be a reduction from approximately 25.5 tons of sediment per year to approximately 22.9 tons of sediment 'per year in the West Fork. TABLE C-2 - SEDIMENT-DELIVERY ESTIMATES IN THE WEST FORK summarizes sediment- delivery estimates. As the sites stabilize and revegetate, sediment levels resulting from culvert replacements would decrease further from projected levels as work sites and closed and reclaimed roads revegetate and stabilize. Over the long term, cumulative sediment loads would be reduced due to a better crossing design. Improved design would reduce the risk of structure failure, which would reduce the risk of sediment delivery to Swift Creek and other downstream waters. The installation and improvement of erosion-control and surface- drainage features on existing roads would also affect the cumulative sediment delivery to the West Fork as described above. In the short term, the installation and improvement of surface drainage features would expose bare soil, which would increase the risk of sediment delivery to the streams in and around the proposed project area. The application of all applicable BMPs during this work would make increased sediment loads unlikely. Over the long term, with the installation of more effective surface drainage and erosion control features on the existing road system, cumulative sediment delivery to the West Fork is projected to be lower than existing conditions. Harvesting trees within an SMZ would have a low risk of adverse cumulative effects to downed woody material in the West Fork or its tributaries. The tree-retention requirements of the SMZ Law would ensure a future supply of woody material to the creeks . None of the cumulative impacts described above are expected to adversely affect downstream beneficial uses. All activities would comply with applicable laws, rules, and regulations. Page C-8 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS WATER YIELD Direct and Indirect Effects • Direct and Indirect Effects qf J\o-» let ion • Uternatire •! to I I'ater Yield This alternative would have no direct or indirect effects on water yield. Water quantity would not be changed from present levels . • Direct and Indirect Effects qf % let ion • Uternatire It to Water Yield The annual water yield in the West Fork watershed would increase by an estimated 2.6 percent over the current level. Antics/ Johnson watershed would increase by 0.4 percent, and the entire Swift Creek watershed would increase by 0.8 percent. These levels of water-yield increases would not be sufficient to create unstable channels . • Direct and Indirect bfffeet# qf • let ion • Uternatire Cto W'ater Yield The annual water yield in the West Fork watershed would increase by an estimated 1.7 percent over the current level, Antice/Johnson watershed would increase by 0.2 percent, and the entire Swift Creek watershed would increase by 0.5 percent. These levels of water-yield increases would not be sufficient to create unstable channels . CUMULATIVE EFFECTS • Cu/nutatire Iffiect* of ‘JVo-» let ion •Uternatire •I to Water Yield This alternative would have no cumulative effects on water yield. Existing timber harvest units would continue to revegetate and move closer to premanagement levels of water use and snowpack distribution. • Cumulatirc Itffect* qf • let ion •Uternatire IS to Water Yield The removal of trees proposed in Action Alternative B would increase the water yield in the West Fork watershed from its current level of approximately 3.4 percent over unharvested to an estimated 6.0 percent. This water-yield increase and its associated ECA level includes the impacts of all past -management activity, existing and proposed roads, proposed timber harvesting, and vegetative hydrologic recovery in the West Fork watershed. The water-yield increase expected from Action Alternative B leaves the watershed well below the established threshold of concern. No impacts to water quality are expected as a result of this alternative. A summary of the anticipated water-yield impacts of Action Alternative B to the West Fork, Antice/Johnson watershed, and the entire Swift Creek drainage is found in TABLE C-3 - WATER YIELD AND ECA INCREASES IN THE WEST FORK; TABLE C-4 - WATER YIELD AND ECA INCREASES IN ANTICE/JOHNSON WATERSHED; and TABLE C-5 - WATER YIELD AND ECA INCREASES IN THE SWIFT CREEK WATERSHED (INCLUDING WEST FORK AND ANTICE/JOHNSON) . • Cumulative Effect# of . let ion . Uternatire C to W 'ater Yield The removal of trees would increase the water yield in the West Fork watershed from its current level of approximately 3.4 percent over unharvested to an estimated 5.1 percent. This water-yield increase and its associated ECA level includes the impacts of all past management activity, existing and proposed roads, proposed timber harvesting, and vegetative hydrologic recovery in the West Fork watershed. The water-yield increase expected from Action Alternative C leaves the watershed well below the established threshold of concern. No impacts to water quality are expected as a result of this alternative. A summary of the anticipated water-yield impacts of Action Alternative C to the West Appendix C Watershed and Hydrology Analysis Page C-9 Fork, Antice/ Johnson watershed, and the entire Swift Creek drainage is found in TABLE C-3 - WATER -YIELD AND EC A INCREASES IN THE WEST FORK; TABLE C-4 - WATER - YIELD AND ECA INCREASES IN ANTICE /JOHNSON WATERSHED; and TABLE C-5 - WATER -YIELD AND ECA INCREASES IN THE SWIFT CREEK WATERSHED (INCLUDING WEST FORK AND ANTICE /JOHNSON) . TABLE C-3 - WATER-YIELD AND ECA INCREASES IN THE WEST FORK ALTERNATIVE A B C Allowable WYI (percent) 10 10 10 Percent of WYI 3.4 6.0 5.1 Acres harvested 0 1,180 883 Miles of new road 0 1.0 0.7 ECA generated 0 1,114 822 Total ECA 876 1,992 1,700 Remaining ECA 1,791 675 967 Allowable ECA 2,667 2,667 2,667 West Fork Project Area Watersheds TABLE C-4 - WATER -YIELD AND ECA INCREASES IN THE ANTICE/ JOHNSON WATERSHED ALTERNATIVE A B C Allowable WYI (percent) 10 10 10 Percent WYI 3.5 3 . 9 3.7 Acres harvested 0 94 60 Miles of new road 0 0 0 ECA generated 0 91 57 Total ECA 641 732 698 Remaining ECA 1,181 1,090 1,124 Allowable ECA 1,822 1,822 1,822 TABLE C-5 - WATER -YIELD AND ECA INCREASES IN THE SWIFT CREEK WATERSHED (INCLUDING THE WEST FORK AND ANTICE/ JOHNSON) ALTERNATIVE A B C Allowable WYI (percent) 10 10 10 Percent WYI 3.4 4.2 3 . 9 Acres harvested 0 1,275 943 Miles of new road 0 1 . 0 0 . 7 ECA generated 0 1,204 879 Total ECA 4,833 6,040 5,714 Remaining ECA 7,529 6,322 6,648 Allowable ECA 12,362 12,362 12,362 Swift Crfeek.yVatershed Appendix C Watershed and Hydrology Analysis Page C-ll 3 3 g cu O' • i 3 3 3 dl T) r> -H to to a 3 O .C O •H 3 O to CO 3 XI •H 3 ,X 3 to -H 3 XI O' d) 3 4-1 1-1 ft! 3 >t O' 3 •H g to 3 to XI XI 3 - o O' ft 3 3 O' - ■H 3 tO d) 4-> P 3 H O -H 3 3 3 3 .3 4-4 M ■ •H i — I a o 3 > 3 3 3 3 4-J O' x CO 3 3 O 4-> 3 tO > 3 3 O 3 X 3 3 XI to i — I • •H 10 O P 3 3 3 3 -3 3 3 3 4-1 3 3 O 3 O X) a 3 3 3 3 XI 3 3 >1 -3 i — l 3 3 3 4-> 3 3 3 O 3 3 XI X! O 3 £ 3 3 O XI 3 • 3 !>i -p a si o O' i — i 3 O v 3 c»P X! X) m to 3 3 a 3 o > rH O co to 3 a o 3 ■H * a si to 3 si -P 3 o co to 3 3 3 X XI 3 -P - (0 3 3 3 O 4-1 X) 4-1 3 3 O O 3 3 XI Xl 3 3 si U 10 3 44 O 3 4-1 3 10 3 3 3 D X) Q) Q) 'O Q) § 8*3 * O H to IT) 3 to H TJ a, x u n to -U to Q) ■3 -H 3 Q M o •H o 3 3 3 3 3 O O X) a 3 3 3 3 X) 3 3 >1 4-1 3 3 -P 3 3 3 O XI 3 • 3 rH -p a xl o O' rH 3 o - 3 cfp XI X) m to 3 3 a 3 o > 3 •H • a x: 3 3 5 a o to X) X) O 3 £ 3 si 3 -p a 3 O o a CO 3 3 3 3 X XI 3 4-1 «. 3 3 3 3 O 4-) XI -P 3 3 O O 3 3 X! rH P X 3 <#> 3 m a ■'4' O 3 3 3 O' > dP 3 O X) X) XI a 3 3 3 3 X) 3 3 >i 4-> 3 3 3 0 3 0 a 4-> >1 o 3 3 3 a 3 3 X 3 0 0 3 a o O 3 15 i — 13 3 3 P I 3 4-> 3 3 3 O 3 3 O O O 3 S 3 CO O O > l -P 44 3 O 3 3 XI 0 3 3 S o 31 X O' 3 4-1 3 3 3 O O £ 3 -P 3 3 3 O O £ 3 P 3 3 3 O O £ 3 4-> 3 3 3 O O £ xl O o CD O O O 0 a >i 4-1 X O' 3 O 3 O 3 O •H 4-> •H p 3 g O O 3 O •H p •H 4-J CD ft O o 4-1 CD 4-J P CD CD > CD CO a' 4-J fd p CD T) O s rC Cn •H A CD ■P5 fH S* o ^ o £ X O' -H X co Z o H Eh < Eh H £ O P 3 P 3 3 3 O O £ 3 3 3 > 3 CO O' 3 a x 3 P 3 O' 3 3 3 3 P O to O a w a p g to 3 u 3 3 ij O' 3 T, X) O g a O g 3 £ H 3 o X w 3 I H o o P , 3 a c i_j ' 1 -H 0^3 H •* 3 O g a o co 3 > •H (0 co CD U X CD rH 73 rH CD a •H fd o p 4-> 73 Td CD £ T5 CD £ -H 3 3 o z o H EH ft H ft CJ co w a 3 ft c si CO > • H ^ o ^ CO >1 ■ 4-J CO CD dP U O (d CM P I P O a) -p co CD a o CM I o cn i «9* CD dP CO d a O (D tr p Qh I O U 2 CM co CO £ a o O i — I P i — I o fd 4-J rC £ co o I rH O fd •H O - fd i — i i — i i — i tn -H co Q) CX O o\° O 40 00 I CTi I X 3 o ” »H< 3 ^ ° a £ to ^ o S 3 n a o o u ^ a ° I o co co CD a O df> rH O CO 40 Appendix D - Soils Analysis Page D-5 i — 1 tu 1 1 •*• tn CO P 0 P o 0 P o • • fd 1 CO a 3 3 to CO 3 to CO 4-> P p P a. a c 3 3 P i — 1 • 3 3 0 fa 0 o U4 O 0 fd (d > o >t X X £ Eh e E-i X p fd CO 10 -P •H CO 3 p tu •rH >i O 3 • co • CO • o • o •V p a H >i >, x 3 a H G H G . i — 1 a < — 1 & H •H o •H u u 3 O . 0 . 0) . •H E •H E •rH E i — 1 p tu 3 ■P H 3 O 0 p P O d) P P o •H o •rH 0 •H CO N > > 3X3 3 to to 6 3 3 to 6 3 3 CO CO CO ►3 (U M O 3 H 0 -P fd a) 4-4 fd CO CO o MH CO CO 3 0 3 X 0 p co P 0 P CO ■p a) •rH tu •rH p > •H u > > > • 3 0 ^ P 2 •H H o 0 •H H o 0 •rH X •H X •H tu M 0 X X E >i cu CO p -H b a P -H 6 a P p p p p CO tu 1 — 1 p p x 3 0 O O B u o E o a o a a 3 X a a T3 • — 1 *H O 3 to •H 3 to i — 1 •H 3 3 0 O X 0 CO O X o CO o o o o -V df> •H C C 3 3 o 3 a) CO m , 3 3 a m a •rH a •rH a c 0 •H •P •rH P O CU X 3 .* X 3 -V X o 0 o X o P 0 M H 0 a x o P a 4-) o P a CO a CO a CO u c a CO o U) O i — 1 pH i — 1 tu * tu a a> x tu a 3 a CU a (U 0 0 0 tu a & a & 3 M X CAP o a) x a) Q) Q) x ai a> o o M1 a) 0) 3 tu (U 3 z i w P 4-> P p P -P H P CO O P Pi - ? CJ £ -g , >i 2 H P P a CO X X! X X X P 0 p 0 XJ X J X x o O o o o •H Cn a Cu Q o O o 0 o 0 3 W W 9 o e> o (3 (3 a 0 p £ s P to Eh 2 X X co w H 2 2 o Q) 0 tu if \ \ 0 3 w § H P P p p P o w Q E-* 0 0 fd tu ,G X 0 0 u s u 3 P p P P O' Cn o X P P Sg a) ■a 0 X tu X) tu > tu 3 (U •rH X 0 • H X 3 X 3 X 2 04 s o o o -h CO 0 a o i rH O 0 CM •rH O - 0 H i — I H O *H P CO 0 a o <#> o X 0 G •rH fd P X H CO 0 0 OP •H G O U -H CM 0 0 I H P O e> o £ cm r. n oo i CD CM (T> I c CD CM r~ l U CD CM Glacial moraines 20-40% slopes Glacial moraines, 40-60% slopes 00 (?) o u LD CD CM CM X ^ to <#> to .? ® « O J) q [15 H CM d 0 3^ X ^ X 0 G •H fd p X i CO H CO cd 0 o*° H G O U H CM 0 fd i —IPO ID O £ co H O 0 fd CM a, 3 O X CO CO H H c*> O O CO M1 i 00 CM Page D-6 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS M CO O 1 0 fj XI 0 p CO Cp -Y o o 4-> •H CO rH a 4-4 O o fd p s •H 0) •H O -Y cr Eh o i cd • 0) (3 •H P O o (3 cd > a tu 0 4-1 43 a fd >4 0) CO Q) (U 43 1 — 1 a 4-1 CO (U u p o 4-1 > Q) ■p 43 o fd fd Q) a; < 0 (U u M CO 3 o co CO CO CO o .a -H 43 cn •H 33 M O o a >1 0) > a o •H - 4-> M *H •H -P nj a) £ o o 3 o h3 a) 4-) u £ 43 a) Cn O ■H i o o c5 a 0) a) 4-) to ,y o o c5 o 4-1 tu 4-1 (0 n cu ■d o s a tu (U 4-1 to W CD T5 ^ s •H .5 0 £ ^ P TJ T5 0 C •H fd P T5 >i A p -P co .a 3 0 o -p - M O tn o a M u -4 rn n •H O ft) O' a d to o o ' — I M C to xs o 2 o H H 04 H 05 CJ to W Q 04 Fj as tJ1 P 3 ° * £ 1 o VD o\o ** O r— | cr» t — I O o\o rH CO O ^ 0 fd a 0 o p I — I 43 to Appendix D - Soils Analysis Page D-7 y\Xv\XX>,>^<>o<>‘0^^ APPENDIX E FISHERIES ANALYSIS ISSUE The purpose of this analysis is to assess potential impacts to cold- water fisheries within the West Fork Timber Sale Project area as a result of any one of the project alternatives . INTRODUCTION The West Fork Timber Sale Project area includes State trust lands within Sections 18, 19, 20, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, and 34, T34N, R23W, and Section 13, T34N, R24W, which lie entirely within the Swift Creek drainage (5th code HUC 17010210050) . Up to 1,270 acres of total harvest area is proposed within the project area . The project area includes the watersheds of 2 major tributaries of Swift Creek: West Fork of Swift Creek (West Fork) and East Fork of Swift Creek (East Fork) . Additionally, 2 specific subbasins of the West Fork will be included in the analysis; from north to south, Stryker Creek and Johnson Creek. The downstream, main-stem reach of Swift Creek between Section 3, T33N, R23W, and Whitefish Lake is not within the project area and will not be included in this analysis. None of the project alternatives are expected to have any direct, indirect, or cumulative impacts with respect to downstream fisheries in the main-stem reach of Swift Creek. The West Fork is identified on the Montana 303 (d) list as an impaired stream, and a TMDL is scheduled for development in 2011. The portion of the West Fork within the project area has been identified as "not supporting" of cold-water fisheries and other aquatic life according to the 2002 and Draft 2004 303 (d) lists developed by the DEQ. Probable causes of this listing include flow alteration, other habitat alterations, and siltation; the probable sources include silviculture, highway maintenance, and runoff. The East Fork is identified on the Montana 303(d) list, but is not scheduled for TMDL development as an impaired stream. The portion of the East Fork within the project area has been identified as "partially supporting" cold-water fisheries and other aquatic life according to the 2002 and draft 2004 303 (d) lists developed by DEQ. Probable causes of this listing include flow alteration and other habitat alterations; the probable sources include silviculture, habitat modification (other than hydromodification) , and modif ication/destablilization of banks or shoreline. The Swift Creek drainage, including the West Fork, East Fork, and any contributing subbasins, is classified as A-l in the Montana Surface Water Quality Standards. The A-l classification is for multiple beneficial -use waters, including the growth and propagation of cold-water fisheries and associated aquatic life. Among other criteria for A-l waters, a 1 degree Fahrenheit maximum increase above naturally occurring water temperature is allowed within the range of 32 to 66 degrees Fahrenheit (0 to 18.9 degrees Celsius) and no increases are allowed above naturally occurring concentrations of sediment, which will harm or prove detrimental to fish or wildlife. In regard to sediment, naturally occurring includes conditions or materials present from runoff on developed land where all reasonable land, soil, and water conservation practices have been applied. Reasonable practices include methods, measures, or practices that protect present and reasonably anticipated beneficial uses. The State has adopted Forestry BMPs through its Nonpoint- Source Management Plan as the principle means of controlling nonpoint -source pollution from silvicultural activities ( Thomas et al 1990) . SPECIES Native cold-water fish species within the project area include bull trout ( Salvelinus confluentus) , westslope cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus dark i lewisi) , slimy sculpin (Cottus cognatus) , largescale sucker (Catostomus macrochei lus) , and longnose sucker ( Catostomus catostomus ) . The 1 nonnative species known to persist within the specific project area is eastern brook trout ( Salvelinus fontinalis) . Neither slimy sculpin, largescale sucker, nor longnose sucker are identified as endangered, threatened, or sensitive species ( Montana Natural Heritage Program [MNHP] 2003 ) . Although all 3 species are an integral component of the aquatic ecosystem within the project area, any foreseeable issues or concerns regarding these species' populations or habitats can be addressed through an effects analysis for bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout. Eastern brook trout is an invasive species that is not a component of the region's historical biodiversity, but any foreseeable issues or concerns regarding this species' populations or habitats can also be addressed through an effects analysis for bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout. Bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout are the primary cold-water species that will be addressed in this analysis. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has listed bull trout as "threatened" under the Endangered Species Act. Both bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout are listed as Class-A Montana Animal Species of Concern. A Class-A designation is defined as a species or subspecies that has limited numbers and/or habitats both in Montana and elsewhere in North America and elimination from Montana would be a significant loss to the gene pool of the species or subspecies ( DFWP , MNHP, and Montana Chapter American Fisheries Society Rankings) . DNRC has also identified bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout as sensitive species ( ARM 36.11 . 436) . Both bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout exhibit resident, fluvial, and adfluvial life forms. Resident life forms spend their juvenile and adult life in natal or nearby low-order tributaries. Fluvial and adfluvial life forms generally leave their natal streams within 1 to 3 years of emergence ( Shepard et al 1984, Fraley and Shepard 1989) to mature in downstream river and lake systems, respectively, and then return again to headwater or upstream reaches to spawn. Fluvial and adfluvial life forms of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout are typically larger than resident fish, and bull trout have been observed returning to upstream reaches during successive or alternating years to spawn (Fraley and Shepard 1989) . The life forms and stages of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout have evolved to coexist in overlapping geographic areas ( Nakano et al 1992, Pratt 1984, Shepard et al 1984) . Fluvial and adfluvial bull trout generally mature between ages 5 to 6, begin upstream spawning migrations in April, and spawn between September and October in response to a temperature regime decline below 9 to 10 degrees Celsius (Fraley and Shepard 1989) . Spawning adult bull trout are known to construct redds in close association with upwelling Page E-2 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Proiect FEIS groundwater and proximity to overhanging or instream cover ( Fraley and Shepard 1989) . Naturally occurring stream temperature regimes and substrate compositions having low levels of fine material are closely related to bull trout embryo and juvenile survival (MBTSG 1998, Weaver and Fraley 1991, Pratt 1984) . Resident westslope cutthroat trout have been observed maturing at ages 3 to 5 ( Downs et al 1997) , and all life forms are known to spawn during May through June (Shepard et al 1984) . Naturally occurring stream- temperature regimes and substrate compositions having low levels of fine material are closely related to westslope cutthroat trout embryo and juvenile survival ( Pratt 1984) . ISSUES RAISED DURING SCOPING Four concerns were received by DNRC during the scoping process that pertain specifically to fisheries: 1) The project should protect the genetic diversity of existing bull trout populations. 2) The project should help protect bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout in Johnson and Swift creeks . 3) The project will not address existing areas of degraded habitat . 4) The project may further degrade bull trout habitat. Concerns 1 and 2 are stated as conservation goals and are not considered 'issues' to be described in the EXISTING CONDITIONS and ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS sections . Concern 3 is an 'issue' that will be addressed under the EXISTING CONDITIONS habitat subissues for each basin and subbasin. Concern 4 is an 'issue' that will be addressed under the ALTERNATIVE EFFECTS habitat subissues for each basin and subbasin . ANALYSIS METHODS AND SUBISSUES The existing conditions of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout populations and habitat will be described in the EXISTING CONDITIONS portion of this analysis. In ALTERNATIVE EFFECTS, those existing conditions will then be compared to the anticipated effects of the project alternatives to determine foreseeable impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout. Analysis methods are a function of the types and quality of data available for analysis, which varies among the different basins and subbasins in the project area. The analyses may either be quantitative or qualitative. The best available data for both populations and habitats will be presented separately for Stryker and Johnson creeks and the West Fork. Existing conditions and foreseeable environmental effects for each subbasin will be explored using the following outline of subissues: • Populations - presence - genetics • Habitat - flow regime - sediment - channel form - large woody debris - riparian zone - stream temperature - connectivity The East Fork will not be analyzed for existing conditions under the EXISTING CONDITIONS or ALTERNATIVE EFFECTS sections since a portion of Harvest Area II -A (see Action Alternatives B and C) is the only area within the East Fork watershed that is proposed for harvesting. This specific proposed harvest area includes approximately 31.5 acres within the East Fork watershed and lies on a very low slope, 1 to 2 percent gradient terrain. The boundary of the proposed harvest unit parallels the East Fork for Appendix E Fisheries Analysis Page E-3 approximately 1,025 feet, but the boundary is at least 285 feet from the stream at all points . The very low relative amount of potential timber harvesting in the East Fork watershed and the associated risk of cumulative effects due to a potential water-yield increase is inconsequential (see APPENDIX C - WATERSHED AND HYDROLOGY ANALYSIS) . Consequently, this stream will not be included in the fisheries analysis since no foreseeable direct, indirect, and/or cumulative impacts to bull trout or westslope cutthroat trout populations (presence, genetics) or habitat (flow regime, sediment, channel form, large woody debris, riparian zone, stream temperature, connectivity) are expected as a result of No-Action Alternative A or Action Alternatives B or C. SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES See CHAPTER II— ALTERNATIVES for detailed information, specific mitigations, and road management plans pertaining to No-Action Alternative A and Action Alternatives B and C. Under No-Action Alternative A, existing conditions relative to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout in the project area would remain unchanged as a result of the selection of this alternative. Action Alternative B involves 12 proposed timber harvest subareas in 3 areas; approximately 1,270 acres would be harvested using various silviculture plans. Actions associated with Action Alternative B would occur in the West Fork basin and the subbasins of Stryker Creek, and Johnson Creek, all of which provide varying degrees of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat . Action Alternative C involves 6 proposed timber harvest subareas in 2 areas. Approximately 938 acres would be harvested using various silviculture plans. Actions associated with this alternative would occur in the West Fork basin and the subbasins of Stryker Creek, and Johnson Creek, all of which provide varying degrees of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat . Page E-4 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS MAP 1 - KNOWN BULL TROUT DISTRIBUTION WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA ( MFISH ) Appendix E - Fisheries Analysis Page E-5 MAP 2 - KNOWN WESTSLOPE CUTTHROAT TROUT DISTRIBUTION WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA (MFISH) Page E-6 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS EXISTING CONDITIONS > WEST TURK The West Fork is a fourth-order stream; the entire reach within the project area is considered fish bearing. West Fork Bull Trout and Westslope Cutthroat Trout Populations • Presence The West Fork has been identified as providing important habitat for a disjunct bull trout spawning adult fish in the Flathead River system have been observed returning to the same stream reaches during subsequent spawning runs (Fraley and Shepard 1989) . This propensity for habitual adult migration to natal or near-natal streams and the consequent selection of unique spawning locations would make the use of redd counts in the West Fork a valid measure of the trends of the species' overall success in occupying a specific subbasin. population associated with White fish Lake. Although bull trout may exhibit the resident life form in the West Fork, this subbasin is likely used by bull trout primarily as spawning and rearing habitat for disjunct populations associated with Whitefish and Upper Whitefish lakes. Genetic data suggests that migratory adults in the upper Flathead River system have been found to frequently return to their natal or near-natal streams ( Kanda et al 1997) , and populations of migratory The protocol for collecting redd count and estimated population data in the West Fork is described in Weaver and Fraley (1991). Experienced crews and fixed survey boundaries are used for result consistency. The data in FIGURE E-l - BULL TROUT REDD COUNTS IN WEST FORK OF SWIFT CREEK, 1994 THROUGH 2003 shows the number of bull trout redds constructed in the West Fork has ranged from 0 to 8 during the years 1994 to 2003. The data may also appear to describe a positive trend in bull trout success in the West FIGURE E-l - BULL TROUT REDD COUNTS IN WEST FORK OF SWIFT CREEK, 1994 THROUGH 2003 BT redd counts on West Fork Sw ift Creek (T. Weaver, FWP Kalis pell) zo o O ~o -O CD cr Year Appendix E - Fisheries Analysis Page E-7 Fork, but the statistical significance of the simple linear regression is very low (r2 = 0.0515), and studies suggest that a larger data set is needed in order to begin identifying long-term trends in bull trout populations through redd counts (Rieman and Myers 1997) . The data in TABLE E-l - BULL TROUT POPULATION ESTIMATES IN THE WEST FORK, 1995 THROUGH 2003 shows the population estimates of bull trout age 1 and older in the West Fork has ranged from 0.22 to 5.10 individuals per 100 square meters during the years 1995 to 2003. The statistical significance of the simple linear regression for this data set is also very low (r2 = 0.0022). For these reasons, it is determined that insufficient data is available to infer existing bull trout population trends or long-term success in the West Fork. The West Fork is used primarily as habitat for resident westslope cutthroat trout, although resident adults typically spawn in several of the stream' s lower-order tributaries such as Herrig, Stryker, and Johnson creeks. The West Fork may also be utilized to some degree as spawning and rearing habitat for adfluvial life forms that have matured in Whitefish or Upper Whitefish lakes. DFWP has conducted surveys of westslope cutthroat trout redd counts during the 2000, 2001, and 2002 early summer seasons utilizing the same protocols as described above for bull trout. No westslope cutthroat trout redds were counted during those survey years . Due to lack of historic and comparable population presence data, there are no apparent existing direct and indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout population presence in the West Fork. • Genetics Site- specif ic information from DFWP regarding bull trout genetics is unavailable. However, some level of hybridization has possibly occurred with resident or migratory eastern brook trout in the West Fork subbasin, as data suggests that this hybridization has occurred widely throughout the Flathead River basin ( Kanda et al 1997) . Any existing impact to bull trout populations in the subbasin as a result of hybridization with eastern brook TABLE E-l - BULL TROUT POPULATION ESTIMATES IN WEST FORK SWIFT CREEK, 1995 THROUGH 2003 DATE POPULATION ESTIMATES 9 5 -PERCENT CON- FIDENCE INTER- VAL PROBABILITY OF FIRST-PASS CAP- TURE DENSITY (NUMBER PER 100 SQUARE METERS) 8/24/1995 9 no estimate 1 . 04 9/16/1996 7 no estimate 0 . 81 8/26/1997 8 \ no estimate 0 . 92 8/26/1998 44 + /-20 0.52 5 . 10 8/25/1999 14 + /-1 0 . 92 1.44 9/07/2000 9 + /-1 0 . 88 1.52 8/31/2001 29 +/-3 0 . 83 2 . 80 9/19/2002 12 + /-2 0 . 80 1.38 8/29/2003 2 no estimate 0.22 Data adapted from T. Weaver (fisheries biologist) , DFWP, Kalispell: pop percent confidence intervals, probability of first-pass capture and dens older bull trout calculated from electrofishing in a 150-meter section o ulation estimates , 95- ities for age 1 and f the West Fork. Page E-8 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS | trout most likely is low. Migratory bull trout tend to have a reproductive size advantage over resident eastern brook trout ( Reiman and McIntyre 1993) , and offspring can have a considerable chance of being sterile or exhibiting other progressive growth problems ( Leary et al 1983) . A DFWP genetic survey in 1984 of 26 westslope cutthroat trout collected from the West Fork found the subspecies slightly introgressed with rainbow trout. The genetic purity of westslope cutthroat trout was determined at that time to be 97.4 percent ( MFISH 2004) . Due to the possibility of bull trout and brook trout hybridization and the known occurrence of introgressed westslope cutthroat trout, there are existing low to moderate direct and indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout population genetics in the West Fork. West Fork Bull Trout and Westslope Cutthroat Trout Habitat • Flow Regime Flow regime is the range of discharge frequencies and intensities in a specific watershed that occur throughout the year. The analysis of hydrologic data for the West Fork basin indicates that the existing average flow regime for the stream is approximately 3.4 percent above the range of naturally occurring conditions (see APPENDIX C - WATERSHED AND HYDROLOGY ANALYSIS) , which is primarily a result of past forest crown removal . The range of naturally occurring conditions is considered representative of those flow regimes in a fully forested, mature (20 to 30 years old) watershed . Changes in flow regime can affect bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout through modifications of stream morphology, sediment budget, streambank stability, and channel formations. There is likely no detectable existing impact on these specific habitat characteristics as a result of the estimated 3.4 percent increase in flow regime. Changes in flow regime have been known to affect bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout spawning migration, habitat available for spawning, and embryo survival; for this reason, there is a very low potential for direct and indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout as a result of flow-regime modifications in the West Fork. • Sediment Existing stream-sediment processes that are described in this analysis are Rosgen stream- morphological type, sediment budget, and streambank stability. The stream morphology of the West Fork, from the confluence with the East Fork (river mile 0.00) in Section 3, T33N, R23W, upstream through the project area and to a point (river mile 7.13) in Section 12, T34N, R24W, is generally described as exhibiting a B3/B4 Rosgen morphological type with gradients ranging from 2 to 4 percent ( Koopal 2001) . The B morphological type broadly includes riffle-dominated streams in narrow, gently sloping valleys, which typically exhibit infrequently spaced pools ( Rosgen 1996) . Furthermore, the B3/B4 morphological type is characteristic of channel compositions dominated by cobbles and codominated by Appendix E Fisheries Analysis Page E-9 gravels, with lesser amounts of boulder, gravel, and sand (Rosgen 1996 ) . Several surveys have been conducted to describe the sediment budget of the West Fork, including McNeil core, substrate score, and Wolman pebble count. The McNeil core sampling methodology ( McNeil and Ahnell 1964 ) has been demonstrated to be an effective technique for measuring temporal changes in the streambed permeability of spawning gravels. McNeil core data has been collected at known bull trout spawning reaches in the West Fork between 1998 and 2003 ( FIGURE E-2 - MCNEIL CORE SAMPLES FROM THE WEST FORK, 1998 THROUGH 2003 [ NOT SURVEYED DURING 1999 AND 2000]) . Weaver and Fraley (1991) found that the percentage of substrates less than 6.35 millimeter in spawning beds was inversely proportional to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout embryo survival in the Flathead River basin. The Flathead Basin Commission, a cooperative program involving private, State, and Federal landowners in the river basin, subsequently determined that streams with spawning gravels having 35 or 40 percent of substrates less than 6.35 millimeter in any given year were "threatened" or "impaired", respectively, in regards to bull trout and western cutthroat trout embryo survival ( Flathead Basin Commission 1991) . The McNeil core sample results from the West Fork are collected using Weaver and Fraley (1991) and are displayed in FIGURE E-2 - MCNEIL CORE SAMPLES FROM THE WEST FORK, 1998 THROUGH 2003 [NOT SURVEYED DURING 1999 AND 2000]) to show the proportion of substrates in the less than 6.35 millimeter size class. All of the sample sets show that the proportion of substrates less than 6.35 millimeters is under the 35 percent threshold for "threatened" status. Embeddedness is generally described as the degree to which fine sediments surround coarse substrates on the streambed surface ( Sylte and Fischenich 2002) . The substrate score is one technique for measuring embeddedness, where higher scores indicate lower embeddedness and typically better juvenile bull trout habitat ( Shepard et al 1984) . A modified substrate score FIGURE E-2 - MCNEIL CORE SAMPLES FROM THE WEST FORK, 1998 THROUGH 2003 (NOT methodology has been employed on the West Fork (Weaver and Fraley- 1991 citing others) from 1994 through 2003 (see FIGURE E-3 - SUBSTRATE SCORE SAMPLES FROM THE WEST FORK, 1994 THROUGH 2003 [NOT SURVEYED DURING 1995 AND 1998]) . The Flathead Basin Commission has subsequently determined that streams with substrate scores of 10 or 9 in any given year were "threatened" or "impaired", respectively, in regards to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout embryo survival and juvenile rearing habitat (Flathead Basin Commission 1991) . All of the sample sets in FIGURE E-3 - SUBSTRATE SCORE SAMPLES FROM FIGURE E-3 - SUBSTRATE SCORE SAMPLES 2003 (NOT SURVEYED DURING 1995 AND 19 WEST FORK SWIFT CREEK, 1994 THROUGH 2003 (NOT SURVEYED DURING 1995 AND 1998) show substrate scores higher than 10, and data also suggests that overall habitat quality as it relates to substrate embeddedness is likely improving over time. The Wolman pebble count ( Wolman 1954) is another method that can be used to describe temporal changes in substrate size classes on the streambed surface. Sample data from 2 collection sites on the West Fork is only available for the year 2001 ( FIGURE E-4 - WOLMAN PEBBLE COUNT RESULTS FROM THE WEST FORK, 2001) . The combined OM WEST FORK SWIFT CREEK, 1994 THROUGH ) FIGURE E-4 - WOLMAN PEBBLE COUNT RESULTS FROM THE WEST FORK , 2001 Wolman Pebble Count results from West Fork Swift Creek (Koopal 2001 ) Appendix E Fisheries Analysis Page E-ll percentage of substrates less than 8 millimeter is 7.5 percent, which is considerably lower than the results calculated for the similar size class in the McNeil core samples (percentage of substrate less than 6.35 millimeters ranges from 31.0 to 33.7 percent). This difference suggests that there could be a greater level of interstitial spaces in the streambed surface gravel and cobble substrates than may be indicated by the McNeil core data . The final assessment of stream sediment processes includes a description of existing streambank stability. Streambank stability is a measure of bank erosion rates per stream length; temporal changes in the rates can be used as one indicator of potential existing impacts to fish habitats. Streambank stability data for the West Fork is only available for the year 2001 ( TABLE E-2 - STREAMBANK STABILITY RESULTS FROM THE WEST FORK (KOOPAL 2001) and includes all stream habitats from the confluence with the East Fork (river mile 0.00) in Section 3, T33N, R23W, upstream through the project area and to a point TABLE E-2 - STREAMBANK STABILITY RESULTS FROM THE WEST FORK (KOOPAL 2001) HABITAT TYPE* TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITS TOTAL LEFT BANK LENGTH (FEET) TOTAL RIGHT BANK LENGTH (FEET) MEAN PERCENT STABLE BANK MEAN PERCENT UNSTABLE BANK MEAN PERCENT UNDERCUT BANK DMV 1 49.0 49 . 0 100 . 00 0 . 00 15.00 DMW 5 215.0 214 . 0 86 . 60 13 .40 0 .70 GLD 2 220 . 0 220 . 0 100 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 HGR 7 831.0 832.0 100 . 00 0 . 00 0.26 LGR 140 29,135 . 0 29,303.0 99.26 0 . 74 1.09 RUN 27 2,714 . 0 2 , 704 . 0 100 .00 0 . 00 2 . 09 SLB 6 178 . 0 178 . 0 100.00 0 .00 2.30 SLM 27 999 . 0 1,003 . 0 100.00 0 . 00 7 . 09 SLW 22 595 . 0 591 . 0 94 . 18 5 . 82 2 . 76 SMB 12 476 . 0 486 . 0 100 . 00 0 .00 2.35 SMW 10 324 . 0 329.0 99.17 0 . 83 6.26 SPB 2 71.0 75 . 0 100 . 00 0 . 00 3 .08 SPW 38 1, 016 . 0 1,011 . 0 97 . 83 2 . 17 5 . 01 STP 4 315 . 0 304 . 0 100 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 SUW 12 402 . 0 408 . 0 99.36 0 . 64 10 . 80 Totals 315 37,540. 0 37,707 . 0 Mean 99 . 19 0 .81 1 . 61 *DMV = main channel dammed pool caused by beaver DMW = main channel dammed pool caused by large woody debris GLD = glide, "HGR" = high gradient riffle LGR = low gradient riffle RUN = run SLB = lateral scour pool formed by boulder SLM = lateral scour pool formed by meander SLW = lateral scour pool formed by large woody debris SMB = mid-channel scour pool formed by boulder SMW = mid- channel scour pool formed by large woody debris SPB = plunge pool formed by boulder SPW = plunge pool formed by large woody debris STP = step -pool SUW = underscour pool formed by large woody debris Page E-12 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS (river mile 7.13) in Section 12, T34N, R24W. The protocol used for collecting the streambank stability data is outlined in Overton et al (1997). Overall, the results of this data set show very high levels (99.19 percent) of streambank stability throughout the project area. McNeil core data indicates that the substrates of known spawning reaches are not "threatened"; substrate scores describing streambed substrate embeddedness also indicate that known spawning reaches are not "threatened", and Wolman pebble counts suggest that there are high levels of streambed substrates in the gravel, cobble, and boulder classes. Additionally, a recent streambank-stability assessment shows very low levels of potential streambank erosion. Based on these observations, there are no existing direct and indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat as a result of sediment in the West Fork. • Channel Forms Two descriptions of channel formation will also be used to describe existing bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat in the West Fork: Montgomery/Buffington classification ( Montgomery and Buffington 199 7) and R1/R4 Fish Habitat Standard Inventory ( Overton et al 1997) . The stream formations of the West Fork, from the confluence with the East Fork (river mile 0.00) in Section 3, T33N, R23W, upstream through the project area and to a point (river mile 7.13) in Section 12, T34N, R24W, are broadly described as exhibiting both 'pool-riffle' and 'forced pool-riffle' Montgomery/Buf f ington classifications. The 'forced pool-riffle' channel form is generally a function of large- woody-debris recruitment to the bankfull area of the stream, and both channel forms typically have pool frequencies of 1:5 to 1:7, where the later ratio is channel width ( Montgomery and Buffington 1997) . The R1/R4 Fish Habitat Standard Inventory is a useful protocol for describing existing conditions and tracking temporal changes in the relative proportions of different stream microhabitats used by bull trout, westslope cutthroat trout, and other native fisheries. Inventory data for the West Fork is only available for the year 2001 ( TABLE E-3 - R1/R4 FISH HABITAT STANDARD INVENTORY RESULTS FROM THE WEST FORK [KOOPAL 2001] ) and includes all stream habitats from the confluence with the East Fork (river mile 0.00) in Section 3, T33N, R23W, upstream through the project area and to a point (river mile 7.13) in Section 12, T34N, R24W . The R1/R4 Fish Habitat Standard Inventory data from 2001 indicates that 56 percent of all channel forms are nonpool features (GLD , HGR , LGR, RUN) , and the remaining 44 percent of all channel forms are pool features . The relative numbers of nonpool and pool channel forms are roughly equivalent to the mean quantity of habitat area, which is 53 and 47 percent, respectively. On the contrary, the mean quantity of habitat volume in the West Fork is 43 percent for nonpool features and 57 percent for pool features. Increasing amounts of different pool habitats are typically proportional to increasing levels of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout stream-habitat quality. As B morphological type streams are Appendix E Fisheries Analysis Page E-13 TABLE E-3 - R1/R4 FISH HABITAT STANDARD INVENTORY RESULTS FROM THE WEST FORK SWIFT CREEK (KOOPAL 2001) HABITAT TYPE* TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITS MEAN HABITAT LENGTH (FEET) MEAN WIDTH (FEET) MEAN HABITAT DEPTH (FEET) MEAN WIDTH/DEPTH RATIO MEAN HABITAT AREA (SQUARE FEET) MEAN HABITAT VOLUME (CUBIC FEET) DMV 1 49.0 19.5 0.68 28.68 955.5 649 . 7 DMW 5 41.4 18 . 7 0 . 76 24 . 90 772 . 2 586 . 0 GLD 2 110.0 13 . 7 0 . 52 32.55 1,509.0 777 . 6 HGR 7 118.4 14 . 1 0.54 27 . 91 1,669.2 894.5 LGR 140 208.0 17.2 0.52 35.94 3,568.7 1,873.5 RUN 27 107.5 17.1 0.65 29.37 1,838. 0 1,194.2 SLB 6 29.3 16.4 0.79 20.91 479.7 377.8 SLM 27 36.5 16.0 0.83 21.07 584.7 483.6 SLW 22 26.0 17.9 0 . 84 24.45 465.6 393.3 SMB 12 39.6 17.8 0.77 24 . 17 702.6 539.0 SMW 10 31.8 19.5 0.72 29.70 620.6 447.4 SPB 2 35.5 12 . 6 0.76 16.62 446 . 8 340.2 SPW 38 26 . 1 18 . 1 0 . 89 22.56 471.8 418 . 6 STP 4 75.3 19.2 1 . 01 19 . 71 1,446 . 1 1,455 . 7 SUW 12 33.1 20.3 0.86 25.26 671.0 575.1 Total 315 Mean 119.4 17.1 0.57 33.70 2,047.5 1,175.1 *DMV = wain channel damwed pool caused by beaver DMW = wain channel dammed pool caused by large woody debris GLD = glide HGR = high gradient riffle LGR = low gradient riffle RUN = run SLB = lateral scour pool formed by boulder SLM = lateral scour pool forwed by weander SLW = lateral scour pool formed by large woody debris SMB = wid-channel scour pool formed by boulder SMW = mid-channel scour pool formed by large woody debris SPB = plunge pool forwed by boulder SPW = plunge pool forwed by large woody debris STP = step -pool SUW = underscour pool formed by large woody debris generally riffle dominated ( Rosgen 1996) , this data indicates that the West Fork likely provides an average quantity of pool habitat within the project area. No specific conclusions regarding trends in channel form can be drawn from thebe current observations, but this data will be indispensable in future habitat assessment and monitoring efforts. Although insufficient data is available for describing existing trends in channel forms, likely there are no existing direct and indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat as a result of channel formations in the West Fork. • Large Woody Debris Large woody debris is recruited to the stream channel from adjacent and upstream riparian vegetation, and the material is a critical component in the formation of complex bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat. All life stages of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout have been observed closely associated with Page E-14 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS TABLE E-4 - LARGE -WOODY -DEBRIS COUNT RESULTS FROM THE WEST FORK ( KOOPAL 2001) TOTAL NUMBER OF SINGLE PIECES AGGREGATES ROOT WADS HABITAT TYPE* TOTAL MEAN NUMBER PER TOTAL MEAN NUMBER PER NUMBER OF PIECES TOTAL MEAN NUMBER PER UNITS NUMBER NUMBER 100 FEET NUMBER NUMBER 100 FEET NUMBER NUMBER 100 FEET DMV 1 1 1 . 0 2 . 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 DMW 5 1 0.2 0.5 6 1.2 2 . 9 47 0 0.0 0.0 GLD 2 2 1 . 0 0.9 0 0 . 0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0 . 0 HGR 7 12 1 . 7 1.4 6 0 . 9 0.7 16 0 0.0 0.0 LGR 140 368 2.6 1.3 223 1.6 0.8 707 14 0 . 1 0.0 RUN 27 33 1.2 1 . 1 25 0.9 0.9 77 1 0.0 0.0 SLB 6 5 0 . 8 2 . 8 2 0.3 1.1 10 0 0.0 0.0 SLM 27 24 0 . 9 2.4 10 0.4 1.0 41 6 0.2 0.6 SLW 22 3 0.1 0.5 20 0 . 9 3.5 94 2 0.1 0.3 SMB 12 11 0.9 2.3 8 0.7 1.7 32 1 0 . 1 0.2 SMW 10 2 0.2 0.6 10 1.0 3 . 1 59 1 0.1 0.3 SPB 2 2 1.0 2 . 8 2 1 . 0 2 . 8 7 0 0.0 0.0 SPW 38 23 0 . 6 2.3 29 0 . 8 2.9 161 0 0.0 0.0 STP 4 3 0 . 8 1 . 0 5 1.3 1.7 58 0 0 . 0 0.0 SUW 12 6 0.5 1.5 13 1 . 1 3.3 51 1 0 . 1 0.3 Totals 315 496 359 1,360 26 Mean 1 . 6 1.3 1 . 1 1 . 0 0 . 1 0 . 1 *DM = wain channel dammed pool caused by beaver DMW = main channel dammed pool caused by large woody debris GLD = glide HGR = high gradient riffle LGR = low gradient riffle RUN = run SLB = lateral scour pool formed by boulder SIM = lateral scour pool formed by meander SLW = lateral scour pool formed by large woody debris SMB = mid-channel scour pool formed by boulder SMW = mid-channel scour pool formed by large woody debris SPB = plunge pool formed by boulder SPW = plunge pool formed by large woody debris STP = step-pool SUW = underscour pool formed by large woody debris large woody debris in the Flathead River basin ( Platt 1984, Shepard et al 1984 ) . Large woody debris recruitment rates to the West Fork throughout the project area can be described using large-woody- debris counts per stream length; this data was collected during 2001 as part a R1/R4 Fish Habitat Standard Inventory ( Overton et al 1997) . (See TABLE E-4 - LARGE -WOODY -DEBRIS COUNT RESULTS FROM THE WEST FORK [KOOPAL 2001]). Large-woody- debris counts for the West Fork include all stream habitats from the confluence with the East Fork (river mile 0.00) in Section 3, T33N, R23W, upstream through the project area and to a point (river mile 7.13) in Section 12, T34N, R24W. The mean large-woody-debris count per 1,000 feet is calculated by dividing the sum of the total number of single pieces, the number of pieces in each aggregate, and the total number of root wads by the total length of all main-channel habitat units (37,612.0 feet) surveyed during the inventory. The mean large-woody-debris count per 1,000 feet in the West Fork is 50 pieces per 1,000 feet . Appendix E Fisheries Analysis Page E-15 Data from reference reaches ( Harrelson et al 1994) in the Flathead River Basin region indicate that the average amount of large woody debris in undisturbed 'B' channel types (Rosgen morphological stream type) is 123 pieces per 1,000 feet plus or minus 57 percent (Bower 2004) . This data suggests that existing amounts of large woody debris in the West Fork are below average when compared to reference reaches in the region with similar morphological characteristics. Moderate levels of riparian harvests have occurred on the West Fork during the 1950s. These riparian harvests primarily involved the individual selection of larger diameter trees in the riparian zone throughout the existing project area and did not include clearcut methods in the riparian zone. This past individual - tree-selection harvest method likely reduced the amount of potentially recruitable large woody debris to the West Fork and could be associated with existing below-average amounts of large woody debris in the stream. Consequently, there is a low to moderate existing direct and indirect impact to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat as a result of low levels of large - woody-debris recruitment in the West Fork. • Riparian Zone The stream riparian area is broadly defined as the interface or linkage between t;he terrestrial and aquatic zones, and this area is critical for regulating large-woody-debris recruitment, thermal regimes, stream nutrient inputs, and water quality among other variables (Hansen et al 1995) . This section will consider how riparian-zone function, in particular, is related to the potential for large-woody-debris recruitment. Studies of large- woody-debris recruitment to the stream channel suggest that the primary zone of recruitment is approximately equal to the height of the tallest trees growing in the riparian zone (Robinson and Beschta 1990, Bilby and Bisson 1998) . The site-potential tree height at 100 years is used to estimate the extent of the primary zone of large-woody-debris recruitment for riparian areas adjacent to proposed harvest areas. Calculations of the site-potential tree height for riparian zones adjacent to various proposed harvest areas are displayed in TABLE E-5 - CALCULATIONS OF SITE POTENTIAL TREE HEIGHT AT 100 YEARS*. As described in the previous section. Large Woody Debris, past individual-selection harvesting has likely reduced the amount of potentially recruitable large woody debris to the West Fork. This selective harvest is known to have occurred within those riparian zones delineated by the mean site-potential tree height at 100 years in TABLE E-5 - CALCULATIONS OF SITE -POTENTIAL TREE HEIGHT AT 100 YEARS*. Consequently, there are low to moderate existing direct and indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat as a result of riparian- zone function in the West Fork. Page E-16 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS TABLE E-5 - CALCULATIONS OF SITE POTENTIAL TREE HEIGHT AT 100 YEARS* AREA ADJACENT STREAM SAMPLE SPECIES HEIGHT (FEET) AGE (YEARS) SITE INDE X SITE- POTENTIAL TREE HEIGHT AT 100 YEARS (FEET) MEAN SITE- POTENTIAL TREE HEIGHT AT 100 YEARS (FEET) REFERENCE II -H West Fork 1A-1 Englemann spruce 68 75 50 75 USFS INT-42 II-H West Fork IB- 1 Englemann spruce 115 158 70 103 USFS INT-42 II-H West Fork IB-2 Englemann spruce 98 138 60 88 USFS INT-42 II-H West Fork 2 A- 1 Subalpine fir 84 70 40 110 USFS RN-71 II-H West Fork 2 A- 2 Englemann spruce 98 126 60 88 USFS INT-42 II-H West Fork - ' ' ’ ' 93 II -G West Fork 3A- 1 Subalpine fir 48 65 30 91 USFS RN-71 II -G West Fork 3B-1 Englemann spruce 65 100 40 63 USFS INT-42 II -G West Fork 3C-1 Englemann spruce 49 40 60 88 ■ / USFS INT-42 II-G West Fork 3D- 1 Subalpine fir 71 105 30 91 » USFS RN-71 II -G West Fork 83 II-P West Fork 5 A- 1 Subalpine fir 57 58 30 91 USFS RN-71 II-P West Fork 5A-2 Englemann spruce 80 154 50 75 USFS INT-42 II-P West Fork 5B- 1 Subalpine fir 38 33 40 110 USFS RN-71 II-P West Fork 5C-1 Englemann spruce 57 44 60 88 USFS INT-42 II-P West Fork 5C-2 Subalpine fir 75 112 30 91 USFS RN-71 II-P West Fork 91 II-C West Fork 7A- 1 Subalpine fir 61 85 30 91 USFS RN-71 II-C West Fork 7A-2 Englemann spruce 58 60 50 75 USFS INT-42 II-C West Fork 7B- 1 Englemann spruce 58 63 50 75 1 ■ USFS INT-42 II-C West Fork 7B-2 Englemann spruce 80 105 50 75 USFS INT-42 II-C West Fork 7C-1 Subalpine fir 37 50 30 91 USFS RN-71 II-C West Fork 81 *Samples were taken by DNRC personnel on 3/3/2004 and 3/4/2004 . Samples were taken from random trees with unimpeded growth at a distance of 50 feet from the bank- full slope break. Appendix E Fisheries Analysis Page E-17 • Stream Temperature Stream temperature data for the West Fork, available for only 2001 and 2003, is displayed in TABLE E-6 - STREAM TEMPERATURE DATA (CELCIUS) FOR THE WEST FORK*. The 'upper' recording station is located in the northwest quarter of Section 29, T34N, R23W, and the 'lower' recording station is located in the southwest quarter of Section 34, T34N, R23W . Data indicates that the annual mean weekly maximum temperature at the upper recording station is relatively stable (11.3 degrees Celsius during 2001 and 2003.) Data also indicates that the mean weekly maximum temperature at the lower recording station is more variable than the upper station (11.6 to 13.2 degrees Celsius during 2001 and 2003) . During the 2 seasons of record, the average change in stream temperature through the lower half of the project area ranged from 0.3 to 1.9 degrees Celsius. In respect to bull trout, the temperature ranges described in TABLE D-6 - STREAM TEMPERATURE DATA (CELCIUS) FOR THE WEST FORK* are at the upper end of the species' tolerances as observed in various studies . Fraley and Shepard (1989) rarely observed juvenile bull trout in streams exceeding 15 degrees Celsius. Garnett (2002) did not find bull trout where maximum stream temperatures exceeded 20 degrees Celsius. Reiman and Chandler (1999) found that bull trout are most frequently observed in streams having summer maximum temperatures of approximately 13 to 14 degrees Celsius . No specific conclusions regarding stream temperature trends in the West Fork can be drawn from these current observations, but this data will be indispensable in future habitat assessment and monitoring efforts. Although insufficient data is available for describing existing trends in stream temperature, no existing direct and indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat are likely as a result of stream temperature in the West Fork. • Connectivity Currently, 2 bridge crossings of the West Fork are in the project area in Sections 29 and 34, T34N, R23W. These crossings provide full passage of all life stages of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout. No naturally occurring or manmade barriers to either trout exist on the West Fork in the project area . TABLE E-6 - STREAM TEMPERATURE DATA (CELCIUS) FOR THE WEST FORK* SITE NAME SEASONAL MAXIMUM SEASONAL MAXIMUM CHANGE IN TEMPERATURE 7 -DAY AVERAGES DAYS GREATER THAN 10.0 CELSIUS DAYS GREATER THAN 15.0 CELSIUS DATE VALUE DATE VALUE DATE MAXIMUM West Fork 2001 - Upper 08/07/01 11. 8\ 07/07/01 6.4 08/09/01 11.3 36 0 West Fork 2001 - Lower 08/07/01 14.1 08/06/01 8.2 08/09/01 13.2 61 0 West Fork 2003 - Upper 07/23/03 11.7 07/18/03 5 . 9 07/22/03 11.3 35 0 West Fork 2003 - Lower 07/23/03 12 . 1 07/18/03 6.0 07/21/03 11.6 40 0 * Samples obtained by DNRC hydrologists using Stowaway ('Onset Corporation) data loggt ?rs. Page E 18 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS There are no existing direct and indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat as a result of disconnectivity on the West Fork. Summary of West Fork Existing Conditions The entire West Fork watershed, including subbasins, has undergone extensive, but irregular timber harvesting through much of the past century, up to approximately 20 years ago. Existing, nonspecific pressures on bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout may include past upland or riparian timber harvesting and secondary road construction. The potential existing impacts from these past events may include increased sedimentation, increased peak flows, modifications of the hydrograph, and reduced large - woody-debris recruitment and channel stability ( Montana Bull Trout Scientific Group 1995, USFWS 2002b ) . In the West Fork, an estimated 3 percent increase in the flow regime may be resulting in a modified hydrograph, and reduced large-woody-debris recruitment has been observed. Moderate levels of riparian harvests have occurred on the West Fork during the 1950s. This riparian harvest primarily involved the individual selection of larger diameter trees in the riparian zone throughout the existing project area and did not include clearcut methods in the riparian zone. This past individual-selection harvest method likely reduced the amount of potentially recruitable large woody debris to the West Fork and could be associated with the existing below-average amounts of large woody debris in the stream (see West Fork Bull Trout and Westslope Cutthroat Trout Habitat - Large Woody Debris) . This riparian canopy removal may also have led to temporarily increased stream temperatures as a result of increased incoming direct solar energy, but to accurately qualify the extent of this potential past impact is not possible. Nonetheless, this specific pattern of past riparian management collectively constitutes low past and present impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout in the West Fork. No data is available regarding recreational fishing pressure on bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout in the West Fork (MFISH 2004); therefore, these potential past and present impacts are likely very low. The existing road system in the project area has been assessed for specific sources of sedimentation to streams in the West Fork watershed. Estimates indicate that approximately 25.5 tons per year of road material (sediment) are contributed to streams in the West Fork watershed by the existing road system (see APPENDIX C - WATERSHED AND HYDROLOGY ANALYSIS) . Overall, low to moderate collective past and present impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout are likely in the West Fork as a result of the existing conditions described above. > STRYKER. CREEK Stryker Creek is a third-order stream and the entire reach within the project area is considered fish bearing. Stryker Creek Bull Trout and Westslope Cutthroat Trout Populations • Presence Very little fisheries data is available for Stryker Creek and no known fisheries surveys have been conducted on the creek. Although this subbasin is not typically utilized by bull trout Appendix E Fisheries Analysis Page E-19 as spawning habitat for disjunct populations associated with Whitefish and Upper Whitefish lakes, a possibility exists that the lower reaches of the stream are utilized as short-term rearing habitat by juvenile bull trout that later become adfluvial or fluvial life forms. Also, the lower reaches of the stream could possibly be utilized to some degree by resident bull trout. Westslope cutthroat trout are known to exist in Stryker Creek; however, the degree to which westslope cutthroat trout utilize the stream is not well studied. Stryker Creek most certainly provides some level of spawning and rearing habitat to resident westslope cutthroat trout and, possibly, adfluvial and fluvial life forms associated with Whitefish and Upper Whitefish lakes. Due to the lack of historic and comparable population-presence data, there are no apparent existing direct and indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout population presence in Stryker Creek. • Genetics Information regarding the existing conditions of bull trout genetics in Stryker Creek is the same as that for the West Fork - see West Fork Bull Trout and Western Cutthroat Trout Populations - Genetics) . Site-specific information from DFWP regarding westslope cutthroat trout genetics in Stryker Creek is unavailable. A DFWP genetic survey in 1984 of 26 westslope cutthroat trout from the West Fork found the subspecies slightly introgressed with rainbow trout. The genetic purity of westslope cutthroat trout was determined at that time to be 97.4 percent ( MFISH 2004) . A possibility exists that genetic introgression among individual westslope cutthroat trout from the West Fork has spread upstream into Stryker Creek. Conversely, there is the possibility of a remnant population of westslope cutthroat trout in the upstream reaches of Stryker Creek that may be genetically pure. Due to the possibility of bull trout and brook trout hybridization and the occurrence of introgressed westslope cutthroat trout, existing low to moderate direct and indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout population genetics in Stryker Creek are possible. Stryker Creek Bull Trout and Westslope Cutthroat Trout Habitat • Flow Regime Flow regime is the range of discharge frequencies and intensities in a specific watershed that occur throughout the year. The analysis of hydrologic data for the Stryker Creek subbasin indicates that the existing average flow regime for the stream is approximately 3 . 3 percent above the range of naturally occurring conditions, which is primarily a result of past forest crown removal. The range of naturally occurring conditions is considered representative of those flow regimes in a fully forested, mature (20 to 30 years old) watershed . Changes in flow regime can affect bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout through modifications of stream morphology, sediment budget, streambank stability, stream temperature ranges, and channel formations. There is likely no detectable existing impact on these specific habitat Page E-20 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS characteristics as a result of the estimated 3.3 percent increase in flow regime. Changes in flow regime have been know to affect bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout spawning migration, habitat available for spawning, and embryo survival; for this reason there is a very low potential for direct and indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout as a result of flow-regime modifications in Stryker Creek. • Sediment Field surveys of Stryker Creek within the project area have found the Rosgen stream morphological type to be B3 ; this is characteristic of cobble-dominated channels with lesser amounts of gravels, boulders, and sands ( Rosgen 1996 ) . Stream gradients range primarily from 4 to 6 percent. Pfankuch (1978) stream- stability scores from reaches within the project area range from 73 to 76, which is considered fair for B3 stream types . Based on these observations, existing direct and indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat are not likely as a result of sediment in Stryker Creek . • Channel Forms Descriptions of channel formation that can be used to describe existing bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat in Stryker Creek are the Montgomery /Buf f ing ton classification ( Montgomery and Buffington 1997) and R1/R4 Fish Habitat Standard Inventory ( Overton et al 1997) . The stream formations of Stryker Creek, from the confluence with the West Fork (river mile 0.00) in Section 29, T34N, R23W, upstream through the project area and to a point (river mile 1.45) in Section 19, T34N, R24W, is broadly described as a transitional zone between 'forced pool-riffle' and 'plane- bed' classifications to 'forced step-pool' and 'step-pool' classifications, respectively. The 'forced pool-riffle' and 'forced step-pool' channel forms are generally a function of large-woody-debris recruitment to the bankfull area of the stream. The 'forced pool- riffle' channel form typically has pool frequencies of 1:5 to 1:7, where the later ratio is channel width, and gradients less than 3 percent ( Montgomery and Buffington 1997) . Both 'step-pool' channel forms typically have pool frequencies of 1:1 to 1:4, where the later ratio is channel width, and gradients of 3 to 8 percent ( Montgomery and Buffington 1997) . The 'plane bed' channel form typically does not have pools and generally occurs in gradients of 1 to 4 percent ( Montgomery and Buffington 1997) . R1/R4 Fish Habitat Standard Inventory (Overton et al 1997) is not available for Stryker Creek within the project area. Although insufficient data is available for describing existing trends in channel forms, no existing direct and indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat are likely as a result of channel formations in Stryker Creek . • Large Woody Debris Large woody debris is recruited to the stream channel from adjacent and upstream riparian vegetation; this material is a critical component in the formation of complex bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout Appendix E Fisheries Analysis Page E-21 habitat. All life stages of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout have been observed closely associating with large woody debris in the Flathead River basin ( Platt 1984, Shepard et al 1984) . Large-woody-debris recruitment rates to Stryker Creek throughout the project area can be described using large-woody- debris counts per stream length; this data was collected during a survey in June 2004 using the protocol described in Overton et al 1997. Two separate 1,000- foot, large-woody-debris survey sections were located on Stryker Creek adjacent to proposed Harvest Area II -P; the mean large-woody-debris count per 1,000 feet in Stryker Creek was determined to be 131 pieces. Data from reference reaches (Harrelson et al 1994) in the Flathead River basin region indicate that the average amount of large woody debris in undisturbed 'B' channel types ( Rosgen morphological stream type) is 123 pieces per 1,000 feet, plus or minus 57 percent (Bower 2004 ) . This data suggests that existing amounts of large woody debris in Stryker Creek are average when compared to reference reaches in the region with similar morphological characteristics. Consequently, there are no direct and indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat as a result of large-woody-debris recruitment in Stryker Creek. • Riparian Zone Proposed Harvest Area II-P is the only area immediately adjacent to Stryker Creek. The site-potential tree height in the riparian zone of this proposed harvest area was calculated for the West Fork. The watershed proximity and the similarity of stand types and growth conditions is sufficient enough that the site-potential tree-height values for the West Fork can be applied to Stryker Creek within proposed Harvest Area II-P. Therefore, the site- potential tree height at 100 years for this riparian zone is determined to be 91 feet ( TABLE E-5 - CALCULATIONS OF SITE- POTENTIAL TREE HEIGHT AT 100 YEARS*) . There are no existing direct and indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat as a result of riparian- zone function adjacent to Stryker Creek. • Stream Temperature Stream-temperature data is not available for Stryker Creek within the project area. Although Stryker Creek is quite similar to the West Fork in respect to many environmental conditions, stream temperature conditions and data generally can be moderately variable between subbasins. Although sufficient data is unavailable for describing existing trends in stream temperature, no existing direct and indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat are likely as a result of stream temperature in Stryker Creek. • Connectivity Currently, 1 bridge crosses Stryker Creek in the northeast quarter of Section 30, T34N, R23W, of the project area. Although this bridge is a failing native-material structure, this crossing provides full passage of all life stages of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout. No naturally occurring or manmade barriers to bull trout or westslope cutthroat trout are on Page E-22 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS Stryker Creek in the project area . There are no existing direct and indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat as a result of disconnectivity on Stryker Creek. Summary of Stryker Creek Existing Conditions The entire Stryker Creek watershed has undergone extensive, but irregular timber harvesting through much of the past century, up to approximately 20 years ago. Existing, nonspecific pressures on bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout may include past upland or riparian timber harvesting and secondary road construction. The potential existing impacts from these past events may include increased sedimentation, increased peak flows, modifications of the hydrograph, and reduced large - woody-debris recruitment and channel stability ( Montana Bull Trout Scientific Group 1995, USFWS 2002b) . In Stryker Creek, an estimated 3.3 percent increase in the flow regime may be resulting in a modified hydrograph. No data is available regarding recreational fishing pressure on bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout in Stryker Creek ( MFISH 2004); therefore, these potential past and present impacts are likely very low. The existing road system in the project area has been assessed for specific sources of sedimentation to streams in the Stryker Creek watershed. Estimates indicate that approximately 2 . 8 tons per year of road material (sediment) are contributed to streams in the Stryker Creek watershed by the existing road system (see APPENDIX C - WATERSHED AND HYDROLOGY ANALYSIS) . Overall, low collective past and present impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout are likely in Stryker Creek as a result of the existing conditions described above. > JOHNSON CREEK Johnson Creek is a third-order stream and the entire reach within the project area is considered fish bearing. A variable portion of the lower reach immediately above the confluence with the West Fork exhibits discontinuous, subterrain flows during low-flow periods of the year. Johnson Creek Bull Trout and Westslope Cutthroat Trout Populations • Presence Limited fisheries data is available for Johnson Creek, and no known fisheries population surveys have been conducted on the stream. Although this subbasin is not likely utilized by bull trout as spawning habitat for disjunct populations associated with Whitefish and Upper Whitefish lakes, the lower perennial reaches of the stream are possibly utilized as short- term rearing habitat by juvenile bull trout that later become adfluvial or fluvial life forms. Also, the lower perennial reaches of the stream could possibly be utilized to some degree by resident bull trout. Westslope cutthroat trout are known to exist in Johnson Creek; however, the degree to which westslope cutthroat trout utilize the stream is not well studied. Johnson Creek most certainly provides some level of spawning and rearing habitat to resident westslope cutthroat trout and possibly adfluvial and fluvial life forms associated with Whitefish and Upper Whitefish lakes. Due to the lack of historic and comparable population-presence data, there are no apparent existing direct and indirect Appendix E Fisheries Analysis Page E-23 impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout population presence in Johnson Creek. • Genetics Information regarding the existing conditions of bull trout genetics in Johnson Creek is the same as that for the West Fork (see West Fork Bull Trout and Westslope Cutthroat Trout Populations - Genetics ) . A 1992 DFWP genetic survey of 52 westslope cutthroat trout from Johnson Creek (river mile 1.2 to 1.3) found the subspecies slightly introgressed with Yellowstone cutthroat trout. The genetic purity of westslope cutthroat trout was determined at that time to be 98.9 percent (MFISH 2004) . A later (1998) DFWP genetic survey of 3 westslope cutthroat trout from an upstream reach of Johnson Creek (river mile 2.0 to 2.1) found samples to be genetically pure. The possibility exists that the genetic introgression that has occurred among the westslope cutthroat trout population within the reach of river mile 1.2 to 1.3 has since spread further upstream into Johnson Creek. Conversely, the possibility also exists that the population representing genetically pure specimens of westslope cutthroat trout in upstream reaches of Johnson Creek may remain genetically isolated . Due to the possibility of bull trout and brook trout hybridization and the known occurrence of introgressed westslope cutthroat trout, there are possible existing low to moderate direct and indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout population genetics in Johnson Creek . Johnson Creek Bull Trout and Westslope Cutthroat Trout Habitat • Flow Regime Flow regime is the range of discharge frequencies and intensities in a specific watershed that occur throughout the year. The analysis of hydrologic data for the Johnson Creek subbasin indicates that the existing average flow regime for the stream is approximately 3 . 5 percent above the range of naturally occurring conditions (see APPENDIX C - WATERSHED AND HYDROLOGY ANALYSIS) , which is primarily a result of past forest crown removal. The range of naturally occurring conditions is considered representative of those flow regimes in a fully forested, mature (20 to 30 years old) watershed . Changes in flow regime can affect bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout through modifications of stream morphology, sediment budget, streambank stability, stream temperature ranges, and channel formations. There is likely no detectable existing impact on these specific habitat characteristics as a result of the estimated 3 . 5 percent increase in flow regime. Changes in flow regime have been known to affect bull trout and westslope cutthroat spawning migration, habitat available for spawning, and embryo survival; for this reason, there is a very low potential for direct and indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout as a result of flow regime modifications in Johnson Creek. • Sediment Field surveys of the reach of Johnson Creek adjacent to proposed Harvest Area II-C and within the project area have Page E-24 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS found the overall Rosgen stream morphological type to be B4 ; this is characteristic of gravel-dominated channels, with lesser amounts of cobbles, boulders, and sands ( Rosgen 1996) . The stream gradient in this reach is approximately 3 percent. The Pfankuch (1978) stream stability score for this reach is 79, which is considered fair for B4 stream types. Based on these observations, no existing direct and indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat are likely as a result of sediment in Johnson Creek. • Channel Forms Descriptions of channel formation that can be used to describe existing bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat in Johnson Creek are the Mon tgomery/Buf f ington classification (Montgomery and Buffington 1997) and R1/R4 Fish Habitat Standard Inventory ( Overton et al 1997) . The stream formations of Johnson Creek, from the confluence with the West Fork (river mile 0.00) in Section 3, T33N, R23W, upstream through the project area and to a point (river mile 1.46) in the southwest quarter of Section 32, T34N, R23W, is broadly described as exhibiting both 'pool-riffle' and 'forced pool -riff le ’ Montgomery/Buffington classifications. The 'forced pool-riffle' channel form is generally a function of large- woody-debris recruitment to the bankfull area of the stream, and both channel forms typically have pool frequencies of 1:5 to 1:7, where the later ratio is channel width (Montgomery and Buffington 1997) . The stream formations of Johnson Creek, from river mile 1.46 upstream through the project area and to a point (river mile 3.05) in Section 31, T34N, R23W, is broadly described as exhibiting 'step-pool', 'forced step-pool', and some 'cascade' Mon tgomery/Buf f ington classifications. Both 'step- pool' and 'forced step-pool' channel forms typically have pool frequencies of 1:1 to 1:4, where the later ratio is channel width, and gradients of 3 to 8 percent (Montgomery and Buffington 1997) . The 'cascade' channel form typically has pool frequencies of 1:<1, where the later ratio is channel width, and gradients of 4 to 20 percent (Montgomery and Buffington 1997) . R1/R4 Fish Habitat Standard Inventory (Overton et al 1997) is not available for Johnson Creek within the project area. Although sufficient data is unavailable for describing existing trends in channel forms, no existing direct and indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat are likely as a result of channel formations in Johnson Creek . • Large Woody Debris Large -woody-debris count data is not available for Johnson Creek within the project area. Although Johnson Creek is a lower-order tributary to the West Fork, existing large-woody- debris counts within the project area are likely quite similar to those in the West Fork. This is probably attributed to watershed proximity, similar stand types and growth conditions, and similar soil and geologic conditions . Therefore, although sufficient data is unavailable to specifically describe existing conditions of large woody debris in Johnson Creek, low to Appendix E Fisheries Analysis Page E-25 moderate existing direct and indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat are likely as a result of the low levels of large- woody-debris recruitment. • Riparian Zone Proposed Harvest Area II-C is the only area immediately adjacent to Johnson Creek. Specific calculations of the site-potential tree height in the riparian zone adjacent to this proposed harvest area are not available. However, the site-potential tree height in the riparian zone of this proposed harvest area was calculated for the West Fork. There is sufficient watershed proximity and similarity of stand types and growth conditions that the site- potential tree-height values for the West Fork can be applied to Johnson Creek within proposed Harvest Area II-C. Therefore, the site-potential tree height at 100 years for this riparian zone is determined to be 81 feet (TABLE E-5 - CALCULATIONS OF SITE -POTENTIAL TREE HEIGHT AT 100 YEARS*) . There are likely no existing direct and indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat as a result of riparian-zone function adjacent to Johnson Creek. • Stream Temperature Stream- temperature data is not available for Johnson Creek within the project area. Although Johnson Creek is quite similar to the West Fork in respect to many environmental conditions, stream temperature conditions and data generally can be moderately variable between subbasins. Although insufficient data is available for describing existing trends in stream temperature, no existing direct and indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat are likely as a result of stream temperature in Johnson Creek. • Connectivity Currently 1 culvert crossing and 3 bridge crossings exist on Johnson Creek in the project area. The culvert is located in the southeast quarter of Section 33, T34N, R23W, and the bridges are located in the southeast quarter of Section 32, the southwest quarter of Section 32, and the southeast quarter of Section 31, all in T32N, R23W. The 3 bridge crossings provide full passage of all life stages of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout. A variable portion of the lower reach immediately above the confluence with the West Fork exhibits discontinuous, subterrain flows during low-flow periods of the year. With discontinuous flow, this reach acts as a naturally occurring seasonal barrier to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout migration. Bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout passage through this reach is most likely possible only during runoff or other bankfull flow events . The culvert on Johnson Creek within the project area is located on the lower reach with discontinuous flow. This culvert was surveyed during 2003 as part of the DNRC Fish Passage Assessment Project; information collected during that survey was used to model seasonal low and high flows, along with juvenile and adult cutthroat trout passage through the structure using FishXing software {1999) . The results of those modeling efforts indicate that the culvert is an upstream migration Page E-26 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS barrier to juveniles and most adult westslope cutthroat trout. Only those adults capable of attaining burst swim speeds of 9.75 feet per second for 7.5 seconds are likely able to migrate upstream through the culvert during low to bankfull flows. These results are likely representative of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout swim performances and suggest that only a portion of the strongest swimming adults are able to migrate upstream through the structure . Due to very limited upstream migration potential through the culvert located in the lower reach with seasonal, discontinuous flow, there is a moderate existing direct and indirect impact to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat as a result of disconnectivity on Johnson Creek . Johnson Creek Existing Cumulative Impacts The entire Johnson Creek watershed has undergone extensive, but irregular, timber harvesting through much of the past century, up to approximately 2 0 years ago. Existing, nonspecific pressures on bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout may include past upland or riparian timber harvesting and secondary road construction. The potential existing impacts from these past events may include increased sedimentation, increased peak flows, modifications of the hydrograph, and reduced large - woody-debris recruitment and channel stability ( Montana Bull Trout Scientific Group 1995, USFWS 2002b) . Moderate levels of riparian harvesting have occurred on Johnson Creek during the previous harvest period described above . This riparian harvest primarily involved the individual selection of larger-diameter trees in the riparian zone throughout the existing project area and did not include clearcut methods in the riparian zone. This past individual -tree -selection harvest method likely reduced the amount of potentially recruitable large woody debris to Johnson Creek and could be associated with possible below- average amounts of large woody debris in the stream (see West Fork Bull Trout and Westslope Cutthroat Trout Habitat - Large Woody Debris under Stryker Creek) . This riparian canopy removal may also have led to temporarily increased stream temperatures as a result of increased incoming direct solar energy, but to accurately qualify the extent of this potential past impact is not possible. Nonetheless, this specific pattern of past riparian management collectively constitutes low past and present impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout in Johnson Creek. No data is available regarding recreational fishing pressure on bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout in Johnson Creek ( MFISH 2004); therefore, potential past and present impacts are likely very low . The existing road system in the project area has been assessed for specific sources of sedimentation to streams in the Johnson Creek watershed. Estimates indicate that approximately 5.2 tons per year of road material (sediment) are contributed to streams in the Johnson Creek watershed by the existing road system (see APPENDIX C - WATERSHED AND HYDROLOGY ANALYSIS) . Overall, low to moderate collective past and present impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout are likely in Johnson Creek as a result of the existing conditions described above . Appendix E Fisheries Analysis Page E-27 ALTERNATIVE EFFECTS DIRECT AND INDIRECT EFFECTS FOR THE WEST FORK, STRYKER CREEK, AND JOHNSON CREEK Bull Trout and Westslope Cutthroat Trout Populations ~ Presence • Direct and Indirect If feet# qfJVo-Action Alternative A This no-action alternative would not be expected to have any direct or indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout population presence in the West Fork or Stryker or Johnson creeks beyond those described under EXISTING CONDITIONS . • Direct and Indirect Effect# of Action Alternative It The existing conditions describe confirmed bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout presence in the West Fork and Johnson Creek and the likely presence of one or both species in Stryker Creek. Redd count and estimated population data from the West Fork indicate that habitat utilization specific to this stream is variable for both bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout. It is reasonable to assume that relatively proportionate levels of variability in habitat utilization also occur in Stryker and Johnson creeks. Action Alternative B would not involve direct or indirect impacts to any specific bull trout or westslope cutthroat trout populations in the project area. Therefore, Actrgn Alternative B would have no direct or indirect impact to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout population presence in the West Fork or Stryker and Johnson creeks beyond those described under EXISTING CONDITIONS. • Direct and Indirect Effects of Action Altern a tive C Direct and indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout population presence as a result of Action Alternative C are expected to be the same as those described for Action Alternative B. ~ Genetics • Direct and Indirect Effects of JVo-»Ecfion Alternative A No-Action Alternative A would not be expected to have any direct or indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout population genetics in the West Fork or Stryker and Johnson creeks beyond those described under Existing Conditions . • Direct and Indirect Effects of Action Alternative It The eastern brook trout may negatively affect bull trout population genetics in the West Fork and Stryker and Johnson creeks through hybridization, as described in the EXISTING CONDITIONS. However, the introduction, migration, and spawning behavior of nonnative eastern brook trout and the consequent population biological interactions with bull trout are beyond the control and regulatory jurisdiction of DNRC land-management activities. Different strains of nonnative and historic hatchery rainbow trout may hybridize with westslope cutthroat trout, which can introduce long-term genetic introgression to pure westslope cutthroat trout populations in the West Fork and Stryker and Johnson creeks . The genetic introgression of westslope cutthroat trout may also arise from hybridization with Yellowstone cutthroat trout, through either local Page E-28 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS introduction of the subspecies or residual introgression introduced by westslope cutthroat trout that may have originally come from historic cutthroat trout hatcheries. Introgression, in general, negatively affects genetically pure westslope cutthroat trout, and, as described in EXISTING CONDITIONS , this is known to have occurred at a minimum in the West Fork and Johnson Creek ( MFISH 2004) . However, the introduction, migration, and spawning behavior of nonnative rainbow trout and the consequent population biological interactions with westslope cutthroat trout are beyond the control and regulatory jurisdiction of DNRC land- management activities . Additionally, the genetic pathway within westslope cutthroat trout populations of genes specific to Yellowstone cutthroat trout is also beyond the control of DNRC land- management activities . Therefore, Action Alternative B would not be expected to have any direct or indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout population genetics in the West Fork or Stryker and Johnson creeks beyond those described under EXISTING CONDITIONS. • Direct and Indirect Effects of diction JUtemative C Direct and indirect environmental effects of Action Alternative C to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout population genetics would be expected to be the same as those described for Action Alternative B . ~ Flow Regime • Direct and Indirect Effect# oJ‘JXo-» let ion JUtemative JI No-Action Alternative A would not be expected to have any direct or indirect impacts to the flow-regime component of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat in the West Fork or Stryker and Johnson creeks beyond those described under EXISTING CONDITIONS . • Direct and Indirect Effect# of Jlclion JUtemative B Changes in flow regime can affect bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout spawning migration, spawning behavior, potential spawning habitat, and embryo survival through modifications of stream morphology, sediment budget, streambank stability, stream temperature ranges, and channel formations. An analysis of potential actions related to Action Alternative B indicates that water yields would increase from approximately 3.4 percent (existing conditions) to approximately 6 . 0 percent in the West Fork, approximately 3.3 percent (existing conditions) to approximately 4 . 1 percent in Stryker Creek, and approximately 3.5 percent (existing conditions) to approximately 3.9 percent in Johnson Creek (see APPENDIX C - WATERSHED AND HYDROLOGY ANALYSIS) . The range of potential water- yield increases to streams with bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat in the project area is approximately from 0.4 percent to 2.6 percent. With respect to those existing conditions described earlier, these potential modifications of flow regimes as a result of Action Alternative B are expected to have negligible, if any, direct and indirect impacts Appendix E Fisheries Analysis Page E-29 to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout in the West Fork and Stryker and Johnson creeks . • Direct and Indirect Effects of Action Alternative C Changes in flow regime can affect bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout spawning migration, spawning behavior, potential spawning habitat, and embryo survival through modifications of stream morphology, sediment budget, streambank stability, stream temperature ranges, and channel formations. An analysis of potential actions related to Action Alternative C indicate that water yields would increase from approximately 3.4 percent (existing conditions) to approximately 5 . 0 percent in the West Fork, approximately 3.3 percent (existing conditions) to approximately 3.5 percent in Stryker Creek, and approximately 3.5 percent (existing conditions) to approximately 3.7 percent in Johnson Creek (see APPENDIX C - WATERSHED AND HYDROLOGY ANALYSIS) . The range of potential water yield increases to streams with bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat in the project area is approximately 0.2 percent to approximately 1.6 percent. With respect to those existing conditions described earlier, these potential modifications of flow regimes as a result of Action Alternative C are expected to have negligible, if any, direct and indirect impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout in the West Fork and Stryker hnd Johnson creeks . Bull Trout and Westslope Cutthroat Trout Habitat ~ Sediment • Direct and Indirect Effects of .Vo-, let ion Alternative A No-Action Alternative A would not be expected to have any direct or indirect impacts to the sediment component of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat in the West Fork or Stryker and Johnson creeks beyond those described under EXISTING CONDITIONS . • Direct and Indirect Effects of Action Alternative li Modifications of stream sediment size classes, especially with trends toward fine size classes, could adversely affect bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout in the project area by reducing the quality of spawning habitat, in-stream cover, rearing habitat, and wintering habitat. Increased levels of fine sediments can be introduced to the stream system from various sources, including bank erosion due to stream channel instability, road features, and adjacent timber-harvesting operations . Data from APPENDIX C - WATERSHED AND HYDROLOGY ANALYSIS in this EIS indicates that the range of potential water-yield increases as a result of Action Alternative B is generally insufficient to facilitate the development of unstable stream channels . APPENDIX C - WATERSHED AND HYDROLOGY ANALYSIS also indicates that road improvements associated with Action Alternative B would reduce sedimentation to the West Fork and Stryker Creek by approximately 4.2 tons per year and by approximately 2 . 7 tons per year to Johnson Creek. Road Page E-30 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS improvement activities that remove or mitigate potential sediment sources may have temporary, unavoidable, and short-term impacts to the sediment component of streams (see APPENDIX C - WATERSHED AND HYDROLOGY ANALYSIS) , which may correspond to a minor, short- term impact to bull trout or westslope cutthroat trout. However, these road improvements would provide a long-term, net- positive impact to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat in respect to sediment. Timber harvesting operations adjacent to the West Fork and Stryker and Johnson creeks would comply with SMZ laws . The SMZ laws are designed to provide adequate mitigations for the prevention of sedimentation to streams from adjacent timber- harvest-related activities. With respect to those existing conditions described earlier, the selection of Action Alternative B would likely provide net-positive direct and indirect impacts to the sediment component of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat in the West Fork and Stryker and Johnson creeks. • Direct and Indirect Iffiect# of fiction . Alternative C Modifications of stream-sediment size classes, especially with trends toward fine size classes, could adversely affect bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout in the project area by reducing the quality of spawning habitat, in-stream cover, rearing habitat, and wintering habitat. Increased levels of fine sediments can be introduced to the stream system from various sources, including bank erosion due to stream channel instability, road features, and adjacent timber-harvesting operations . Data from APPENDIX C - WATERSHED AND HYDROLOGY ANALYSIS indicates that the range of potential water-yield increases as a result of- Action Alternative C is generally insufficient to facilitate the development of unstable stream channels. The APPENDIX C - WATERSHED AND HYDROLOGY ANALYSIS also indicates that road improvements associated with Action Alternative C would reduce sedimentation to the West Fork and Stryker Creek by approximately 2.6 tons per year and by approximately 0 . 0 tons per year to Johnson Creek. Road-improvement activities that remove or mitigate potential sediment sources may have temporary, unavoidable, and short-term impacts to the sediment component of streams (see APPENDIX C - WATERSHED AND HYDROLOGY ANALYSIS) , which may correspond to a minor, short- term impact to bull trout or westslope cutthroat trout. However, these road improvements would provide a long-term, net- positive impact to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat in respect to sediment. Timber-harvesting operations adjacent to the West Fork and Stryker and Johnson creeks would comply with SMZ laws . The SMZ laws are designed to provide adequate mitigations for the prevention of sedimentation to streams from adjacent activities related to timber harvesting. With respect to those existing conditions described earlier, the selection of Action Alternative C would likely provide net-positive direct and indirect impacts to the sediment component of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat in the West Fork and Stryker and Johnson creeks . Appendix E Fisheries Analysis Page E-31 ~ Channel Forms • Direct and Indirect Effect* of • \o-, let ion •Alternative el No-Action Alternative A would not be expected to have any direct or indirect impacts to the channel -form component of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat in the West Fork and Stryker and Johnson creeks beyond those described under EXISTING CONDITIONS. • Direct and Indirect Effects tf •letion • alternative It Potential changes to stream channel forms are primarily a function of modifications to flow regimes and consequent relationships with existing sediment size classes. As indicated earlier, modifications to the bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat features of flow regime and sediment as a result of Action Alternative B are expected to be negligible or not occur at all. Therefore, with respect to those existing conditions described earlier, there are no foreseeable direct and indirect impacts to the channel form component of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat in the West Fork and Stryker and Johnson creeks. • Direct and Indirect Inflects of •letion •alternative C Potential changes to stream channel forms are primarily a function of modifications to flow regimes and consequent relationships with existing sediment size classes. As indicated earlier, modifications to the bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat features of flow regime and sediment as a result of Action Alternative C are expected to be negligible or not occur at all. Therefore, with respect to those existing conditions described earlier, there are no foreseeable direct and indirect impacts to the channel form component of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat in the West Fork and Stryker and Johnson creeks. ~ Large Woody Debris • Direct and Indirect Effect* of JVo-^Ection • alternative el No-Action Alternative A would not be expected to have any direct or indirect impacts to the large-woody-debris component of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat in the West Fork or Stryker and Johnson creeks beyond those described under EXISTING CONDITIONS. • Direct and Indirect Effect* of •action •alternative It Action Alternative B proposes varying levels of timber harvesting up to, but not within, 100 feet of the nearest stream bankfull edges of the West Fork (proposed Harvest Areas II-H, II-G, II-P, and II- C) , Stryker Creek (proposed Harvest Area II-P) , and Johnson Creek (proposed Harvest Area II- C) . Potential large-woody- debris recruitment to the channels of these and other streams is a function of the distance from the stream channel that riparian trees may fall in order to contribute large woody debris. This distance from the stream channel is generally equal to the mean height of dominant and co-dominant trees ( Robinson and Beschta 1990, Bilby and Bisson 1998) , which is usually expressed as the site- potential tree height. As described in EXISTING CONDITIONS, the site -potential tree height at 100 years from sample sites in the riparian zone along both sides of the Page E-32 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS West Fork throughout the project area ranges from 81 to 93 feet. The riparian zones along Stryker and Johnson creeks are likely sufficiently similar to those in the West Fork that site- potential tree heights of 81 to 93 feet can also be applied to these areas. Since a no-harvest buffer of 100 feet would be established between the 3 streams and associated proposed harvest areas described above, rates of potential large-woody- debris recruitment to any of these 3 stream channels is not expected to be affected by any of the proposed harvest areas. Correspondingly, a study of large-woody-debris recruitment to stream channels in Alaska found that 99 percent of in- stream large woody debris was recruited from trees within 30 meters (96 feet) of the stream channel ( Murphy and Koski 1989) . In-stream large woody debris may also be recruited to 1 of the 3 stream channels from upstream channel reaches . Proposed Harvest Area III-I intersects 1 intermittent stream channel that eventually delivers seasonal flow to the West Fork, and proposed Harvest Areas III-J and III-L are jointly bordered by 1 intermittent stream channel that eventually delivers seasonal flow to the West Fork. The very low discharge of these 2 intermittent streams is unlikely to provide sufficient energy for transportation of large woody debris to downstream reaches. The intersecting reaches of these 2 first-order, intermittent tributaries, which would also have established buffers for Class I streams according to Streamside Management Rules (1996), are not expected to affect sources of upstream large-woody-debris recruitment to the West Fork in any measurable or detectable way . Therefore, Action Alternative B would not be expected to have any direct or indirect impacts to the large-woody-debris component of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat in the West Fork or Stryker and Johnson creeks beyond those described under EXISTING CONDITIONS . • Direct and Indirect Effects of Action Alternative C Although Action Alternative C does not propose any harvesting in Harvest Area III, the consequences, in respect to large woody debris, would be identical to those of Action Alternative B. Therefore, the direct and indirect effects of Action Alternative C to the large-woody-debris component of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat would be expected to be the same as those described for Action Alternative B. ~ Riparian Zone • Direct and Indirect Effects of JVo-Action Alternative A No-Action Alternative A would not be expected to have any direct or indirect impacts to the riparian- zone component of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat in the West Fork or Stryker or Johnson creeks beyond those described under Existing Conditions . • Direct and Indirect Effects of Action Alternative B The manner in which the riparian zone affects bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat through large-woody- debris recruitment to the stream channel is described under Large Woody Debris (previous heading) . In that section, the effective riparian zone is described as varying between 81 and 93 feet Appendix E Fisheries Analysis Page E-33 along the West Fork and Stryker and Johnson creeks. Since a 100-foot no-harvest buffer would be established between these 3 streams and the associated proposed harvest areas in Action Alternative B, the riparian-zone function associated with these 3 stream channels is not expected to be affected by any of the proposed harvest areas. Therefore, Action Alternative B would not be expected to have any direct or indirect impacts to the riparian- zone component of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat in the West Fork or Stryker or Johnson creeks beyond those described under EXISTING CONDITIONS. • Direct an ft Indirect Infect* of fiction •Alternative C The direct and indirect environmental effects to the riparian-zone component of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat for Action Alternative C would be expected to be the same as those described for Action Alternative B . ~ Stream Temperature • Direct and Indirect BffecUt of \No-Jlction • Alternative .7 No-Action Alternative A would not be expected to have any direct or indirect impacts to the stream- temperature component of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat in the West Fork or Stryker or Johnson creeks beyond those described under EXISTING CONDITIONS. • Direct and Indirect Ejffecta of .Action • Alternative H Direct solar radiation is the primary mechanism affecting positive changes in stream temperature throughout the project area. Increases in stream temperature can then, consequently, occur through the loss of riparian vegetation, which intercepts solar radiation. The amount of riparian vegetation intercepting solar radiation, or stream shading, depends on many factors, such as width of the stream channel, site-potential tree height of dominant and co- dominant riparian tree species, riparian tree density, and stream azimuth. Nonetheless, studies with no-harvest riparian buffers of 30 meters (96 feet) in managed, forested watersheds have demonstrated levels of stream shading equivalent to unlogged, forested watersheds (Beschta et al 1987, Castelle and Johnson 2000 citing others.) A similar study has found the same results with a 100-foot no- harvest buffer ( Brown and Krygier 1970) . Since a no- harvest buffer of 100 feet would be established between the West Fork and Stryker and Johnson creeks and the associated proposed harvest areas in Action Alternative B, stream temperatures associated with these 3 stream channels are not expected to be affected by any of the proposed harvest areas. Tributaries to streams can have an affect on (downstream) stream temperatures that is proportional to the discharge of the tributary. Proposed Harvest Area III-I intersects an intermittent stream channel that eventually delivers seasonal flow to the West Fork, and proposed Harvest Areas III-J and HI -L are jointly bordered by an intermittent stream channel that eventually delivers seasonal flow to the West Fork. The intersecting reaches of these 2 first-order, intermittent tributaries would have established buffers for Class I streams according to Streamside Management Rules (1996), which have been shown to have a Page E-34 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS statistically insignificant effect on stream temperatures in preliminary studies ( Sugden and Steiner 2003 ) . As these streams also provide only low, seasonally intermittent discharges to higher-order streams, no measurable or detectable changes in stream temperature would be expected in the West Fork due to Action Alternative B. Therefore, Action Alternative B would not be expected to have any direct or indirect impacts to the stream- temperature component of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat in the West Fork or Stryker and Johnson creeks beyond those described under EXISTING CONDITIONS. • Direct and Indirect Effects of fiction Alternative C Although Action Alternative C does not propose any harvesting in Harvest Area III, the consequences in respect to stream temperature would be identical to those of Action Alternative B. Therefore, direct and indirect environmental effects to the stream- temperature component of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat as a result of the selection of Action Alternative C are expected to be the same as those described for Action Alternative B. ~ Connectivity • Direct and Indirect Effects of .Xo-. let ion Alternative A No-Action Alternative A would not be expected to have any direct or indirect impacts to the connectivity component of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat in the West Fork or Stryker or Johnson creeks beyond those described under EXISTING CONDITIONS . • Direct and Indirect Effects of Action Alternative It As part of Action Alternative B, the bridge crossing the West Fork in Section 29, T34N, R23W, would be replaced with a new 70- foot steel bridge. The new structure would be expected to provide naturally occurring levels of connectivity to all life stages of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout. Therefore, Action Alternative B would not be expected to have any direct or indirect impacts to the connectivity component of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat in the West Fork or Stryker and Johnson creeks beyond those described under EXISTING CONDITIONS . • Direct and Indirect Effects of Action Alternative C Direct and indirect effects to the connectivity component of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat as a result of the selection of Action Alternative C are expected to be the same as those described for Action Alternative B. CUMULATIVE EFFECTS FOR THE WEST FORK, STRYKER CREEK, AND JOHNSON CREEK • Cumulative Effects of JXo-Action Alternative A Action Alternative A would not be expected to have any cumulative impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout in the West Fork and Stryker and Johnson creeks . • Cumulative Effects of Action Alternative It Cumulative impacts are those collective impacts on the human environment of the proposed action when considered in conjunction with other past, present, and future actions related to the proposed action by location or generic type (7 5-1-220, MCA). Appendix E Fisheries Analysis Page E-35 The direct, indirect, and collective impacts of past- and present -related actions associated with bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout populations and habitat in the project area for all 3 specific streams are described throughout the EXISTING CONDITIONS section. These existing impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout described earlier range from low to moderate in the West Fork and Johnson Creek and low in Stryker Creek . There are no known future activities related to the proposed action by location or generic type. As described in the Direct and Indirect Effects of Action Alternative B, the actions associated with proposed Action Alternative B would have impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout that range from negligible to net positive. The assessment of the proposed actions on bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout populations (presence and genetics) and bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat variables (flow regime, sediment, channel form, large woody debris, riparian- zone function, stream temperature, and connectivity) summarily indicate that no adverse negative impacts would likely be associated with Action Alternative B. Consequently, as a result of the selection of Action Alternative B, the risk of foreseeable, adverse cumulative impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout is low in the West Fork and Stryker and Johnson creeks . • Cumulative Effects qf Action Alternative C Cumulative impacts are those collective impacts on the human environment of the proposed action when considered in conjunction with other past, present, and future actions related to the proposed action by location or generic type (75-1-220, MCA). The direct, indirect, and collective impacts of past- and present-related actions associated with bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout populations and habitat in the project area are described throughout the EXISTING CONDITIONS section for all 3 specific streams. Those existing impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout, described earlier, range from low to moderate in the West Fork and Johnson Creek and low in Stryker Creek . There are no known future-related activities associated to the proposed action by location or generic type. As described in Direct and Indirect Effects of Action Alternative C, the actions associated with proposed Action Alternative C would have impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout that range from negligible to net positive. The assessment of the proposed actions on bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout populations (presence and genetics) and bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat variables (flow regime, sediment, channel form, large woody debris, riparian- zone function, stream temperature, and connectivity) summarily indicate no adverse negative impacts would likely be associated with Action Alternative C. Consequently, as a result of the selection of Action Alternative C, the risk of foreseeable, adverse cumulative impacts to bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout is low in the West Fork or Stryker or Johnson creeks . Page E-36 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS APPENDIX F WILDLIFE ANALYSIS INTRODUCTION The discussion in this section pertains to wildlife species and their habitats in the existing environment and changes to that environment due to each alternative. During the initial scoping, the following issues were expressed regarding the effects of the proposed project: • Timber harvesting and road use could reduce habitat security of areas for large mammals. • Timber harvesting and road use could cause fragmentation. In addition to the above issues, the analyses below discuss other environmental effects of the alternatives to the wildlife resource . This discussion occurs at 2 scales. The project area includes DNRC- managed lands within Sections 18 through 21 and 28 through 34 in T34N, R23W, and Section 13 in T34N, R24W. Full descriptions of the project area and proposed harvest areas are presented in CHAPTER II - ALTERNATIVES ( TABLE II -1 - SILVICULTURAL TREATMENTS BY HARVEST AREA NUMBER FOR ACTION ALTERNATIVES B AND C) . The second scale relates to the surrounding landscape for assessing cumulative effects . This scale varies according to the species being discussed, but generally approximates the size of the home range of the species in question. Under each grouping or species heading, the description for the cumulative-effects analysis area will be discussed. In the cumulative-effects analysis area, the project area and the effects are placed in a landscape context. If habitat does not exist in the project area or would not be modified by any alternative, species that use that habitat were dismissed from further analysis. METHODS To assess the existing condition of the project area and the surrounding landscape, a variety of techniques were used. Field visits, scientific literature, data from the SLI and Montana Natural Heritage Program, aerial photography, consultations with other professionals, and professional judgment provided information for the following discussion and effects analysis. In the effects analysis, changes in the habitat quality and quantity from the existing conditions were evaluated and explained. Specialized methodologies are discussed under the species in which they apply. COARSE -FILTER ASSESSMENT DNRC recognizes that it is an impossible and unnecessary task to assess an affected environment or the effects of proposed actions on all wildlife species. We assume that if landscape patterns and processes similar to those that species adapted to are maintained, then the full complement of species will be maintained across the landscape (DNRC 1996) . This "coarse filter" approach supports diverse wildlife populations by managing for a variety of forest structures and compositions that approximate "historic conditions" across a landscape. To compare present and historical conditions across the landscape, the analysis was conducted for Stillwater State Forest using SLI data (refer to APPENDIX B - VEGETATION ANALYSIS ) and was compared to the historical assessment compiled for the Lower Flathead Climatic Section ( Losensky 1997) . Covertypes The vegetation analysis indicates that covertypes changed over the past century due to the influence of fire suppression, insects, diseases, and timber harvesting. Generally, Stillwater State Forest should support more western white pine and western larch/Douglas-f ir covertypes and less subalpine fir and lodgepole pine covertypes than found on average for the climatic type. All other covertypes occur near historical proportions found in the climatic section ( Losensky 1997) . Therefore, species using western white pine and western larch/Douglas -fir covertypes are presumably more likely to be found and/or be more abundant on Stillwater State Forest than on average in the climatic section. Conversely, species using subalpine fir and lodgepole pine covertypes are presumably less likely to occur or occur in lower densities on Stillwater State Forest due to the amount of habitat present, while species that use other covertypes are expected to occur near the average densities expected throughout the climatic section. However, primarily due to fire suppression, timber management, and introduced diseases, many of the stands have increased in the proportion of shade- tolerant tree species ( TABLE F-l - PERCENTAGE OF COVERTYPES FOUND ON STILLWATER STATE FOREST AND THE CLIMATIC SECTION) . Fire suppression probably had little effect in the project area, while past timber harvesting and diseases heavily influenced the decline in shade -intolerant tree species. The changes presumably reduce the abundance of species that use open, shade-intolerant forested habitat, while favoring species using dense, closed-canopy habitats. Patch Size and Interior Habitats Species that are hesitant to cross broad expanses without forest cover, or those that depend upon interior forest conditions, can be sensitive to the amount and spatial configuration of appropriate habitat. Therefore, patch size and juxtaposition can influence habitat quality and population dynamics for some species. Some species are adapted to thrive near patch edges, while others are adversely affected by the presence of edge or by the presence of other animals that prosper in edge habitats. TABLE F-l - PERCENTAGE OF COVERTYPES FOUND ON STILLWATER STATE FOREST AND THE 333C CLIMATIC SECTION COVERTYPE PERCENT CLIMATIC SECTION (LOSENSKY 1997) PERCENT OF COVERTYPES ON THE STILLWATER STATE FOREST EXPECTED UNDER HISTORIC CONDITIONS PERCENT OF COVERTYPES ON THE STILLWATER STATE FOREST EXISTING COVERTYPES CURRENTLY Douglas -fir <1 2 2 Lodgepole pine 27 11 11 Mixed conifer (spruce-fir) 2 6 8 27 Nonforest1 (wheat-fescue) 2 \ Trace 2 2 Other types Trace Trace Trace Ponderosa pine 1 1 1 Subalpine fir 36 20 26 Western larch/ Douglas- fir 28 45 26 Western white pine 1 11 3 1 DWRC classification 2 Losensky (1997) classification Page F-2 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS | A "patch" is defined as a unit of habitat with broadly similar age and structural characteristics (primarily associated with forest or nonforest cover) . For this analysis, forested habitats provided the basis for patch, interior- habitat, and edge-habitat analyses. Forested habitats were defined as stands greater than 40 years old (pole- to sawtimber-sized stands) with a canopy cover of 40 percent or more. Interior forested habitat is defined as an area that is not affected by the adjacent stand and retains similar climatic conditions. Conversely, edge is defined as the contact zone between 2 different types of habitat. For this analysis, the first 300 feet of a patch was considered edge habitat; the remaining patch was considered interior forested habitat ( TABLE F-2 - EXISTING AND RESULTING FORESTED, INTERIOR, AND EDGE HABITAT ON THE UPPER WHITEFISH GRIZZLY BEAR SUBUNIT) . Connectivity Connectivity of forest cover between adjacent patches is important for promoting movements of species that are hesitant to cross broad, nonforest expanses. Stands that are pole-sized or greater with crown closure greater than 40 percent can be important for providing travel cover for forest-dwelling species. Across Stillwater State Forest, connectivity is high with few isolated stands. No harvest areas are proposed in key travel areas, such as saddles or near streams ( FIGURE F-l - EXISTING FORESTED HABITATS IN THE UPPER WHITEFISH GRIZZLY BEAR SUBUNIT) . See Canada Lynx and Fisher analyses for additional details on connectivity and travel cover. Deadwood Deadwood (downed trees and snags) is an important component of the forested ecosystems. The 5 primary functions of deadwood in the forested ecosystems are to: 1) increase structural diversity, 2) alter canopy microenvironment, 3) promote biological diversity, 4) provide critical habitat for wildlife, and 5) act as a storehouse for nutrient and organic matter recycling agents (Parks and Shaw 1996) . This analysis focuses on the importance of deadwood as ^wildlife habitat and the effects of this project on those habitats. The presence of insects and predaceous birds and mammals are important to forest management . Both insects and birds associated with snags and downed wood are suspected of controlling insects that are harmful to wood production, such as the Douglas-fir tussock moth and spruce budworm. However, when insect populations reach epidemic levels, predation is often ineffective at controlling or reducing population levels (Torgensen 1994) . Small mammals that are associated with downed wood distribute ectomychorrhizal fungus, which is needed for seedling establishment and tree growth (Amaranthus 1998) . Therefore, maintenance of habitats for insectivorous birds and mammals is important for long- term forest health. Snags and logs provide reproduction, feeding, TABLE F-2 - EXISTING AND RESULTING ACRES OF FORESTED, INTERIOR, AND EDGE HABITAT IN THE UPPER WHITEFISH GRIZZLY BEAR SUBUNIT PARAMETER NO -ACT I ON ALTERNATIVE A ACTION ALTERNATIVE B ACTION ALTERNATIVE C Forested habitat 21,465 20,278 20,610 Interior habitat 14,771 13,245 13,635 Edge habitat 6,694 7,033 6,975 Appendix F - Wildlife Analysis Page F -3 FIGURE F-l - EXISTING FORESTED HABITAT IN THE UPPER WHITEFISH GRIZZLY BEAR SUBUNIT Page F-4 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS I rearing, and/or shelter structure for an array of wildlife species. Deadwood provides insects, fungus, and wood food sources for small mammals. In turn, these small mammals provide prey for predatory birds and mammals. Additionally, deadwood provides animal areas with: - stable temperatures and moisture, - shelter from the environment, lookout areas, and food storage sites. Small mammals, such as red-backed voles, to large mammals, such as black bears, rely on deadwood for survival and reproduction. The size, length, decay, and distribution of deadwood affect their capacity to provide specific habitat. Logs less than 6 feet in length tend to dry out and provide limited habitat for wildlife species. Single, scattered logs could provide lookout and travel sites for squirrels or access under the snow for weasels and other small mammals, while log piles provide habitat for weasels, hares, other small mammals, etc. Similarly, diameters, heights, and snag densities determine the snag habitat value for wildlife species. Larger, taller snags tend to provide nesting sites, while shorter snags and stumps tend to provide feeding sites for birds and mammals. Cavity- nesting birds often nest in areas where several snags are available, using individual snags as feeding or roosting sites; therefore, considering the size and distribution of these resources is important . Snag data were collected in areas where SLI data indicated the stand might meet the old-growth definition defined by Green et al (1992). These areas occurred only in Harvest Area III, which is exclusive to Action Alternative B. Mean snag densities (greater than 14 inches dbh) ranged from 0 to 64 per acre, with an average of 12.6 (n(stands) = 20 [standard deviation = 3.67]) and 14.0 (n(8tand8, = 4 [standard deviation = 4.12]) for stands in cool and moist and cold and moderately dry habitat types, respectively. Only 2 of the sampled stands were harvested in the past. In the harvested stands, snag densities are among the lowest encountered. Whitebark pine was the most common snag encountered (36 percent of all snags) , followed by subalpine fir (30 percent) , Engelmann spruce (26 percent) , and Douglas-fir (8 percent) . The live- tree distribution is quite different; Engelmann spruce (75 percent) represents the highest proportion of large trees (greater than 21 inches dbh) , followed by subalpine fir (12 percent) , Douglas- fir (9 percent) , whitebark pine (3 percent) , and western larch (2 percent) . These trees could provide snag and coarse-woody-debris recruitment in the future. Regeneration in the project area is primarily shade- tolerant Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir. Snag densities in the other harvest areas were subjectively assessed and appear to be relatively low in density, which is expected in previously harvested stands ( Harris 1999) and near open roads (Bate et al . 2002) . COARSE FILTER Direct Effects to Coarse Filter • Direct Effects of JVo-Action Alternative A to Coarse Filter No additional displacement or disturbance of wildlife is expected in the area. • Direct Effects of .fiction Alternatives II and C to Coarse Filter Displacement and/or disturbance of wildlife species would be expected due to these alternatives. Since different species react to human disturbance differently, the extent of disruption would be related to the species in Appendix F - Wildlife Analysis Page F -5 question. Generally, the amount of harvest area, associated roads, and duration of the project provides an avenue to develop a hierarchy of potential disturbance to wildlife in the area. Both action alternatives would be implemented over a 3 -year period. Action Alternative B proposes to harvest 9.5 mmbf of timber from 1,270 acres and construct 3.4 miles of new roads. Action Alternative C proposes to harvest 5.7 mmbf of timber from 938 acres and construct 3.1 miles of new roads . Due to the amount of acres and volume, Action Alternative B would be expected to take longer to complete than Action Alternative C. Due to the increased area and duration of Action Alternative B, Action Alternative B would be expected to produce more disturbances to wildlife species than. Action Alternative C. However, the project design features would be incorporated to reduce widespread disturbance of the area (see Grizzly Bear analysis) . Indirect Effects to Coarse Filter Covertypes • Indirect luffed* of JXo-Jlction •Alternative . / to Covertypes The stands considered for harvesting would continue to age, and the western larch/Douglas-f ir covertypes would convert to mixed- conifer or subalpine fir covertypes. Where mixed-conifer and subalpine fir covertypes currently exist, these covertypes would be retained, but these stands would maintain or increase their canopy closure, shading out understory plants and shade- intolerant tree seedlings. In the long-term, species that use the more open stands and/or shade - intolerant tree species, would be negatively affected due to the loss of habitat, while species that use late-successional forest structure, would benefit by an increase in habitat. • Indirect 1$ fleet* of •Action • Alternative II to Covertypes Harvesting under this alternative would convert most stands to younger age classes, but would not necessarily change covertypes. On 138 acres, harvesting would promote more historic covertype representation. On the remaining 1,130 acres, the current covertype would be retained; however, shade- intolerant species, such as western larch and western white pine, would be planted in the regeneration-harvest areas to reintroduce or increase their representation in the future stand. DNRC would rely on natural regeneration of whitebark pine to increase or maintain this species in the future stand. These changes would favor wildlife species that use the more-open canopies and shade-intolerant tree species at the expense of wildlife species associated with closed- canopy, shade-tolerant tree species. If whitebark pine successfully regenerates, species such as Clarke's nutcrackers, grizzly bears, squirrels, etc., would benefit from an increase in key food sources . • Indirect Effects of • let ion •Alternative Cto Covertypes Harvesting under this alternative would convert most stands to younger age classes, but not necessarily change covertypes . On 46 acres, harvesting would promote a more historic covertype representation. On the remaining 892 acres, the covertype would be retained; however, shade- intolerant species, such as western larch and western white pine, would be planted in regeneration-harvest areas to reintroduce or increase their representation in the future stand. These changes would favor wildlife species that use the more Page F- 6 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS open canopies and shade-intolerant tree species at the expense of wildlife species associated with closed-canopy, shade- tolerant tree species. Whitebark pine regeneration is not expected in any of these harvest areas. Patch Size and Interior and Edge Habi tats • Indirect Ejffect* qfJVo- fiction •Alternative .7 to Patch Size and Interior and Edge Habitat* Patch size and interior and edge habitats would not change in the near term. Through time, forested patch size and interior habitat are expected to increase, while edge habitat would be expected to decrease. These conditions would favor wildlife species that prefer dense, mature forests at the expense of wildlife species that use nonforest, open-canopied, or edge habitats. • Indirect Effect* of » Action • Alternative It to Patch Size and Interior and Edge Habitat* Forested habitat would decrease by 1,187 acres and interior forested habitat would decrease by 1,526 acres, while edge habitat would increase by 339 acres in the Upper Whitefish Grizzly Bear Subunit (TABLE F-2 - EXISTING AND RESULTING ACRES OF FORESTED, INTERIOR, AND EDGE HABITAT ON UPPER WHITEFISH GRIZZLY BEAR SUBUNIT) . Habitat for species that use forested and interior habitat would decrease, while species that use edge and regeneration or unforested habitats would be favored. • Indirect Effect* of • let ion •Alternative C to Patch Size and Interior and Edge Habitat* Forested habitat would decrease by 855 acres and interior forested habitat would decrease by 1,136 acres, while edge habitat would increase by 281 acres in the Upper Whitefish Grizzly Bear Subunit ( TABLE F-2 - EXISTING AND RESULTING FORESTED, INTERIOR, AND EDGE HABITAT ON UPPER WHITEFISH GRIZZLY BEAR SUBUNIT) . Habitat for species that use forested and interior habitat would decrease, while species that use edge and regeneration or unforested habitats would be favored. These effects are intermediate between No-Action Alternative A and Action Alternative B. Connectivity • Indirect Effect* of JXo-, let ion Jll ’tentative ./ to Connectivity No change in forest connectivity is expected. Over time, forest connectivity would be expected to increase due to the succession of early serai stands and sparse stands. The increase in connectivity would benefit species that depend on dense interconnected forests by providing movement corridors and other habitats within the project area . • Indirect Infect* to Connectivity Common to • Action •Alternative* H and C Timber harvesting under these alternatives does not substantially alter connectivity. In both alternatives, regeneration harvests would not result in barriers to forest dwelling species under either alternative (FIGURE F-2 - FORESTED HABITAT IN THE UPPER WHITEFISH GRIZZLY BEAR SUBUNIT) . However, Action Alternative B narrows the connectivity corridor along the West Fork to approximately 500 feet. Under both alternatives, substantial effects to connectivity are not expected; therefore, any effects are expected to be negligible. Deadwood • Direct and Indirect hfflect* qf j\o-» Action • Alternative ./ to Deadu'ood No changes in deadwood resources would occur. Tree mortality, especially shade- tolerant tree species, could increase due to insects and diseases or other Appendix F - Wildlife Analysis Page F -7 Forested habitat not affected under either action alternative Forested habitat removed under Action Alternative B in addition to Action Alternative C Forested habitat removed under Action Alternative C FIGURE F-2-FORESTED HABITAT IN THE UPPER WHITEFISH GRIZZLY BEAR SUBUNIT UNDER EITHER ALTERNATIVE Page F-8 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS natural events. This situation would benefit species that use deadwood resources in the short term; however, because of the current lack of shade-intolerant tree species in the longer term, reductions in deadwood, especially shade-intolerant tree species, could occur. • Direct and Indirect Effects to Deadwood Common to Action Alternatives B and C Under both alternatives, deadwood resources would be targeted to be retained in the harvest areas. Harvesting could remove recently dead trees that are merchantable, but would attempt to retain most of the cull material . Based on data collected by the USFS on Lolo National Forest, an estimate of snag loss during harvesting activities ranged from 50 to 100 percent ( Hillis 1993) . On a recent DNRC timber sale where all snags greater than 14 inches were to be retained, 60 percent were standing following harvesting; however, when all snags were considered, only 35 percent were left standing. A majority of the loss of snags occurred in the medium-size class, with retention of the larger snags appearing more successful. Therefore, nearly one-half of the snags, mostly small to medium sized, planned for retention in the area could succumb to operational or safety- related felling. These losses are expected to be larger in the cable -yarding harvest areas and exasperated if prescribed fire is used for site preparation. In each harvest area, a minimum of 1 snag and 1 snag-recruitment trees over 21 inches dbh would be retained per acre ( ARM 36.11.411) . If snags planned for retention were felled for safety concerns, these trees/snags would be left on site to provide feeding substrate and habitat structure for wildlife species. In all harvest areas, decreases in feeding and nesting sites might occur due to the reduction in snags, while some ground structure and foraging sites could be removed by the harvesting and crushing of downed trees. Harvesting is expected to reduce the densities of small to medium-sized snags; therefore, these alternatives are likely to affect smaller cavity-nesting species and their associated secondary cavity species. However, retention of dominant trees, existing deadwood, and untreated piles of cull logs is expected to provide habitat for species associated with large deadwood in the short and long term. More deadwood habitat would be retained under Action Alternative C than under Action Alternative B. The loss of deadwood structure could reduce insectivorous wildlife species, which could result in increased populations of forest pests ( Torgenson 1994) and could inhibit regeneration by reducing distribution of ectomychorrhizal fungus distributed by small mammals ( Amaranthus 1998) . However, not all deadwood would be removed from the stand, thereby providing some habitat for these species. The scale of the effects to these species is unknown, but is expected to be related to the reduction in deadwood habitat . CUMULATIVE EFFECTS - COARSE FILTER Cumulative Effects to Covertype and Age Class • Cumulative JEjff'ects qfJVo-Action Alternative A to Covertype and Age Class Covertypes would continue to convert from shade- intolerant to shade-tolerant covertypes, and stands in older age classes would continue to increase. Where shade-tolerant covertypes are present, shade - intolerant tree densities would continue to decline. This situation would affect wildlife species using the Appendix F - Wildlife Analysis Page F -9 area by decreasing habitat diversity in the area and favoring species associated with late- succession, shade- intolerant tree species . • Cumulative Effects to Covert. ype and Age Class Common to Action Alternatives H and C Efforts under both action alternatives would be made to convert stands to more closely reflect the historic conditions outlined in Losensky (1997). Under Action Alternative B, conversion would occur through the thinning of shade-tolerant species and regeneration harvesting. The harvesting would result in more closely reflecting historic covertypes and age classes . This alternative would benefit early successional species at the expense of mid- to later- successional species. The treatments are expected to increase the growth of retained trees, thereby decreasing the amount of time before large trees are available in these stands. These alternatives are expected to benefit native wildlife species by reproducing habitats to which the species are adapted. Cumulative Effects to Patch Size, Interior and Edge Habitats, and Connectivity Adjacent USFS lands are not expected to be harvested, thereby increasing forested habitat and patch size in those areas. The effects discussed under the indirect effects above would be cumulative to the conditions occurring on adjacent lands in the area. Cumulative Effects to Deadwood Resources Reductions in deadwood resources would be cumulative to past timber and salvage harvests. However, in these areas, mitigations to provide deadwood habitats are incorporated in all these projects. So, although deadwood resources would be reduced in the cumulative effects area, retention of specific snags and downed trees would continue to contribute habitat, albeit at a lower density in the short term, for species that use deadwood resources. FINE FILTER In the fine-filter analysis, individual species of concern are evaluated. These species include wildlife species listed under the Endangered Species Act, species listed as sensitive by DNRC (ARM 36.11.436(6)), and species managed as big game by DFWP. THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES > Bald Eagle The bald eagle is classified as "threatened" and is protected under the Endangered Species Act. Strategies to protect the bald eagle are outlined in the Pacific States Bald Eagle Recovery Plan ( USFWS 1986 ) and the Montana Bald Eagle Management Plan (Montana Bald Eagle Working Group 1994) . Management direction involves identifying and protecting nesting, feeding, perching, roosting, and wintering/migration areas (USFWS 1986, Montana Bald Eagle Working Group, 1994) . For the nesting territory at Upper Whitefish Lake, Paige (1997) developed site-specific management guidelines that will be followed in this project. Bald eagles prefer multistoried nesting habitats with 40- to 70- percent canopy cover with emergent trees within topographic line-of- sight to an associated water source with an adequate food supply. The emergent trees and/or snags need to be large enough (more than 25 inches dbh) to support nesting or perching eagles. Additionally, eagles prefer cottonwood, Douglas-fir, and ponderosa pine trees (Wright and Escano 1986) . In western Montana, eagles also use western larch and Engelmann spruce. Page F-10 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS Eagles nest south of Upper Whitefish Lake. Paige (1997) defined the nest area to include the south shoreline of the lake to West Fork Road; the primary use area includes the nest area and extends approximately 1 mile to the north. The home range of these eagles extends north from Swede Creek to Nasukoin Lake and east from the divide between the Swift Creek and West Fork drainages to Hay Lake (FIGURE F-3 - UPPER WHITEFISH BALD EAGLE TERRITORY) . The eagles return to their breeding territory in February and, if successful in raising eaglets, will inhabit the nest area through August. No proposed harvest areas occur within the nest or primary-use area. However, haul routes intersect the nest and primary-use area. The West Fork Road (open road) borders the south boundary of the nest and primary-use area, while Whitefish Saddle Road (restricted road) cuts through the primary-use area. To assess cumulative effects to bald eagles, the bald eagle territory home range was used. This area includes DNRC (approximately 33 percent) and National Forest System Lands (approximately 66 percent) . Harvest Areas I, II-A, and II-C fall into the bald eagle's home range . Direct Effects • Direct Effects of 'JXo-Action Alternative A to Hold Eagle* No additional direct effects to nesting or wintering bald eagles would be expected. • Direct Effect* to Raid Eagle* Common to Action Alternative It and C No harvesting would occur in the nest or primary-use area. However, hauling through the primary-use area and along the boundary of the nest-site area would occur. To limit disturbance to nesting eagles, Harvest Areas I and II-A would not be harvested during the eagle nesting season (February 1 through August 15) unless the territory is determined to be unoccupied. If needed, logs could be loaded and hauled (but not cut, skidded, or processed) from Harvest Area II-A during the nesting season because the harvest area is along an open road. Loading and hauling would be a short-term disturbance consistent with disturbance found along open roads . However, if this activity is determined to be too disruptive to the nesting eagles, the hauling operation would be discontinued immediately and would start again after August 15. With these mitigation measures in place, no additional disturbance effects are expected . Indirect Effects • Indirect Effect* qfJVo-Action Alternative A to Raid Eagle * Timber stands that presently provide bald eagle habitat would continue to increase in density and proportion of shade- tolerant tree species, while decreasing in growth rates. Additionally, snags would continue to develop. Barring any natural disturbance, shade-intolerant trees would not regenerate over time. Existing younger stands would continue to grow and produce the structure needed by eagles, but at a slower rate due to dense stocking. Under this alternative, the quality of eagle nesting habitat would decrease as canopy cover increases above 70 percent (Montana Bald Eagle Working Group 1991) . The potential of these effects limiting nest success of this breeding pair is low. Appendix F - Wildlife Analysis Page F -11 White fish Saddle Road Upper White fish Lake Harvest Area Nest Site Are Primary Use Area Home Range Mi L ; » y. c . i • 1 • WW Vi FIGURE F-3 - UPPER WHITEFISH BALD EAGLE TERRITORY Page F-12 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS • Imtirect iffects to Haiti I' at/ It’s Common to , let ion Alternative R and C No habitat modifications would occur in the nest site or primary-use area under these alternatives. Therefore, the effects discussed under No- Action Alternative A are expected to occur in these areas . Cumulative Effects • Cumulative Effects of JVo-»Ection Alternative A to Raid Eagles Under this alternative, no additional disturbance or habitat modification would occur in the analysis area. No other projects are proposed in the home-range area. • Cumulative Effects to Raid Eagles Common to Action Alternative R and C This alternative would result in treatment of 119 acres of timber within the 17, 520 -acre home range associated with this territory. None of these stands are located in a landscape position (outside line-of -sight of an associated waterbody) where they provide potential bald eagle nesting habitat . In both Harvest Areas II-A and II- C, regeneration and a group - select harvest prescriptions would be implemented. These treatments would open the overstory canopy, which would increase eagle access to small mammal prey, while retaining dominant trees scattered throughout the harvest area or in groups. Over time, these harvest areas would develop a multilevel canopy. These conversions are expected to be neutral to positive. However, harvesting in Harvest Area II-A would decrease visual screening between the open West Fork Road and the harvest area, thereby offsetting any benefit realized by reducing canopy cover. Otherwise, no other projects are planned in the cumulative- effects analysis area. The effects of these habitat alterations are expected to be neutral to slightly positive, but are not expected to change the reproductive success rate of this nesting pair. > Canada Lynx Canada lynx are listed as "threatened" under the Endangered Species Act . Currently, no recovery plan exists for Canada lynx. Several reports have been written to summarize the research on lynx and develop a conservation strategy ( Ruediger et al 2000) . Lynx are associated with subalpine fir forests, generally between 4,000 and 7,000 feet in elevation, in western Montana ( Ruediger et al 2000) . Lynx habitat in western Montana consists primarily of young coniferous forest with plentiful snowshoe hares, stands with abundant coarse woody debris for denning and cover for kittens, and densely forested cover for travel and security. Additionally, the mature forests provide habitat for red squirrels, an alternative prey source. These conditions are found in a variety of habitat types, particularly within the subalpine fir series ( Pfister et al 1977) . To assess lynx habitat, DNRC SLI data were used to map specific habitat classes used by lynx. These areas were considered lynx habitat (ARM 36 . 11 . 403 (40) ) . Other parameters (stand age, canopy cover, amount of coarse woody debris) were used in modeling the availability of specific types of lynx habitat in the area (i.e. denning, forage, other, temporarily not available) ( ARM 36. 11 . 435 (2)) . Based on field reconnaissance and SLI modeling, denning habitat is not expected to be affected, while all harvest areas occur in general Appendix F - Wildlife Analysis Page F -13 or foraging habitat . The current conditions allow lynx to move through the project area and the proposed harvest areas. All stands proposed for harvesting likely provide red squirrel habitat, and stands or portion of stands with thick understories likely provide snowshoe hare habitat . Cumulative effects were analyzed for lands in the Upper Whitefish Grizzly Bear Subunit. Based on the above analysis, lynx habitat comprised approximately 26,866 acres, nearly the entire DNRC ownership in the Upper Whitefish Subunit. Of these acres, 915 acres are modeled as denning habitat. The denning habitat component is difficult to model because lynx can den in small patches of downed wood within a large stand. The SLI is designed to identify general stand conditions and does not capture small dense patches of downed woody material; therefore, it is likely that more denning habitat occurs on the landscape than the model predicts . Other classifications used in the modeling effort appear more predictable. For existing lynx habitat , see TABLE F- 3— EXISTING LYNX HABITAT ON DNRC OWNERSHIP WITHIN THE UPPER WHITEFISH GRIZZLY BEAR SUBUNIT. Direct Effects • Direct Effects of JVo Action Alternative A to Canada lynx No additional activities would occur; therefore, no direct effects would be expected. • Direct Effects to Canada Dynac Common to Action Alternatives It and C Some disturbance of lynx could occur in areas with adequate cover for lynx to travel through. However, lynx appear to be relatively tolerant of human presence and road use ( Mowat et al 2000) ; therefore, no substantial direct effects would be expected. A slight potential increase for mortality due to road traffic on gated and/or new roads would be possible, though the risk of this occurring would likely be extremely small. Lynx do not appear to avoid roads at low traffic volumes (Ruediger 2000) , so increased logging traffic on open and gated roads is not expected to displace or increase the energetic cost of individual lynx. The risks are higher under Action Alternative B than Action Alternative C, but both alternatives are expected to result in very minor risks of negative direct effects. Indirect Effects TABLE F-3-EXI STING LYNX HABITAT ON DNRC OWNERSHIP WITHIN THE UPPER WHITEFISH GRIZZLY BEAR SUBUNIT LYNX HABITAT EXISTING EXISTING COMPONENT ACRES PERCENT Denning 915 3.4 Mature foraging 4,915 18.3 Young foraging 5,025 18. 7 Other available 13,406 49.9 Temporary nonhabi tat 2,604 9. 7 Totals 26, 865 100. 0 Indirect Effects of j\o Action Alternative A to Canada Lynx Under No-Action Alternative A, lynx would continue to use the project area similarly in the short term because no lynx habitat would be modified under this alternative. In the longer term (barring natural disturbances) , stands would continue to age and increase in the coarse woody debris needed for denning and security cover. Regenerating harvest areas would mature and reduce habitat quality for snowshoe hares, Page P-14 ^West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS potentially resulting in decreased primary prey availability for lynx. As these stands mature, habitat for red squirrels would increase, somewhat lessening the loss of prey. However, a diet of red squirrels might not provide the nutrients needed for the successful reproduction and rearing of kittens ( Koehler 1990) . Therefore, in the short term, no effects to lynx are expected. In the longer term without disturbance, denning habitat is expected to increase, but foraging opportunities are expected to decrease. • Indirect Effect# oJ\Iction •/. Ilternative B to Canada By nor Lynx habitat would be modified on 1,270 acres. A regeneration- harvest prescription would be implemented on 1,198 acres; a commercial-thin harvest prescription would occur on the remaining 72 acres. Regeneration harvests would render the harvest area temporarily unsuitable for lynx. Over time, if the harvest areas regenerate to a dense stocking of young trees, snowshoe hare populations in these areas are expected to increase, thereby providing an increase in lynx foraging opportunities . Due to the steep slopes and shrub competition, the harvest areas specific to this alternative (Harvest Area III) might not regenerate successfully enough to provide young foraging habitat. Past harvesting in adjacent areas show sparse regeneration over the past 20 to 30 years. In the proposed regeneration harvest areas (332 acres) , tree density is not expected to meet young foraging- habitat criteria, however, the shrub component could provide summer cover for snowshoe hares. Therefore, lynx use of these areas is expected to be limited until the regenerating canopy exceeds 40 percent canopy closure, resulting in marginal habitat in 40 to 80 years. If these stands do not regenerate successfully, lynx habitat would be removed on 332 acres for a long period of time. In Harvest Area I, where a commercial -thin treatment is proposed, harvesting would remove trees that could lead to red squirrel population declines to an unknown degree due to the removal of cone -producing trees ( Pearson 1999) . However, canopy cover would be retained above 40 percent; therefore, the potential for lynx to use or move through this harvest area is expected to continue. Additionally, several slash piles throughout Harvest Area II would be retained following harvesting to potentially provide denning sites near future high quality foraging areas. The regeneration harvest areas and associated piles of cull logs are not expected to be used until dense regeneration occurs. In the short-term, available lynx habitat would decline. As stands regenerate, foraging and denning habitats are expected to increase . • Indirect Effects of fiction . Ilternative C to Canada Bynac The effects discussed above would apply to harvest areas proposed under this alternative; however, the 332 acres discussed above would not be harvested. This alternative is expected to result in the benefits discussed above without the potential long-term loss of habitat on 332 acres in Harvest Area III. Appendix F - Wildlife Analysis Page F -15 Cumulative Effects • Cumulative Hffeetx of the JXo-Jt c ti on Alternative A to Canada Lynx No habitat would be modified. In time, denning habitat would develop on much of the area at the expense of young forage. Snowshoe hare populations would remain relatively stable, but possibly at low densities due to the lack of the temporal high- density, young successional habitats . Under these alternatives, barring any disturbance, forage availability would decrease, while denning habitat would increase. • Cumulative Infects qf Action Alternative It to Canada Lynx Under this alternative, 1,198 acres of lynx habitat in the Upper Whitefish Subunit would be converted to 'unsuitable' for 10 to 20 years. The conversion of habitat would be cumulative to other past harvesting on State land; some harvest areas have not fully regenerated in 20 to 30 years. Of this proposed alternative, 332 acres are in areas similar to those that have not regenerated in the past 2 to 3 decades . In the other harvest areas, young foraging habitat is expected to develop . Additionally, denning structure (piles of cull logs) would be left following harvesting, which could increase denning habitat in this subunit. Expected effects to lynx habitat components are presented in TABLE F-4 - LYNX HABITAT EXPECTED FOLLOWING HARVESTING UNDER ACTION ALTERNATIVE B. TABLE F-4 - LYNX HABITAT EXPECTED FOLLOWING HARVESTING UNDER ACTION ALTERNATIVE B LYNX HABITAT COMPONENT FOLLOWING HARVESTING ACRES PERCENT Denning 915 3.4 Mature foraging 4,326 16.1 Young foraging 4,977 18.5 Other available 12,856 47. 9 Temporary nonhabi tat 3,791 14.1 Totals 26,865 100.0 • Cumulative Effect* of Action Alternative C to Canada Lynx Under this alternative, 866 acres of lynx habitat in the Upper Whitefish Subunit would be converted to unsuitable for 10 to 20 years. All proposed harvest areas in this alternative are expected to regenerate successfully; therefore, young foraging habitat is expected to develop in 10 to 20 years. Additionally, denning structure (piles of cull logs) would be left following harvesting, which could increase denning habitat in this subunit. This alternative is expected to impact lynx to a minor degree in the short-term, with greater long-term benefits. Expected effects to lynx habitat components are presented in TABLE F-5 - LYNX HABITAT EXPECTED FOLLOWING HARVESTING UNDER ACTION ALTERNATIVE C. Page F-16 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS TABLE F-5 - LYNX HABITAT EXPECTED FOLLOWING HARVESTING UNDER ACTION ALTERNATIVE C LYNX HABITAT COMPONENT FOLLOWING HARVESTING ACRES PERCENT Denning 915 3.4 Mature foraging 4,489 16. 7 Young foraging 5,025 18. 7 Other available 12,905 48. 0 Temporary nonhabi tat 3,531 13.1 Totals 26,865 100. 0 > Gray Wolf The gray wolf is listed as "threatened" under the Endangered Species Act. The Northern Rocky Mountain Wolf Recovery Plan defines 3 recovery zones (USFWS 1987) . The proposed project is in the Northwest Montana Recovery Zone . The 3 recovery zones met the recovery standards for the last 2 years and are expected to meet the 10 packs per recovery area this year, initiating the delisting process. The wolf is a wide-ranging, mobile species. Adequate habitat for wolves consists of adequate vulnerable prey and minimal human disturbance, especially at den and/or rendezvous sites. Primary prey species in northwest Montana are white-tailed deer, elk, moose, and mule deer. The distribution of wolves is strongly associated with white-tailed deer winter ranges. Wolves in northwest Montana typically den in late April. Wolves choose elevated areas in gentle terrain near a water source (valley bottoms) , close to meadows or other openings, and near big game wintering areas for dens and rendezvous sites. The project area contains elk and white-tailed and mule deer nonwinter ranges, which could provide prey for wolves. However, due to the high elevation, denning and rendezvous sites are not expected and harvesting activities would not occur in spring when wolves and their pups are sensitive to human disturbance. Wolf use of the area is expected to be transitory or sporadic; therefore, this project is not expected to affect gray wolves, and this species was dropped from further analysis for this project > Grizzly Bear Grizzly bears are listed as "threatened" under the Endangered Species Act. The Grizzly Bear Recovery Plan defines 6 recovery areas ( USFWS 1993 ) . This project is proposed in grizzly bear habitat in the North Continental Divide Ecosystem Recovery Area. The North Continental Divide Ecosystem is divided into subunits. Each subunit approximates the size of a home range for a female bear and is separated from other subunits based on landscape features. This project is proposed in the Upper Whitefish Grizzly Bear Subunit. The project area provides year- round habitat for grizzly bears. During the spring, bears search for winter-killed big game and lush green vegetation, especially in avalanche chutes. During the summer, bears seek lush green vegetation typically found in riparian areas . In late summer and into autumn, bears switch primarily to a berry diet. The project area contains high elevation, relatively flat basins bounded by steep slopes with numerous avalanche chutes and riparian habitats. Repeated spring observations indicate that grizzly bears could be migrating through the project area between denning sites and spring habitat. During summer and autumn, the basins and riparian habitats in Appendix F - Wildlife Analysis Page F -17 FIGURE F- 4— EXISTING ROADS AND ROAD MANGEMENT IN THE UPPER WHITEFISH GRIZZLY BEAR SUBUNIT Page F-18 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS the project area provide high quality habitat for bears. This project could affect grizzly bears directly through increased road traffic, noise, and human activity indicated by changes in road densities, and indirectly by altering the amount and location of hiding cover and forage resources . The cumulative effects analysis was conducted using the Upper Whitefish Subunit. This subunit is comprised of 84 percent DNRC- and 16 percent USFS-managed lands. This subunit receives a high amount of recreational activities, especially around Upper Whitefish Lake. Recreational use varies by season and includes snowmobiling, ice fishing, camping, fishing, ATV riding, firewood cutting, etc. During the nondenning season, these activities are generally confined to Upper Whitefish Lake, the surrounding area, and along open roads . Access management is a major factor in managing grizzly bear habitat. The subunit includes several open roads (Upper Whitefish, West Fork, Swede, Stryker Ridge, and Johnson) and the seasonally restricted (March 15 through June 30) Ant ice Road. Other roads in the area are restricted year-round with gates or berms ( FIGURE F-4 - EXISTING ROADS AND ROAD MANAGEMENT IN THE UPPER WHITEFISH GRIZZLY BEAR SUBUNIT) . To measure disturbance associated with open and total roads, a moving -windows analysis (Ake 1994) was used. Additionally, areas that are 500 meters from open or gated roads were defined as potential security core habitat. The road -management scenario in this subunit yields precise-open-road (POR) density (greater than 1 mile per square mile) of 31.8 percent; precise- total-road (PTR) density (greater than 2 miles per square mile) of 33.8 percent; and 51.6 percent of potential-security-core area. DNRC committed to design projects not to exceed the POR or decrease the amount of potential security core realized in 1996 baseline (ARM 36.11.432 [1] [c and d] ) , unless approved by the Forest Management Bureau Chief ( ARM 36.11.432 [c] [ii] and [d][i]). In 1996, the POR was 32.9 percent, PTR was 41.2 percent (no commitment under ARM), and 43.8 percent was security core ( TABLE F-5 - EXISTING AND BASELINE ACCESS -MANAGEMENT PARAMETERS FOR THE UPPER WHITEFISH GRIZZLY BEAR SUBUNIT) . In the present situation, grizzly bears benefited by the reduced disturbance realized in the subunit. Managing motorized access reduces the potential for mortality, displacement from important habitats, and habituation to humans, and provides relatively secure habitat to reduce the energetic requirements (Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee [IGBC] 1998) . In addition to the timber harvesting proposed under this alternative, a native culvert restoration project is included. This project would require "walking" an excavator to the head of Stryker Basin to remove earthen fill from over numerous logs that were used to form a culvert for TABLE F-5 - EXISTING AND BASELINE ACCESS MANAGEMENT PARAMETERS FOR THE UPPER WHITEFISH GRIZZLY BEAR SUBUNIT. PARAMETER CURRENT CONDITION 1996 BASELINE POR density (percent exceeding 1 mile per square mile) 31.8 32 . 9 PTR density (percent exceeding 2 miles per square mile) 33 . 8 41.2 Potential security core area (percent greater than 500 meters from potential motorized disturbance) 51 . 6% 43 . 8% Appendix F - Wildlife Analysis Page F -19 the existing road prism. DNRC hydrologist and fisheries biologists are concerned that these culverts will fail in the future and contribute high amounts of sediment to the West Fork of Swift Creek, which could affect bull and westslope cutthroat trout reproduction and survival (refer to APPENDIX C - WATERSHED AND HYDROLOGY ANALYSIS and APPENDIX E - FISHERIES ANALYSIS) . Access to these culverts would require use of a road that, presently, is bermed and water-barred, making it relatively impassable to motorized vehicles . Direct Effects • Direct Effects of JVo-Action Alternative .7 to Grizzly Rears No additional direct effects would occur under this alternative . • Direct Effects to Grizzly Rears Common to Action Alternative R and C Under these alternatives, disturbance would increase due to activities in the harvest areas and on the associated access roads. Due to the amount of area. Action Alternative B is expected to result in more direct negative effects than Action Alternative C. The specific road disturbance will be discussed under the cumulative effects analysis. To accomplish the harvests, some restricted roads would be used for commercial purposes, but public use would not be allowed over a period of several years . Disturbances associated with these roads are expected to result in decreased use of adjacent habitats by grizzly bears and will be discussed under Cumulative Effects. Indirect Effects • Indirect Effects of JVo-Action Alternative A to Grizzly Rears No additional habitat would be altered. Hiding cover would be retained within the proposed harvest areas. In time, increases in canopy cover could reduce forage production. No additional disturbance due to road use would occur. Therefore, negligible effects are expected. * I n Scenario 1 would require restriction of Stryker Ridge Road just past the intersection with Antice Road. This restriction would apply for the year(s) that the Johnson Road system was used for more than 7 trips per week or 30 consecutive days. If this were not acceptable , => Scenario 2 would extend the existing spring seasonal closure on the Antice Road to the full year for each year the Johnson Road system exceeds 7 trips per week or 30 consecutive days of motorized use. With the Johnson closure mitigation included in the project design and implementation of 1 of the 2 scenarios, grizzly bears could be displaced from the project area; however, DNRC would reduce disturbance in other areas to offset the habitat affected by road use associated with the proposed timber harvests. If these mitigations were implemented, bears would be displaced from the specific habitats in the project area, but would have other habitats secured for them to 'displace into' . Therefore, with the above-mentioned mitigations, the effects of this alternative are expected to be negligible. Scenarios 1 and 2 both increase the amount of habitat affected as compared to the existing condition; however, both scenarios reduce the amount of habitat affected to less than the 1996 baseline (TABLE F-6 - THE EXISTING, PROPOSED, AND MITIGATED POR UNDER ACTION ALTERNATIVE B) . => Scenario 3 would not incorporate road-disturbance mitigations while harvesting in Harvest Area III. The alternative practice authorized by the Forest Management Bureau Chief (ARM 36.11.432 [c] and 36.11.449) would be required for this scenario . With the authorized alternative practice, the increased road disturbance could result in grizzly bears TABLE F-6 - THE EXISTING, PROPOSED, AND MITIGATED POR UNDER ACTION ALTERNATIVE B 1996 BASELINE EXISTING CONDITION ACTION ALTERNATIVE B WITHOUT MITIGATION JOHNSON CLOSURE MITIGATION HARVEST AREA III WITHOUT MITIGATION HARVEST AREA III WITH STRYKER RIDGE CLOSURE MITIGATION HARVEST AREA III WITH ANTICE CLOSURE MITIGATION 32 . 9% 31 . 8% 36 . 0% 32 . 7% 34 . 0% 31.5% 31.4% Appendix F - Wildlife Analysis Page F -23 avoiding an additional 732 acres over the currently available habitat and 358 acres over the levels experienced during the 1996 baseline. The area where displacement of bears is expected provides good quality summer and autumn habitat. Displacement from these areas during the summer and autumn periods could result in increased energy expenditures and decreased forage consumption resulting in reductions of weight gain. Since bears are dependent on weight gain for survival and reproduction during the denning period, the displacement of bears from these good quality habitats could affect winter survival and reproduction. The scope of these effects is unknown and depends on a bear's ability to live in a disturbed area or seek out suitable undisturbed habitat. These effects would be present for at least the duration of the harvesting activities in Harvest Area III (approximately 3 nondenning seasons) . The combination of the timber harvesting proposed under Action Alternative B and the native culvert removal would reduce potential security core areas to less than the 1996 baseline, thereby violating ARM 36.11 . 432 (d) . If this alternative is selected, approval by the Forest Management Bureau Chief would be required (ARM 36.11.432 [d] [i] ) . Road access to Harvest Areas III would reduce security core areas by 1,052 acres, but still retain enough security core area to exceed the 1996 baseline. After 1996, Stryker Basin Road was bermed and water barred. This action increased the potential security core by approximately 2,500 acres. Therefore, while the timber sale in Harvest Area III is active, security core areas would be reduced, but would still be above the levels experienced in 1996. The combined use of North Johnson Road for timber harvesting and Stryker Basin Road for accessing the native culverts would result in a loss of security core area to less than 1996 levels. Options to restrict other roads in the subunit for long periods of time are extremely limited and not overly practical. Therefore, an exception to ARM 36.11.432(d) would be required for the native culvert removal. This project would occur between August 15 and September 15 and would be expected to last approximately 1 week. The culvert removal could be expected to prevent impacts to bull and native cutthroat trout (see APPENDIX C-WATERSHED AND FISHERIES ANALYSIS and APPENDIX E-FISHERIES ANALYSIS) . The loss of security core area for 1 week during the late summer period is expected to be negligible. In addition, the culvert removal would further inhibit illegal motorized use. Following completion of this project, all roads would revert to their existing management. • Cumulative Injects of Action Alternative C to Grizzly Hearn Under Action Alternative C, timber harvesting would not reduce hiding cover below 40 percent in the subunit. Since the subunit estimates are well above 40 percent, no measurable effects to grizzly bears are expected . Impacts to grizzly bears could intensify when the open-road density exceeds 1 mile per square mile because at this road density bears tend to avoid Page F-24 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS otherwise suitable habitat ( Mace et al. 1997). Under this alternative, grizzly bears are expected to avoid 556 acres of habitat due to the increased motorized use on roads associated with timber harvesting. To mitigate this increase, the gated closure on Johnson Road would be moved down to the base of the hill (Site A on Alternative C Map in CHAPTER II) . This mitigation would reduce habitat avoidance to 309 acres over the existing condition. This increased amount of habitat disturbance is still less then those experienced during the 1996 baseline conditions. Additionally, 166 acres of potential security core area would be lost for the duration of the harvesting and postharvesting activities in Harvest Area II -P ( TABLE F-7 - THE EXISTING , PROPOSED, AND MITIGATED POR UNDER ACTION ALTERNATIVE C) . Additional losses to security core would occur due to the repair of the native culvert in Stryker Basin. However, this disturbance would occur for only about 1 week during the summer period when habitat is most abundant. This disturbance would be limited to a backhoe and a small crew that would remove culverts on Stryker Basin Road. This alternative would not reduce the amount of habitat available to grizzly bears to less than was available in 1996 and does not exceed the limit of ARM 36 . 11 . 432 (1) (c) or (d) . During implementation of the project, small losses of habitat could occur that increase the energetic cost for grizzly bears using the area. In addition, increased access also increases the risk of mortality for bears. To mitigate this increased risk, any currently restricted road would retain the restriction to the general public. Additionally, contractors would be restricted from carrying firearms on restricted roads ( ARM 36.11. 432 [ 1 ] [m] ) . Since these losses would affect a small area and be short term, this alternative is expected to have minor negative effects. Following completion of this project, all roads would revert to their existing management. TABLE F-7 - THE EXISTING, PROPOSED, AND MITIGATED POR UNDER ACTION ALTERNATIVE C 1996 BASELINE EXISTING CONDITION ALTERNATIVE C WITHOUT MOVING THE JOHNSON GATE MOVING THE JOHNSON GATE 32 . 9% 31.8% 34.0% 32 . 7% Appendix F - Wildlife Analysis Page F -25 SENSITIVE SPECIES When conducting forest -management activities, the SFLMP directs DNRC to give special consideration to the several "sensitive" species. These species are sensitive to human activities, have special habitat requirements that may be altered by timber management, or may become listed under the Federal Endangered Species Act if management activities result in continued adverse impacts . Because sensitive species usually have specific habitat requirements, consideration of their needs serves as a useful "fine filter" for ensuring that the primary goal of maintaining healthy and diverse forests is met. The following sensitive species were considered for analysis. As shown in TABLE F-8 - LISTED SENSITIVE SPECIES FOR NWLO SHOWING THE STATUS OF THESE SENSITIVE SPECIES IN RELATION TO THIS PROJECT, each sensitive species was either included in the following analysis or dropped from further analysis for various reasons. TABLE F-8 - LISTED SENSITIVE SPECIES FOR NWLO SHOWING THE STATUS OF THESE SPECIES IN RELATION TO THIS PROJECT SPECIES DETERMINATION - BASIS Black-backed woodpecker No further analysis conducted - No burned habitat occurs in the project area. Coeur d'Alene Salamander No further analysis conducted - No moist talus or streamside talus habitat occurs in the project area. Columbian sharp-tailed grouse No further analysis conducted - No suitable grassland communities occur in the project area. Common loon No further analysis conducted - Neither alternative would occur near Upper Whitefish Lake. Ferruginous hawk No further analysis conducted - No suitable grassland communities occur in the project area. Fisher Included - Potential fisher habitat occurs in the project area . Flammulated owl No further analysis conducted - No dry ponderosa pine habitats occur in the project area. Harlequin duck No further analysis conducted - Neither alternative would occur near Swift Creek. Mountain plover No further analysis conducted - No suitable grassland communities occur in the project area. Northern bog lemming No further analysis conducted - No sphagnum bogs or other fen/moss mats occur in the area. Pileated woodpecker Included - Western larch/Douglas-f ir and mixed conifer habitats occur in the area. Townsend' s big-eared bat No turtner analysis conducted - No caves or mine tunnels occur in the project area. Page F-26 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS > Fisher Due to their use of mature and late-successional forested habitats, fishers are listed by DNRC as a sensitive species ( DNRC 1996). DNRC ' s strategy to conserve fishers in a managed landscape is aimed at protecting valuable resting habitat near riparian areas and maintaining travel corridors . Fishers are generalist predators and use a variety of successional stages, but are disproportionately found in stands with dense canopy ( Powell 1982, Johnson 1984) . Fishers appear to be highly selective of resting and denning sites. In the Rocky Mountains, fishers appear to prefer late- successional coniferous forests for resting sites and use riparian areas disproportionately to their availability. Fishers tend to use areas within 155 feet of water. Such areas contain large live trees, snags, and logs, which are used for resting and denning sites and dense canopy cover, which is important for snow intercept (J ones 1991) . Field reconnaissance indicates that all of the proposed harvest areas provide fisher habitat. However, in some of the areas, large snags and downed wood are rare, while relatively abundant in other areas. Timber harvesting and associated road construction could affect fishers by altering habitat and/or increasing susceptibility to trapping. Trapping pressure was responsible for the extirpation of fisher over most of their range by the 1930s. Although they again inhabit this area, populations remain vulnerable to trapping because fishers are easily caught in traps set for martens, bobcats, and coyotes; however, fishers are rare and are not trapped often. Vulnerability to trapping is influenced by the miles of road, both open and closed. The Upper Whitefish Grizzly Bear Subunit was used to assess cumulative effects. For a description of the subunit and ownership, refer to the Grizzly Bear portion of this analysis. In the cumulative effects analysis area, State trust lands provide potential denning/resting, foraging, and travel habitats. Currently, these areas are highly connected, thereby allowing fishers to use and move relatively unimpeded through the project area and the subunit. Direct Effects • Direct Effect* of JVo-Jlction Jllternative . / to Fishers No additional human disturbance or increased vulnerability to trapping would occur. • Direct Effects to Fishers Common to •Action Jllternative D and C Under each action alternative, some displacement could occur; however, the effects of this displacement would be minor. The risk of displacement is approximately proportional to the amount of habitat affected; therefore, Action Alternative B (1,270 acres) poses more risk than does Action Alternative C (938 acres) . Under Action Alternative B, 3.4 miles of new or temporary road would be constructed, while 3.1 miles of road would be constructed under Action Alternative C. The new temporary roads would increase access into the project area. Following use, these roads would be obliterated or restricted, thereby inhibiting use during the nonwinter period. However, during the winter period, access into the harvest areas via snowmobile would be increased. This increased access could result in increased fisher Appendix F - Wildlife Analysis Page F -27 mortality due to trapping. However, since fishers are rare and many of the areas are already accessible, no substantial changes to fisher vulnerability are expected. Indirect Effects • Indirect Effects ofJXo-. ‘Iction Alternative . / to FKshers Fisher habitat would remain relatively unchanged in the short-term. In the longer-term, more resting/denning habitat would develop. Fishers would benefit from the increased habitat and no increase in mortality risk, resulting in a potential increase in fisher use in the area. • Indirect Iffccts of Action Alternative It to Ushers Under Action Alternative B, 1,270 acres of habitat would be modified. In regeneration- harvest areas (1,198 acres), harvesting would remove fisher habitat for a period of time (15 to 30 years) and reduce the habitat quality in the adjacent stands, because fishers avoid openings (Roy 1991, Jones 1991) and are rarely detected near abrupt-edge habitat adjacent to clearcuts (Heinemeyer, unpublished) . The retention of seedtrees and snags would provide resting/denning structure for the future stand. However, these resources would be reduced by nearly 50 percent following harvesting. The regenerating areas could provide foraging habitat (snowshoe hare habitat) in the future (15 to 30 years) . A 100-foot, no-harvest buffer along the West Fork and Stryker and Johnson creeks would be retained to protect potential high quality resting habitat and travel corridors, since fishers travel along stream courses and prefer habitats in proximity of water (Jones 1991, Heinemeyer 1993) . This proposed alternative would reduce fisher habitat in the harvest areas ; however, habitat and travel corridors along perennial streams would be retained to provide fisher resting/denning habitat and allow movement through the project area. Within each harvest area, snags and large trees would be retained to provide denning/resting sites in the future. This would reduce the amount of time needed to become fisher habitat from 100+ years to develop resting structure to 15 to 30 years needed to develop horizontal cover. The reduction of denning/resting sites and foraging habitat in the uplands would result in increased energy expenditures, while decreasing forage opportunities. This alternative is expected to remove fisher habitat, while retaining travel corridors along stream courses, resulting in minor negative effects to fishers . • Indirect Effects of Action Alternative C to Ushers Under Action Alternative C, the same effects discussed above are expected; however, this alternative would not harvest in Harvest Area III (332 acres) . Harvest Area III has less desirable fisher habitat than the other areas in the flatter topography; therefore, this alternative would result in slightly less minor effects to fisher . Cumulative Effects • Cumulative Inflects of All Alternatives to Fishers Salvage operations and firewood cutting on State trust lands has decreased habitat . Salvage and regeneration harvests, especially in mature and late successional stands, has reduced Page F-28 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS the amount of habitat available on State trust lands . Habitat conditions on USFS lands are expected to improve in time; however, these lands occur higher in the drainage and are probably used less by fishers than the lower elevations. Under all alternatives, movement corridors from the project area into the cumulative effects area would be retained. The effects of the new roads discussed above would also apply to the cumulative effects area. Overall, Action Alternative B would combine with other activities on DNRC-managed to produce minor negative effects to fishers. Slightly less minor effects are expected under Action Alternative C. > piieated WoodpecKer Pileated woodpeckers, listed by DNRC as sensitive, play an important ecological role by excavating cavities that are used in subsequent years by many other species of birds and mammals . Pileated woodpeckers excavate the largest cavities of any woodpecker. Preferred nest trees are western larch, ponderosa pine, cottonwood, and quaking aspen, usually 20 inches dbh and larger. Pileated woodpeckers primarily eat carpenter ants, which inhabit large downed logs, stumps, and snags. Aney and McClelland (1985) described pileated nesting habitat as "stands of 50 to 100 contiguous acres, generally below 5,000 feet in elevation with basal areas of 100 to 125 square feet per acre and a relatively closed canopy." The feeding and nesting habitat requirements, including large snags or decayed trees for nesting and downed wood for feeding, closely tie these woodpeckers to mature forests with late-successional characteristics. The density of pileated woodpeckers is positively correlated with the amount of dead and/or dying wood in a stand ( McClelland 1979) . Potential pileated woodpecker nesting habitat was identified by searching the SLI database for 'old stands' with more than 100 square feet basal area per acre, more than 40 percent canopy cover, and below 5,000 feet in elevation. Due to the relatively high elevation of the project area, the pileated woodpecker is limited to the drainage bottoms in the project area. Only Harvest Area II (except Subarea II-H) provides pileated woodpecker habitat. Harvest Areas I and III are above 5,000 feet in elevation and are unlikely to be used often or heavily. Older-aged stands with dense amounts of deadwood would provide pileated with nesting habitat, younger- aged stands could provide feeding or lower quality nesting habitats . Since even the subareas in Harvest Area II are at the upper extremes used by pileated woodpeckers, this habitat is probably marginal. The project area is large enough ( approximately 5,035 acres) to provide habitat for several pairs of pileated woodpeckers. Of this area, approximately 3,000 acres occur at less than 5,000 feet in elevation, with 433 acres currently unsuitable due to past harvesting . Since the project area could provide habitat for several pairs of pileated woodpeckers , the cumulative-effects analysis area is the project area. Appendix F - Wildlife Analysis Page F -29 Direct Effects • Direct Effect* ofJVo-Action Alternative A to Pileated Woodpeckers No disturbance of pileated woodpeckers would occur. • Direct Effect * to Pileated Woodpecker* Common to Action Alternative * B and C Under the action alternatives, pileated woodpeckers could be affected if harvesting occurred during the nesting period. Nesting woodpeckers could be displaced by harvesting activities. The effects of harvesting disturbance are unknown; however. Bull et al . (1995) observed a discernible woodpecker roosting near a harvest area consistently throughout harvesting. Additionally, mortality of individual woodpeckers could occur if nest trees were inadvertently cut. This risk would be low because most nest trees possess some rot; therefore, they have low merchantability and would likely not be harvested. Action Alternative B would result in a low risk of directly affecting pileated woodpeckers. Action Alternative C would result in a slightly less risk of directly affecting pileated woodpeckers than Action Alternative B. Indirect Effects • Indirect Effect* of JVoAction Alternative A to Pileated Woodpecker* The existing trees would continue to grow and die, thus providing potential nesting and foraging substrate for pileated woodpeckers. However, as these trees die, barring any disturbance, replacement trees (shade-intolerant) would not be present. Therefore, under this alternative, pileated woodpecker habitat would increase through time, then decline, resulting in a short- to mid-term moderate beneficial effect to pileated woodpeckers, but a long-term minor negative effect. • Indirect Effect* to Pileated Woodpeckers Common to Action Alternative* B and C Under Action Alternatives B and C, 775 acres of pileated woodpecker habitat in the project would be modified. All of these areas would experience a regeneration harvest, thereby reducing the quality of nesting habitat for a long period of time in all proposed harvest areas ( McClelland 1979) . Some of the dominant and clumps of trees would be retained and would be expected to increase growth rates due to reduced competition. Additionally, large snags would be targeted for retention, especially western larch snags greater than 21 inches dbh, thereby retaining some feeding and nesting structures in the harvest area. However, some snags could be lost due to harvesting. These snags would be left on site to provide feeding substrates for pileated woodpeckers and other wildlife species. These alternatives are expected to result in negligible negative effects to pileated woodpeckers. In the longer term, serai species would be planted under this alternative and could provide pileated woodpecker habitat in the distant future. Cumulative Effects • Cumulative Effect* of JVo-Action Alternative A to Pileated Woodpeckers Pileated woodpecker habitat in and around the project area would increase through time on DNRC lands, then decline. This alternative would result in continued retention of the existing pileated woodpecker habitat on DNRC lands . These conditions would result in continued retention of pileated woodpecker habitat. Page F-30 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS • Cumulative Effects to IHleated II * 'oodpecker s Common to . let ion • Uternative s It and C Under Action Alternatives B and C, potential habitat would be reduced; this loss would be additive to past harvesting and salvaging on DNRC lands. Under both action alternatives, pileated woodpecker habitat in the analysis area would be reduced by 775 acres. The reduction is expected to cumulatively contribute to reduced habitat quality and quantity in the analysis area. However, since the analysis area occurs in higher elevation and, presumably, lower habitat quality, any effects would be negligible. Following harvesting, enough habitat is expected to remain in the project area to support at least 1 pair of woodpeckers . The long-term minor benefit could be realized by the regeneration of shade-intolerant tree species that are important nesting structures . BIG GAME SPECIES Deer, elk, and moose inhabit the project area. However, due to heavy- snow accumulations and high elevation, big game use of the project area is restricted to the nonwinter period. During the nonwinter period, forage and hiding cover are important components for these species. The project area provides dense hiding cover in both harvested and unharvested stands. To assess cumulative effects, the Upper Whitefish Grizzly Bear Subunit was considered. DIRECT EFFECTS • Direct Effects of jVo-, Iction . Uternative . 1 to /tiff Game Species No additional human disturbance or increased vulnerability to hunting would occur. • Effects of .Iction . Uternative It and C to / tiff Game Specie s Under each action alternative, some displacement could occur; however, the effects of this displacement would be minor. The risk of displacement is approximately proportional to the amount of habitat affected; therefore, Action Alternative B (1,270 acres) poses more risk than does Action Alternative C (938 acres) . Any use of restricted roads during the project period would require the contractor to keep the road restricted to the public with a sign during active periods and with a locked gate during inactive periods (nights, weekends, breakdowns, etc.). This mitigation measure would result in no increased direct effects to big game species. INDIRECT EFFECTS • Indirect Effects of the JVo-t Iction . Alternative . / to Dig Game Species No changes to big game habitat would occur in the short-term. In the longer-term, forage items could be reduced as canopy cover increases. These changes would be slow and localized. Hiding cover is not expected to change dramatically over time. This alternative is expected to result in negligible effects. • Indirect Effects of .Iction Alternative It and C to Dig Game Species Removal of the overstory canopy closure is expected to increase forage items, but would also reduce hiding cover. The reduction in hiding cover is expected to be short-term due to the rapid regrowth of shrubs in the project area. Visual screening would be retained along open roads in the project area. Since Action Alternative B would affect more area than Action Alternative C, these effects would be more pronounced in the project area under Action Alternative B. Appendix F - Wildlife Analysis Page F -31 However, these effects are expected to be negligible and could result in slight habitat shifts . CUMULATIVE EFFECTS • Cumulative Effects of All Alternatives to Ilig Game Species Under all alternatives, vegetative cover, especially along streams, would allow movement into and out of the project area. Harvest areas are expected to increase forage production in the cumulative effects area, with Action Alternatives B expected to produce more forage than Action Alternative C. No increases in forage production are expected due to No-Action Alternative A. Since no other projects are planned in the cumulative effects area, the effects discussed for the project area also hold true for the cumulative effects area. Page F- 32 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Proiect FEIS •>\XXv^^vio$0oc<^><^XXXXX^ ___ APPENDIX G ECONOMIC ANALYSIS I £ INTRODUCTION The West Fork Timber Sale Project is located in Stillwater State Forest, north of Whitefish in Flathead County. The project is in an area of relatively low population density and has produced timber for the area mills since the early 1900s. The focus of the economic section will be on market activities that directly or indirectly benefit the Montana education system, generate revenue for the school trust funds, and provide funding for public buildings . Flathead and Lincoln counties have historically provided both manufacturing and recreational pursuits . Manufacturing has historically focused on mining and timber, as well as a limited amount of agriculture processing. Recreation has focused on Glacier National Park, as well as the many lakes and mountains in the region. Mining has declined within the area in recent years, while timber has remained comparatively steady or declined slightly. EXISTING CONDITIONS The location of Stillwater State Forest in relation to purchasers likely to be interested in timber sales necessitates analyzing economic and demographic data for both Flathead and Lincoln counties, although there is a potential for purchasers further south and west to be interested in this sale. TABLE G-l - SELECTED DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION FOR FLATHEAD AND LINCOLN COUNTIES contains selected demographic information for each of these counties and for the entire State . TABLE G-l - SELECTED DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION FOR FLATHEAD AND LINCOLN COUNTIES Demographic Flathead Lincoln Montana Population 1990 59,218 17,481 799,065 Population 2000 74 , 471 18,837 902,195 Growth Rate 2.4% 0 . 8% 1 . 2% Median Age 37.2 38.2 37 . 8 School Enrollment 13 , 000 3,012 157,560 Flathead County is known for its production of "Flathead cherries" . Flathead County also has a large wood-products sector producing a variety of products that include dimensional lumber, plywood, and molding. In addition to wood products, Flathead County also has a large recreation industry that include the primary entrances to Glacier National Park and Big Mountain, a large and major ski destination. Lincoln County is located in the northwest corner of Montana. Historically, both mining and wood manufacturing played a large role in the County's economic activities. In recent years, mining has declined in the region and the timber industry has remained as one of the primary employers . An abundance of forests, lakes/streams, and wildlife have made the area also heavily used by recreationalists . School enrollment for kindergarten through grade 12 in the 2 counties combined is over 16,000. The data in TABLE G-2 - COVERED WAGES AND EMPLOYMENT IN 2002 FOR SELECTED INDUSTRIES IN FLATHEAD AND LINCOLN COUNTIES shows employment and income in selected industry categories for each of the 2 TABLE G-2 - COVERED WAGES AND EMPLOYMENT IN 2002 FOR SELECTED INDUSTRIES IN FLATHEAD AND LINCOLN COUNTIES INDUSTRY FLATHEAD COUNTY LINCOLN COUNTY AVERAGE ANNUAL EMPLOYMENT ANNUAL WAGES (000) AVERAGE WAGE AVERAGE ANNUAL EMPLOYMENT ANNUAL WAGES (000) AVERAGE WAGE Agriculture, forestry, and fishing 424 $13,717 $32,340 236 $6,655 $28,201 Forestry 70 10,392 36,898 210 5,893 28,020 Construction 2,411 73,054 30,295 193 5,190 26,928 Manufacturing 3,264 122,266 37,461 664 21,082 31,755 Lumber 1,426 55,536 38,945 575 19,190 33,384 Metals 475 21,280 44 , 800 NA NA NA Transportation 659 18,072 27,410 127 2,554 20,180 Trade 5,776 124 , 546 21,563 640 10,144 15,850 Eating and drinking establishments 2,685 29,392 10,259 363 2,969 8,178 Finance, insurance, and real estate 1,797 57,826 32,180 163 7,388 19,907 Services 9,736 290,648 19,875 1,554 24 , 177 15,557 Hotels, etc. 1,254 18,908 15,074 99 1,101 11,109 Amusement and recreation 952 12,667 13 ,306 81 985 12,221 Government 4 , 389 136,196 31,035 1,393 42,552 30,542 Total all industries 33,446 $853 , 132 $25,508 5,085 $118,983 $23,399 counties that are included in the analysis . Economic activity within the 2 counties varies substantially, although both counties have timber- related industry present. Lincoln County is less populated and less developed than Flathead County. Lincoln County has a substantially smaller labor force and a smaller number of workers employed in timber-related jobs. The average wage in the timber industry is 53 percent higher than the overall average wage in Flathead County (38,945 divided by 25,508 times 100) and 43 percent higher than the overall average wage in Lincoln County (33,384 divided by 23,399 times 100) . Service-industry wages are lower than the overall average wage in both counties . The service industries provide employment for over twice as many workers as the timber industry in Lincoln County and nearly 9 times as many workers as the timber industry in Flathead County. The average wage in the service industry is almost one -half of the average wage in the timber industry in both counties. Page G-2 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS ALTERNATIVE EFFECTS DIRECT EFFECTS Three options are being analyzed in this Environmental Impact Statement: No-Action Alternative A; Action Alternative B, which includes harvesting an estimated 61,750 tons (9.5 MMBF) of timber; and Action Alternative C, which includes harvesting an estimated 37,115 tons (5.7 MMBF) of timber. The following estimates are intended for relative comparison of alternatives and not intended to be absolute estimates of returns, taxes, employment, or wages . • Direct Effects of JVo-,/Iction Alternative . / None of the employment, income, or trust fund effects that result from the action alternatives would occur . • Direct Effects of Action Alternatives D and C Timber Sale Effects TABLE G-3 - ESTIMATED REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES FROM THE WEST FORK OF SWIFT CREEK TIMBER SALE PROJECT displays the estimated revenue and expenditures associated with the West Fork Timber Sale Project. The 2 alternatives analyzed may, for administrative purposes, be broken into smaller sales, but are treated as a unit for the purpose of this analysis. The volume for Action Alternative B is 61,750 tons , or 9.5 MMBF . The corresponding volume associated with Action Alternative C is 37,115 tons, or 5.7 MMBF. The areas associated with each alternative are identified in the map section of Chapter II. Broader market and local stumpage prices are currently well above the long-term average. These prices are highly dependent on the housing market and foreign timber imports. The housing market is highly dependent on the interest rate, which, in part, determines who can "qualify" to purchase a home. Interest rates are currently at very low levels; these low levels have not been seen since the late 1950s and early 1960s. Low interest rates normally impact the housing market by stimulating new construction to satisfy the demand for housing from individuals who can now "qualify" to purchase a home . The growth of the economy appears to be increasing, as the economic effects of the bombing of the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001 continues to decline. The result of the growth and low interest rates has been a continued strong housing market. Mortgage interest rates appear to be remaining at low levels, which helps keep the demand for housing strong . Restricted imports of timber and sheet goods from other countries, primarily Canada, have helped bolster prices by reducing the supply of TABLE G-3 - ESTIMATED REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES FROM THE WEST FORK OF SWIFT CREEK TIMBER SALE PROJECT ACTION ALTERNATIVE B ACTION ALTERNATIVE C Harvest volume 61,750 tons 37,115 tons Stumpage price $/ton $26 . 55 $25 . 50 Forest improvement fund revenue ( $10 . 20/ton) $631,750 $379,700 Stumpage revenue (harvest volume times stumpage price) $1,639,100 $947,600 State income (FI revenue plus stumpage revenue) $2,270,850 $1,327,300 Trust income (stumpage revenue minus expenditures ) $677,900 $359,000 Expenditures* $961,200 $588 , 600 Source: DNRC, Trust Land Management. *The State does not identify expenses for individual timber sales. The estimates used here are based on area- wide averages of the timber sale program. Appendix G — Economic Analysis Page G-3 timber available to homebuilders. In addition, the demand for U.S. timber has increase due to a combination of economic recovery in several countries and the devaluation of the U.S. dollar, which makes our timber relatively cheaper to foreign buyers . The timber prices used in this analysis attempt to recognize the current market conditions. Underlying Assumptions Project impact estimation and analysis assumes that most of the economic impact associated with the sales would take place in the 2- county area. The estimates are intended for comparative purposes and do not purport to be the value of the impacts in any absolute sense. Stumpage prices were determined using the current transaction equation modified by professional judgment to reflect current and local market conditions as much as possible. The estimated stumpage price per ton for Action Alternative B is slightly higher than Action Alternative C because Action alternative B has a greater volume of timber for sale, higher volume of timber per acre, and higher value material due to the quality of wood and average dbh . Fees collected for the FI fund are collected from the purchaser of the timber sale as part of their bid. Activities funded under this program include site preparation, tree planting, thinning, roadwork, right-of-way acquisition, etc. The current FI fee for the NWLO area is $66.50 per MBF . TABLE G-4 - NUMBER OF STUDENTS SUPPORTED BY 1 YEAR OF ESTIMATED REVENUE shows the difference in revenue to the trusts from the 2 action alternatives. The school trust income from a timber sale under Action Alternative B is estimated to be $677,900; enough to fund the education of 96 students for 1 year based on an average cost of $7,080, as determined by information provided by the Montana Office of Public Instruction. This information is shown in TABLE G-4 - NUMBER OF STUDENTS SUPPORTED BY 1 YEAR OF ESTIMATED REVENUE. If the sale does not take place, no students are benefited. A "cost" of not harvesting, compared to harvesting the timber under Action Alternative B, is the loss of financing for 96 kindergarten through grade 12 students for 1 year. The school trust income from a timber sale under Action Alternative C is estimated to be $359,000; enough to fund the education of 51 students for 1 year based on an average cost of $7,080, as determined from information provided by the Montana Office of Public Instruction. This information is shown in TABLE G-4 - NUMBER OF STUDENTS SUPPORTED BY 1 YEAR OF ESTIMATED REVENUE. If the sale does not take place, no students are benefited. Thus, one of the "costs" of not harvesting the timber, compared to harvesting under Action Alternative C, is the loss of financing for 51 kindergarten through grade 12 students for 1 year . If the trust does not fund these students through the sale of timber, funding must come from other sources, primarily property taxes. TABLE G-4 - NUMBER OF STUDENTS SUPPORTED BY 1 YEAR OF ESTIMATED REVENUE ACTION ALTERNATIVE B C Estimated school revenue $677, 900 $359,000 Students supported* 96 51 Source: Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation, Trust Land Management * Assumes all of the "trust" income would be distributed for educational purposes . Depending on the trust, some of the income is distributed to a fund that earns revenue for future education funding . Page G-4 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS Timber-Related Employment Timber harvesting generates employment. Keegan et al estimate that on average 10.58 jobs are created or maintained for every MMBF of timber harvested. Both economic theory and empirical analysis suggest that the marginal effect of an increase in the timber harvested is likely to be different than the average effect because of increasing returns. The marginal effect may be larger or smaller than the average. Empirical evidence would suggest that in a growing industry marginal effect on employment is likely to be smaller than the average. In a contracting industry, the marginal effect on employment could be either larger or smaller than the average. In most cases the marginal effect of increased or decreased timber sales is "lumpy", i.e. 2 sales of the same size under different conditions might induce a larger- than-average employment response in one case and a smaller- than-average , or nearly negligible, employment response in another. FIGURE G-l - TOTAL TIMBER HARVESTED FROM MONTANA FORESTS (MBF) demonstrates that the amount of timber being harvested in Montana from all sources has declined since 1987. The decrease in harvesting since the peak of 1,411 mmbf in 1987 has been nearly 40 percent to 854 mmbf in 1999. Mills, such as the Louisiana-Pacific Mill in Belgrade, recently closed, citing a lack of available timber as part of the cause of their closure. All of these point to an industry declining in size. Based on the previous discussion, the assumption of the average induced employment of 10.58 jobs per mmbf is reasonable. Because the exact conditions of this sale are unknown, the best estimate of employment, (i.e., the average effect on employment) should be used since it is the best estimate available and the marginal effect of the sale is unknown. A ratio of 10.58 jobs per mmbf of wood harvested implies the direct generation of between 60 and 100 jobs and between $2.2 and $3.7 million in wages for each alternative as shown in TABLE G-5 - WEST FORK I TIMBER SALE DIRECT EMPLOYMENT AND INCME IMPACTS. The wages are based on an average wage of $37,347 for lumber industry in both counties, using the from data in TABLE G-l-SELECTED DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION FOR FLATHEAD AND LINCOLN COUNTIES . These are the wages that directly result from the timber harvest. Without a timber harvest, income would be lost to the State and communities. Wages in the timber industry are higher than TABLE G-5 - WEST FORK TIMBER SALE DIRECT EMPLOYMENT AND IMCOME IMPACTS ACTION ALTERNATIVE B ACTION ALTERNATIVE C Direct employment 100 60 Wages and salaries $3 , 734 , 700 $2, 240, 800 FIGURE G-l - TOTAL TIMBER HARVESTED FROM MONTANA FORESTS (MBF) 1,600,000 1.400.000 1.200.000 « 1,000,000 | 800,000 X 600,000 400.000 200.000 0 IT) r- OS r— 1 cn i/N On f— 1 m t-- On r- K oo oo OO oo 00 ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON On ON ON ON ON ON ON ON i 1— H N— 1 »— i i *— i i— < *— < 1— H *— < *— i •— « Year Source: Montana Department of Natural Resources, Forest Management Appendix G - Economic Analysis Page G-5 average. This allows individuals working in the industry to obtain higher than average ownership of real personal property . Since much of the revenue for school funding comes from property taxation, higher levels of real property ownership should provide for better school funding . In addition to these jobs, additional employment is created when the income earned within the timber industry is spent to purchase goods and services elsewhere in the economy. There are also impacts from the logging companies and timber mills when they purchase goods and services from the local economy. Both of these effects are important since they support other community businesses such as grocery and clothing stores, gas stations, etc. The loss of the income from this sale would mean not only the loss of the direct income, but the loss of the indirect income as well. The economic impact on the schools occurs through ways other than just the direct contribution to the school trust fund from the revenue generated through timber sales. The timber industry pays taxes on the facilities it owns and operates. In the year 2000, the timber industry paid estimated taxes of over $848,600 to the schools in Flathead and Lincoln counties . The tax contribution, however, may decline in the future if more mills, such as American Timber Company in Flathead County, close. The closure of this mill has reduced the tax base by an estimated $4.4 million ( Jackson , South Wood Timber Sale EIS) , thereby reducing the taxes received by the school districts by about $28,500. This is a permanent reduction in school funding for over 4 students per year. INDIRECT EFFECTS Indirect economic impacts are much broader than those identified above. Some of these impacts are the result of the money from the timber sales "recycling" through the economy several times. For example, the money spent for groceries by the employee of the timber mill, in part, goes to pay the salary of the grocery store employees; the grocery store employees use that money to purchase groceries for themselves. This, in turn, generates more income for the grocery store employees, etc. Unfortunately, a model of the county that could be used to demonstrate secondary effects is not available. In a broader State-wide context, money paid to the woods industry workers results in increased State income tax collections as well as increased purchases in other areas of the State. Income tax collections from the wages of millworkers alone are estimated to generate between $87,000 and $146,000 in State tax revenue, depending on which alternative is selected. Taxes on indirect wages would add to this tax amount. Since State revenue is spent on projects State-wide, the entire State shares, in part, in the benefits that result from the timber sale. In particular, Montana schools benefit additionally by being able to use these revenues to fund schools throughout the State. Nonmarket Issues A quantitative analysis of the economic value of nonmarket benefits and costs will not be part of this analysis because they do not generate income for the trust, although they do affect the well- being of Montana residents. Because of their effects, a short qualitative discussion of nonmarket issues follows. A brief description of the biological impacts is included in order to identify areas where economic values might be affected. A more detailed discussion of the biological impacts is found in other sections of the report. Environmental Modifications - The harvest of the timber would modify Page G-6 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS the undisturbed development of the forest and, as a result, would affect both the short- and long-term habitat and wildlife regimes. How individuals value these modifications is an empirical question and may be viewed either positively or negatively by different individuals. The estimation of the net social benefit or loss of the impacts described in this EIS is an empirical issue that does not directly affect the school trust fund. Human Use - The harvest area has been historically used for recreational purposes such as hiking, hunting, and fishing. While the use of these areas is likely to decline or change during the period of logging, long-term overall use of the area is expected to remain high. Some nonmarket uses are unlikely to change. Fishing, for example, should not be severely affected by the logging since SMZ laws protect streams . The aesthetics would be modified; some individuals would view this as a loss, others may prefer the more-open forest that would result from the harvest. Visual changes are minimized to the extent practicable by limiting the trees harvested in some areas and by "sculpting cuts" to avoid "unnatural" visual lines. Some activities may be enhanced. For instance, the logged area may enhance the habitat of some game species, and the increased use of areas by those game species may make the area more attractive to hunters. As in the case of the environmental modifications, the net social benefit or loss is an empirical issue dependent on individual values . Social Impacts The area has a substantial presence in the wood-processing industry and, as a result, has institutions established to handle the social requirements associated with this industry. This timber sale is unlikely to add sufficient pressures to these institutions to require their modification. A high rate of employment (low rate of unemployment) is associated with lower rates of crime, domestic violence, alcohol/drug problems, and a healthier, more satisfied community. To the extent that No- Action Alternative A might contribute to unemployment, the social impact of the harvest might be a short-term negative social impact on the community. Conversely, to the extent that the sale provides employment, the short- term impact would be positive. Roads and Infrastructure New roads are to be constructed for the sale(s) . Existing roads would be improved to handle the logging truck traffic and provide transport for other equipment used in logging. Expenditures for road improvements are identified in both action alternatives as part of the sale development cost. Some improvements are also funded through FI funds, as well as other funds set up for this purpose. To the extent that these expenditures are spent locally, they will improve local economic conditions. A portion of the money will leave the area and provide income for other areas of the State and national economies. The culverts, for example, usually come from manufacturers outside of Montana; however, most of the road improvement expenditures will remain in Montana. Population Impacts Logging and milling activities associated with the timber sale are not anticipated to have any long- term impact on the population of the region or the State of Montana. CUMULATIVE EFFECTS This sale would be part of the annual harvest of timber from the State of Montana forest trust lands. The net revenue from this sale would add to the trust fund. Annual trust Appendix G - Economic Analysis Page G-7 fund contributions have varied widely over the years, because the actual contribution to the trust is more a function of harvest levels than of sales. Harvest levels can vary substantially over time; sales tend to be more consistent. TABLE G-6 - ANNUAL REVENUE FROM TIMBER HARVESTED FROM MONTANA TRUST LANDS shows the annual revenue from harvesting for the last 5 years. The net contribution to the trust fund is also affected by the annual costs experienced by the Department for program management, which varies year to year. The Department should continue to make net annual contributions to the trust from its forest management program. TABLE G-6 - ANNUAL REVENUE FROM TIMBER HARVESTED FROM MONTANA TRUST LANDS YEAR HARVEST REVENUE ($) 2003 8,270,589 2002 9,699,034 2001 8,524,150 2000 12,710,311 1999 6,998,847 DNRC has a State-wide sustained- yield annual harvest goal of 50 MMBF . If timber from this project is not sold, this volume could come from sales elsewhere; however, the timber may be from other areas and not benefit this region of the State. A long-term deferral of harvesting from this forest would impact harvest patterns, changing both the region where the trees are harvested and the volumes taken. This would impact other areas of the State where these changes occur. Page G-8 West Fork of Swift Creek Timber Sale Project FEIS APPENDIX H COMMENTS AND RESPONSES This section contains comments received from parties interested in the West Fork Timber Sale Project DEIS and DNRC's responses to those comments. A response is not required for those portions of the comments that stated either an opinion or a recommendation. All comments were carefully reviewed. DNLRC appreciates both the time and thought that was involved in producing these comments. The decisionmaker will carefully consider each received comment to aid him in deciding on a course of action for this project. ' a h a) s 0 a -H 41 a o a .u id 43 4-1 10 a) 4-1 m 41 m a id •* G CO it) H 6 &q •H Q u ■— a G a> a> (DOS 41 id G It) a tn it) a > rH 0) rH O) G -h a 4-1 -rl X) W X G It) It) 41 o •rl 43 41 •rl £ CO It) g .0 41 CO a) u o o H 41 41 -rl O a o a 0) o G -H a o •rl ■U It) a) 3 G -n G O a <1) 0 ti O It) ® 43 CO ® 41 G 41 G It) 0) G > 4J 0 o 03 a) 0) s > s It) *rl G It) X) to s 0) 4-1 43 M 0 O rH 0 a> 3 G 1 G -rl 0 41 44 ft • 41 41 01 a) 1 III G rH CO CO id it) A I 44 G A X a> G M -H G n n) ■H i > B a> •rl it) n) 4J O Id 53 4J ' ® -rl ■rl 4-1 £ 41 ■rl 44 G O T) 4J ai ■rl > 0) 4-1 0) G 0 43 G * -rH to CD G 1 0 -rl v 4-1 0 • o 4-1 a> 0) 0) 0 ' O 43 — s 41 to T) o •rl 0) G 4J i tn tN 4-1 G 4-1 id 4-1 a> 0 0 l 01 1 0 0 co T3 •H rH a >w 1 >1 G H G ft 0 G 41 G rH G -rl ft G it) G 0 0 0) « n) > 01 to O 4-1 <1) 4-1 O 4-1 rH i fi a> bl -rl * G It) A | *H *H It) to rH G 0 o id ft 4 i n) s ® ■rl 43 G O >4 tl) tfl i G H G > O G id G 43 4 i 0 G 0 o co O 0 -0 id 4-> G i O 0 G p4 G ■rl l <0 41 0 i 44 0 ft a) 41 G X) G a) 4-1 a> 4j a> 43 id a) •rl a> i— i 43 rH Q, 4J 4-1 41 o A > s •rl <5 X *5 <2 r* "T $5 £? 45 *r -s rn S ■*r A tr, («; S' ^ S 55 w Cj B CJ ca O O E > o Z > n -a CO CO ° O o .2 a a 3 a CD 5 © 43 4— • O E 0X) a E ^ © 53 4-r • rH > a> -O a a ox o a a o ox _c co o a o a a CO a cu OX a a a E ■a a JO 4/ H-> a w C/5 4/ > a 41 £ a a ox a >-» 42 a o o O 4, X5 jg -O c-» ts a 5/5 w a >2 “S ^•a » .a ox a •aoa c - o a m -a *h 2 c ox5 « a a 3 •— a 4i -£ 4/ 2 a 4* a jg « 4> 3 ox -a +3 **■ R "5 ° a o o g a .2 -o c 3 .2 a ox •> w 4/ . co 43 J "O •*- -a a a 2 a cu g — •a .2 4= J3 2 ^ la % ^ 4> r a as « ^ « f i M 0> ^ S >2 a « a 4/ ■a 43 a ■*_> i 3 S a ^ « 2 3 b o Q- ^5 . > % a cE g (Z) §5 .2 +- o 3 a _ .2 *3 43 ,>* H H . 44 a i- 4> a a h-i t3 a 43 a a. £ a .a O 3 a CO O U 3 o a <*- 4/ Comments and Responses Page C&R-3 4) ® a) -U m 4i B a) 43 (tJ 43 Id 0 B 41 43 V 4J CO ® 0 B ■U tO ® ® > X! hi • » 43 -H ® ft 41 ® m 4> 43 3 4J d 3 Oi CO 41 41 01 X 01 XJ 41 O 41 C CO 5 -H C *H 41 X) O 0 « ai -h t3 ® o ® ® 4) -H 43 O c 43 ® ft B > ® i-> > > ® id Id C ® X 41 ® Id Ol T-> O 0 0 O X) O B ® B B 0 B 4: ft •r-i 3 43 B 4) ft B 3 B ® b id ® C Ol ® 4 % c JQ ^ 0 O ft ft 4> ft X) 43 5 •rl -rl > ' — ' •H 0 CM B ® oi -h 0 WOT) 1 43 41 41 3 . * oi oi u B 01 oi ® 01 c 41 CO 4i H 41 O 0 a ® m b -h a ® ® H ® X) Id C ® O ® c •H H >, 0 43 O ■U g ® ■rl 5 ® > ® ® XJ *r"» 4) 3 (d >41 4) a i 0 oi 41 41 id •H ■no® 0 01 fl 4) s Ol -H O -rl OH—® 4) O id -rl B id 0 3 oi >-i xl c 4) ft 01 Id B ft ■B ft S O *M >, ® OH O 0 -rl Id t Id c ft rl C H <41 3 H S B 41 01 a s a B s 4J m 32 41 43 9 01 ® 01 •H 41 CO O o H C CM rH 41 ft XI id -n C S C 3 H U 3 0 -H 41 43 0 cm u 0 C O a) 0) 0 x-s to fO u a) 0 ® 01 Id 0 41 O 2 0 xJ B r- 0 X) H 43 oi B -r-i ft > ® C O id 5 Ol 1 ® -H 01 to ® ft 41 ® ® 0 B ® -rl O O 41 c 4) ft ® ® a q ft 43 B 3 -h 4> -H i oi 41 •H 5 CO X} CO f— 1 Ol CO 0 ft ft 43 -H 41 O nJ ■o • ® ® 41 ® 3 43 •H ® ® •H O > id -rl H 43 ® ® B 43 r- ft Ol m 43 3 • 41 Oi rH fl) -H U rH Cd ■P ® c O 41 X) id 3 ® 41 CO m C id H 3 43 oi O 0 >44 C 01 ® 0 X) CO 01 Id -rl C 0 O X3 3 O co X Ol 43 id > B c •H ® B 0 4) id ® ft ft ® ® ® 01 41 B -H 43 ® -rl O >41 3 •H 0 •H B a -rl M a 4J ■U B ® O 0 X) 41 tn 4) H ® c 41 B 0 Ol 5 X) 43 Id ® X) 43 B ® 41 ft ® X) U Id ® C 41 c ■d oi oi id -r 41 O •H > ® 3 5 0 0 h 3 01 ® ® ® ® H 41 CO -U 4H CO Ol -rl ft TJ d) *H CD X) -rl -rl • O -H CO C 01 0 ® B Ol 41 C -H b •H *H H ® 01 c ® 41 ® -rl 3 H ® Id -H -H 41 o 41 V ® O ft 41 X ■H •n CJ B CU rH (1) B 43 C X) B -rl ft ® oi o ft 0 Id C 0 0 ® X) 0 0 > 0 41 id Xl 3 C ft ® 3 ® z 0 41 XJ CD •C d ft *H ft id X) rH CD Ad AJ TJ cn n M > H •H ID d ft 10 ft V 5? A! id CD A3 AJ AJ U rrl r 1 rrl d) ft 0 d &3 AJ tn A3 tn O CO • Eh a3 O d AJ rH » XJ cd id rH rH cd Oj o M yj CL) d> xx ,r M 0 Q • id d 4J 0 •rl •rl N— •rl CO ft tn N o XJ id id tn •rl d XJ Ad d rH rH d ,_q rM n cn xx 0 9* Tl d •H U Ul d CO CO •H Eh XJ CO d ft d > o a tn CD -H id ft co CD rrl l ) a •rl -rl ft AJ d id u d 0 cd S d rt M cd 0 cn rl *H r CD Q d N ft id CO -rl ■rl 2 0) d at > Ad ft •H cn rj > cq £ AJ • d id (D •rl d d CO ft ft XJ H 0) H AJ XJ p 44 CD u s ft •H AJ X) B ft AJ Tl d> rH Jj rj d) 4-> m -H XJ a) d id 10 CD CD CO H d U ft d X) 41 3 • — i •rl rl g d a cd id V d) 4J cd Ph o Jj d) XJ X) d * «■< > Ad cn cd cn 0 *H cd bi •0 0) id d id 2. 4J A) X AJ d d Q ft • CD XJ d •rl id U d £h U ft * XJ d cd 4J cd Pi cd a) xJ 0 & O U d AJ XJ •H ■ V ft co Ad •rl 44 id CO AJ id CD d) a ft X) d CD _Q M *H p T3 Q ft a) d 0 00 -H a) a) O • u d XJ ft 00 CD AJ 0 AJ a) d Ad d d id 4J Q ID id CO rM jj CL p ft a> 0) ID a3 i d •n •n £ AJ CD •H id o X i 3 CD d •H 0 AJ Pi d cd cd 2 ft d d) cn VH JJ CD Pi v "0 d CD H d 0 O CO -n XJ o d H co CO d AJ 0 AJ o -rl 3 44 * a Eh O » 0 a) P o o co •H •d H d d XJ d 0 X) co O H iX CO id CD d 2 ■rl d O 0 rH cd i — 1 id u cd Q X) 0 rH AJ CD ID rH Q) p p CO a M d co d •rl AJ ft •H id CD XJ Ad XJ co 6 CD •rl d CD •rl co AJ -H d Ad > d • C/) cn rH £ -H •rl o 0 <+-l id 4) id AJ X) 44 (D 44 Ad id tn 2; CD CO ft Ad AJ id a AJ •rl d 4-> o AJ ai cd CD CO H Cl) a) o s 0 tn d CD ■rl CO •rl —v AJ 0 3 o CD 3 CD 0 AJ O d id CD cn 2 XJ a AJ CD Ctj XJ cn co id CD ID CO AJ Ad •rl AJ 04 d 0 H Ad cn 3 rH id CD id > U 0 rH cd id •H f-i o # ■H u d co aj ft 4-> d O d AJ Ad d 1 Ad d Eh co co cn CD d u XJ d ft u Ad -H a) AJ * AJ H n p rd PS 0 d d id CD ft CD AJ CD H tn CD Ad -d d •H co > CD CD d d a) £■ O 0 AJ AJ d d •H a) o d) a) •H -U ID »» d 44 0 XJ 0 X) 3 XJ AJ ft CD x> •H a> XJ o CD O CO Q rH 4-1 *H d id o X) > Xi # u •H Z 0 co Q V id a tp id 44 d •rl AJ d •rl CD o 3 ft AJ XJ d d o a CD D 2 d ■H 4J cn o 0 cd cq id AJ 3 W ft •H ft •rl tn d rH 1 ft ft id d X) P 3 O o > a d cd AJ cd u g H % u co > CD X) CD d CO id Ad a 1 H £ id CD CD f O 0 id u CD cd m Ad a pj o cn •H o •r| ft AJ 0 o H co CD Ad d CO a) ft AJ d N Eh > Ad CO u m i X) rH X • rH AJ * cd *H •r{ d) u 4J a 4-1 d t-i id Id Ad AJ d CD > •iH H ft X) CD rH AJ * 1 d d A CD d ft -H iH 4J 4J cd d) cn s •H s XJ d ft 0 AJ AJ >. •rl CD U CD CD 0 •H AJ cn cd 0) a) co e tn iX rH CO d d AJ 0 CD » tn •H •H •H rH s o 4J CD d) cd | H X) 2. H AJ id d 4J AJ rH AJ ft 3 D) rH cn u > r*H ft a) d & cn ►3 0 rH d & d d A3 AJ AJ ft X 0 3 2. CO d X) u XJ ft •H cd 4A •d id 0 ■a tn -H cd (D p cd JJ > id ■ a> * rH d •rH 6 id a) O D d id H CO Ad D1 CD CD 0 0 3 a u •rl 0 d O d id 4-1 o cn X a) d si ID 0 XJ 0 AJ AJ ft CD d s Q AJ 0 • AJ d A3 X) id V tn 0 i* u 0 o id d 4J cd p 4H H X) CO > d o CD rH AJ X) d to ft CO d d co id d d ft d -U to AJ rH a) 0) p a) cd o AJ 4J CD d o d id U ft -rl CD cn 44 CD AJ X) CD 0 * H •rl cn X CO o f; p *H g AJ d id 4H H X) CO 44 id o CD CD AJ ft CD 0 * CD > CO CD AJ u rH ft AJ a) tn a) CD AJ CD 1 4J -H o M 4J p ft u 0) S 0 H •H CD 0 v ■n to rH H ft d XJ > ■rH X) id -H Q id a a) ft rH AJ p4 ft i >1 p o ft a) 0 4J Ad o to O o d id Eh *4 X) CO CD id AJ ft a * CD 0 ft ■r| d CD A3 CO 4-1 ft p d) •H ft n 3 tJ cn 04 0 AJ AJ AJ CD H d ft CD § XJ ■rl ft Ad id H id d cn •rH S XJ U 3 id CD o cd a) cd cn cn *£ 0 > d V W d CD id XJ &J ft ft » d s id CO 0 d ft ft XJ id ft u -u 3 AJ d d d 0 rH a) •H M 0 •d o Eh d co •rl Q 0 ft ft >1 rH XJ d Q X AJ ft AJ -rl H AJ rH CD i — i CD CD -U >h XJ co AJ rH u 44 rH AJ CO 44 cn rtf 2 > ft d) tn ft ft a i > d ft id o CD a) cd AJ Eh ft id > 3 AJ CD cn CD a ft d cd a ■rl id d id o p *H cd (D Pi d> a 0 8 tn i id •rl O d 3 H cn d o xl ® -U 4-1 0 > -rl P ® ft o td ft ■H 44 01 m p p u •H •H P X) tn tn ft •rl ft P 0 -H ■rl n Xl Xl -rl B O O P p ® d ft •rl d « p p Cn 44 3 tt) ® TJ M id k«; TJ ® ® • to d x) •H 0 0 H P •n O N -H P ft d cn P —N d o d X J H X) ft XI P P X) to CJ O 0 « o 1 •rl P fi ® P P Ol X) 44 - P ® CQ p • » d H 0 ro ft 0 V fi -a a 0 ft ® id tn OP® ® P P P a p > H tn ft o> td d P X w d P a) ® O <0 to ft ro P « H td d ® 0 tn rH p X) to d Q ® o O gj r-i fi o ® a) -H • cn ro 0 -rl •rl 44 P 0 N ro p to to x a p •H p cn X) ■rl ® V PH - ■rl ft d •rl CO o o tn V p d O p ft P ® ® H H ® tJ o ® 1 — 1 | d P H TJ O* m cn p ft to d ft P ® P 0 td ® P >4 0 ® a tn ro ro to tn ft O TJ H •H H J P 0 p P Xl •rl « cn ® P ft •rl O X P ft a> 0. P to 44 d p p X) o 3 > P > o Cn w P A id d •H 0 o ® i ft H O td ® td ® a P to a) ® •rl p « ® •H 44 •rl ® 44 P d ® •H •H > P Id X) I • to 44 44 n -n 0 O H n 0) Xl 0 o P p — N d -H ® s? 0 d ® ® 9 d a 4J P a u ® M 1 CN| •rl p o 0) P to £ P p ■rl ft -rl ® d -rl 1 1 d P H d ft m 44 P « to 44 S tn ® H ® ® •rl Eh •rl O •rl - P p 4-1 •H 0 -rl > • d 01 Xl Xl X) « •TO X 01 H m id ® 0 X) •rl « P i Xl P tO a d 0) P g 5 P X) TJ H 0 d -H ro ® S d (0 xl ■rl ® d ® V s ® p O X 1 ft o p i > TJ # 0 ' XI H tn 3 «. 4J P tn d » •rl p ® M p Id P P p d a ® P o TJ ft TJ M ® p d w a •H ® P TJ d x i N « ® ® ® n a ® • m o •H a) a) •n ® 1 -rl 0 « h P ■1—1 a ft P ® m i m h Cn p p « 0 A 1 O •rl 1 3 f— 1 0 H H ro ® ro ® ® 0 a> o 43 P 1 d P P 1 ft p fi D ■rl m • rl « w H r-i 44 P ft ■*H 1 -H o a ) ft > ft P z u td m P i to a) 0 a 1 P 1 « X 1 *1 ® ® ft 0 Id 44 x! s a) P « ® 44 £ 1 ft « ft m ® ® ® i 0 P 0 xl 0 Xl 44 Xl d -r i ft d X! « ft a p h XI ! 0 P td u 4-1 a p 0 1 4J H X J -3 P TJ 3 ro ro P p ' H ft ft to ft d ft o ® •rl rH W 01 p •H i 5 ft (d -u >i d O X H to l H M o Xl H ® — s ® to Eh ® a xJ P G) 01 ro c*l ft p 2j ■rl H § d ■U cn tJ td P H 1 m p O H ft ro rH Q ® > ft Q ft S ® ft ^ *H P H ® H ® TJ H ft ft ft ft •* O o id d ft 0 ® d H Eh to ft -h •H 4H ® a H Q P p ro id ft Eh > 0 44 Xl • — p •rl rt « ft TJ H rH i iii d tJ O % P ® 3 d 1 •rl CU ■rl d ro to 1 p p P i P ft ro ft cn o H td B ® ft d -rl id P u M tr-4 ill « ro 44 ft H - TJ TJ m 44 p ® p 1 H P X d d) 'd id p O P Oi ® to d d ft M « cn -h ® o ro H « •rl Q| ro H 1 o u O r* p ® d 0) ft O i — i ft p ft H ft M4 M h ro o d P 01 * Eh to Q H H 0 *H ® d to s p ® ft •rl i M ol ■rl ro d ft p 0 d < ro 0 ft cy ® ® H H d a rl ft « to X tM P >1 to ro ft ro ft o p P ® US 4J H td Xl s ft p 1 •H o Oi iM TJ 3 a m X! ® H ® d h ro H -U P TJ d p 3 -rl O p ft ro p ■ ft '□ id ® •s ro z ro P •rl H •s ro H w Xl P ® ® «c ® ro Xi ft — -s ® X H - * j P ro p p xl p H * ft to to ft Cn rH ® H d p ft i H •rl ® « H 4J •• f \ rrl *4. ro 44 ro « ft ® d d I TJ > Oi ft U TJ « d > p 0 H a p p to H p ro ft G) rH , H ® -rl X p O ro « « X) H XI ro ft ft * ' 3 p ® ® ft ® p p d P xl o o w P TJ Ol ® ro ro ro ro 0 -rl - S w > q A /fi d ro « Ol i •rl « ® p -u d ft *i Oi td ft XI X) * ro 0 m Cn rH d fi p O Ol -rl fe; T5 rt JQ •rl tO P 01 01 P TJ H d p H O G) 0 0 rA 1 1 i >4 d p 01 TJ ft d d d « 1 •rl ro Eh H uj -n h f\ l 1 o 44 ® ro d H H •rl ro p N P p rt Eh o y ft C\ •rl 01 •rl ® R d TJ p to H d ® 2 V-M A 1 /It P 0 p P 0 2 H P a ® ro a ft ft V *ri US d XI •H •H P ft ro H ■rl > « H « ft ft M M cn A r 1 ffd « p « B TJ ft p U a p Oi ft Ol ft ft ft U ID m <11 x) id XI •rl ® ft ® a « ro ro ® ® ft ft UJ us P ® m -rl ft P H p p •H P xl ft P p 0 P -rl 44 ft TJ • • • • Page C&R 8 West Fork Timber Sale Project Comments and Responses Page C&R-9 as well as new regeneration became infected when their roots came into contact with roots from infected stumps. I C/3 * ~ •s § a - * B sj x j2 JS cm © © k. 2 b ■o © CM I -C © 8 a '5 © © a 8 £ x s •- -o £ s - 8 |M CM — *7 -o T B © y> u 8 >> g 2 5 u © S3 8 S3 t o o cm e 1 1 sa a £ *3 .2 “ — B © "2 .© 8 Cm *3 o *r If £ S3 O © o cm © a fc. © A . ka ( J ox 3 2 © M cm &ai © s 3 OX ka a © .3 © X ® 3 2 < £ 2 ~ e a 00 S £ oo 3 © Os x g ~ Q.O — 8 -C 98 k. © — OX £ 41 © H 3 Q.'= « ;r ©- 22 j ° § „ j?» V) k. 8 0“ © ••—i S3 V) 8 8 •■3 £ 2 i X ch w k. CM 4> 0 > M 8 k. — 0) k. B OX 8 B 8 — 8 M ■o CM !►> fS a S3 | 2 S CS = .£ 3 *8 M © CM k I © B B 3 1 s 8 «s a, o is a. O O 2 C 2 ° 2 © 2 I ox _o E £ o k. © Cm cm © .£ £ a M 3 O k. >> >- 8 — (j S3 © B ^3 8 *- k. 3 OX 8 «m E _ ox-- ° £ ■§ 8 ^ sx o ? S «© 3 S3 .© 8 2 *-3 S3 ■© ’ » = Su IS5” •- 8 S'® •B g ^ rc £ £ o 8 >■ -3 B M — o CM O B k. | £ Sq > — 3 .2 >» 8 8 3 k- O V .3 — *- .£ 2 x ^ Oj Cm a -2 £ ox o s w -a — . o OX 8 « a 0 m 3 *S B c2 Jb £ .£ w a 8 1 3 Q- c a* b *- 1> 8 8 «M pB ®f-a 'W C g ^ *a a OX v S o -B >» OX 00 -o B OS k. ’B s== j _! 2 U g 8 *a b o •M "O *“* *C O £ -S' o <-> ox *- 2 ■« B o B o 1 u ■W 1 ,o k. «y o e 3 ,4> z #o *w V) fl 5tS *5 E 4» -w a X! _8 o ka o q -o 0 fl fl •w C/3 k. 8 O a> B o B 0/ a O £ 2 "O « a | o^,« y. «m « 2 > l” O iu B S ^ •k* fO M O os a o 2 8 £ C CUD - S H B o .£ £ 22 OX 3 B OX k 3 © a S3 >►> *“ X3 -Q O ^ .22 O £ -© • 8 ^ 2 ka O fj HP4* ^ ka CM CM v 2 o a CM ai -a O. 8 -E S3 £ ^ 8 CM ._ 8 a « a .22 2. ■© 8 £ a "al ■B k. O B 8 ej ^ b 2 — m S2 o fl ^ M 2 B Cm 8 ° 2 CM ■° B o o - s g 2 cJ a && ■o a> y k » 2 — _B OX fS H 3 Os w © os *2 Q Ml O w k. a *- -o S § u a all — 8 Cm a © o 8 1 ■§ I 2 £ ■is? O £ g Page C&R-10 West Fork Timber Sale Project Comments and Responses Page C&R 11 Page C&R 12 West Fork Timber Sale Project 1 XJ Ol Ol 4 a) >5 4 di 0) a 3 3 0) a) •LI >5 H d> ■ bi 0 H g 4 •rl -rH > cH 0J H H pi a> 14 fa 8 4 o> 3 4 4 O rQ H H n § 4 O .3 v •r| 3 a; •H dJ 0 0 ai ca x) § 1 id a O 0 0 ca w 1 4 4 8 O Q H Q. d> id 0 tn 01 Eh d) 3 •rl -rl O ■H -H Q. 0 a. 01 XI d) a; 3 a> ft X) 01 3 3 •H rH a) s Q< < 4 H O 4 g 0) id O O 4 a < * O X) 3 S ft; 01 XI 8 0 se O 0. H u N d> g •rl Jft 0 id 4 id 0) <0 0 Q 01 -n id ca • 0 S 0 0 4 <4-1 tn 5 rH O ■o ■ — , id d> XI •rl . •rl a> . d) ca •H Ll 0) d) 0 M d> a) 4 4 4 4 -N X) W 0) •H o. 0 0. S 01 I? 1 01 O ■rl 01 id 00 4J •rl -H Ll o. a •H 3 H H 4 aj » 0) 0 41 4 m ca 0) 4 4 h H O •n 4 0 8 Vj >. >1 X XI 01 in co H >4 •d O 0) O Id . 0> 0 rH rH 01 C id 4 •H H di 4 0 <4 4 ><; d) XJ 4 ft 3 Ol -H 3 fl fa <4 4 > 4 ca Ol dl id id 4 0 . Ol T3 id id •rl v 0 O id id 4 w XJ O 4 Co 8 a) N rH . 0 X! 1 ft d) 01 ■rl 4 <4 ft m 3 Li ca ca — s id Co 1 4 01 4 XJ -H XI O id a) 4 4 3 H <4 d) H S •r| 01 EH O id XJ 0 n 0 0 H D1 CO 01 3 H CO 01 is O 3 3 ft •H a) a) 50 >1 01 id O H fa 3 >H 8 id 8 rdj 0 ca <4 <4 S>1 Ll 1 -u 4ft -H 0 0 id . 4 • — 4 a <4 <4 g d) : 0 id 4 fe; 0 3 3 3 rH 3 0 a) d) 4 S i 0 4 •H ta fa id ■H O 0) 01 •rl 0 id <4 id X) Eh lD ID 1 3 > 4 0) d) 3 » >4 X) 3 ft Ol 4 tn 1 ca 0 ca id 4 d) 4h rH 0) d> Li 4 -H ca S O O s CO 4 Id H CO ►a 1 • § Ol 0 4 4 id a) 01 O 4 4 3 rH H 0 ► -N a 3 u 0 ft ft 1 0) d> -rl O n 0 3 Q CO a; to •rl di O 3 >4 -Hi 3 ft L> x i >4 1 H 0 4 H 4ft T-l 4 1 — 1 3 0 o1 4 0 0 1 3 H 1 5° 4 01 «: 0 ft Q ft « 4 0) O 0 3 0 & 1 ^ 3 •rl Q h 4 ft ca 0 ft 4 CJ IM 0 g •H X g Q. Id H •H 0) 3 <4-1 4 d> 1 ■ 1 S d> a) fe; > 0) Ol •rl 0) J3 i ^ TJ a) g XJ ai 0) -H X) 3 4 4 &« CO I ^ d) 0) w 2 d) A Q XJ 4 3 -rl di a) ca 4 j3 O 01 4 Id rH 4 4 > 01 01 >5 N c 1 CO id 4 * O XJ 4 O 4 8 -rl d) d) H ca 4 cn H ft 3 ca rH 4 3 O 4 O A Q fa ft: h 0 <4 ■H p O O 3 3 •rl ft ca (0 Ll *rl 5 fa CO 0 P. 0 CA 4 CO O •H dl 4 rH 3 Li ta co ft; co 4 >. ca ft XJ 0 > 3 XI 4 rH | 0 O cl H ca 0 4 rH d) ft -H CJ 3 01 01 Q. ft. E~ 1 1 O 4 D XJ 01 ft XJ E •rl XJ 01 3 d> d) << 3 1 3 id a § 3 id 5 3 'O XI 8 dl 0 4 X) 1 s : Q -rl ft ctJ id X| ft id S 8 4 *! XJ XJ H dl rH Q 0) TJ O 5.. XI -rl XJ H 4 4 4 > rH 3 ft 8 dl 0 X) 0 •rl ft 0) 4 4 4 3 * 0 d> Id ft 4 8 4 4 3 XI * O O ■ 4 4 rH 8 XI 3 01 co Id -rl rH O 4 3 > H ft dl •rl -H :< dl O 01 4 ca 0) 4 4 0 4 * •rl • -H id Q Q 3 CO 0 H Id 8 4 dl 01 XI •rl 0) 01 0 id 0 is dl d> 3 4 dl -rl H 3 rH 0 XI XJ 01 O H XJ ft 4 3 8 id 4 4 H 4 XJ 1 — i id id ft X) 8 3 A 0 U -H •rl -rl id 01 3 d) 4 rH 01 4 4 3 dl •rl • 0 S 8 <4 xJ id 01 Ol 01 01 — 3 O 4 0 3 > 4 O XJ C\| 4 4 d) id O) 4 O ft d) 1 -rl Ol 3 01 rH >4 3 id 0) O XI ft P. dl 4 O ■rl xl <4 4 •H XJ Ol 8 01 XJ 4 MH ft 4 di oi rH 3 a 0> 3 0) O Oi 4 O d> O 4 Ol rH 3 4 01 id XJ 0 -rl 8 0 0 01 3 0) ft 01 <4 4 •3 3 8 3 > XJ XJ •rl O © 4 ■rl XJ ■rl 4 s 01 XJ d) 01 4 dl co is 01 4 X! 4 H a 01 id 4 4 H rH ■rl -rl 4 dl id 3 -rl O 4 0 fc is 3 3 4 H 4 X) ft X! K*i 4 < Id ■H 01 a id 4 -rl XJ 4 4 -rl 4 01 XI 0) S; rH 4 01 CO XJ O 3 01 O 0 O H • 0 dl 0) O 4 8 H A £ O Ol 8 8 -n -rl O 0) 0) Eh Id ft 0 Ol O O 4 3 ■d p -H P id 3 <4 4 id XJ 3 4 Eh > 01 is O ft O 3 •rl ca 4 3 rH -rl O •v CD O O -rl a 4 dl -rl 0) O O S •* di la 4 |B 4 01 0 O tv; O 0 1 XJ 3 -H 4 4 •rl ft a 4 4 3 ft 3 3 3 4 01 Q Ol Oi ft 0 CO © XI O O eft o k 2 £ 4) ^ ®-.tS £ ® — 73 g 3 •S'!®* 3 . .2 « & « £ * >> j= ^ 4) La. fT M O " 8 .2 c .2 i^Ss .22 a =0 S£ 55 “ — — £ « 5 ~ a .5 ss w a a ^ S rti C3 pm ££ ^ — 'SS^ 0> O lx > B o *5 .2 "© 55 •— 3 £ W E © 5 a J» 3—55 d> IK d> |S — > •3 O 2 H 2 .—i -3 I La © © i- w a. a •*a *— IK .2 £ o 5 £ © ® a .© 8 — .3 u o w c E r ■S e a •8 5 $ ^ S § « *S i sj Q. E 2d #fl ’© OX) 3 O U o •o © -M 4) © ■— IK 4» 3 - on o l. o. h "o 2 a « £ t 3 ^ c» £ O X5 o • • ffSai a-aW o © K •La © © •o’ La Q. -*a IK 3 a. K __ K 4) 3 St- fc- © - > 4» a "T 3 -aa . © U d o •—> © _^> 3 s a a .= 3 3 -o a — © CK *© ■+* +* OJ 2 5 3 © te 5 Q. © © 4) 43 -aa 3 . O 3 CK .2 — -C « w a c5 M _ E -S — cK — o 3 a Si £ Q_ o L. 4) Q, aS -M © ^ CK O 42 5 T3 «g 5 O 4> a & .2 *8 K Jl> 3 =2 © 8 IK -aa 'a - M "3 3 3 _a 4» ^ — 7: IK I 3 O ck i 3 O- Aj .S. 1 ® 2 IL, pS a ^ — *S .2 3 — 4> < E 4» O O 3 O-jS La K — OX O 3 4 4 (K ■= L. 4> Q s s *- e — o £ O < La H 4» IK 1 - 2 -a a ^ 4> O 5 S s *3* — * L. ■3 SX 4) 5J3 ik S3 3 4 Q" Da 4> (K 2 2 La O -LJ *3 O IK 3 4» fc E b a 3 U O ■3 — La 2 -* O a- •2 w 4^ o 8 ."2 -3 La o «N T3 4 K ■S — La 41 0 « Qa o’ La S, a 4 a k ■3 ® S« ■S f 1 S 5 -a 3 4a OX) o 4> X! 4 4 . IK 4 > .2 C/5 ■« J5 -< 4) La 4/ IK 4 4 ‘o5 La Q. 4 8 4> ”3 8 3 IK 4» ‘■C 4 4 •— » ^ ■2 ® © 3 — OX) QJ •mm E T3 £ « o. ~ La 4 O a <- « a © = IK *2 ■S a 5 S 3 5 4 r a — >= 4 5aa 4 4 «— •3 *S ffl a O .3 4 "a — aa W 5 3 > a 4 .3 5 5 ■3 ^ « J3 3a — a £ K 2 3 od 2 2 La o 4 © La 3 O 4 *C 4 Q-5 a a 2 g =3 9* * 3 2 <« OS ^ 3 •a- 2 3 JS JS 4 o IK IK 3 O La OX) V 04 Q 4 X H E 3 La OX £ 0 La OX 1 •3 © 2 Caa O © Caa & 0 .3 OX .3 8 ■2 ’ex a ox > o E La 4 vs ~ 3 OX 4 8 — O X — 4 ■ ^ © t 3 x •w *: .2 •- x -5 X " w 4 3 3 *a *U a 4 if a >H J3 3 . 3 3 3 | If 4 © O a L 3 3 OX OX) 3 aQ 2 2 o O 4 Caa <- U ® ® 4 a a $ a 4 3 — > H 3 4 4^ La "aa OX 3 .2 a .2 — 4 ^ C/5 La 3 4 a 3 4 _IK — k ® K CK 3 3 — 2 3 4 a » 3 3 2 ©- 4 a-| £ o a g 4 L- ti © 3 X E l: a x 3 K a a 4 jT -a > ex a s x .aa IK «o © a ox "4 8 8 >- •— 4 . A IK aa 4 L. 4 © a> c cl . ^ 2 4 4 — 4 .2 a 4 >0 © © «K S 5/5 s 3 ? -a 8 4 a 3 E S © -5. a> a a 5 4 > a x 4 .E - S 4 s a >• 3 3 o "H. 3 3 3 3 a a 3X3 Comments and Responses Page C&R-13 great gray owl, flammulated owl, and black-backed wood- pecker since they require large blocks of high quality old growth. Logging of small fragmented old growth will possi- bly limit recovery of landscape distributions of old growth to required densities for some or all of these species. 4J tn (tj 4) TJ 0) O 1 d 4) rH co cq 1 d OJ d 0) T3 ttl B p 0 4J M 'K d »H d 4J 5 id id bi O 4) Cl d id id d 1 CO id d a A • CL O 4) Cn d Cl 0) 4-> N — •u cn d H P TJ 0 T> 4 S o H -H d Id d o -q 01 cq A rH d 4h h Oi S ■U T) a •h d d 4J 0 z. m s rH d cn d J •a d a O rn O Cl o **-* • rH C| CO o *H d 0)4) M 0 4-> o d d > I Cl d 0) W o •u -U s H ■rl H t co a) H M d TJ • H d 4J d ■d ,y h * Eh id A d A H CO 4J H O 0 « •H aJ V XI d -h d O 0 h Eh d C| X* Z d o >< s d 01 0 ■U 0) o id S d id «« jQ Q) tn O 'H ■U Cl •H 0 4J id •U Cl 01 o* A TJ TJ m id a S u d *H 4) d i m 2 v * "a TJ 1 J Id d •HOW 1 d 0 rH H o o> W ^ Sn Hi ,an oq 0 4J 01 4) Id rH -H a) d H to 1 CO fH «TJ V 4J CO X CO 0 4) O d TJ d d d d O H 0^ d D 6 id Q. rH p in P 4J •H MH A H O H -H a. *H rd U 0 4-> a> 4-> 01 Q. 04 Cl d d 01 d H • id oim N «< ■U Cl 4) oq mo T> CL Cl 01 4J to 4J rl Id -rl >41 d d P o w co H o $ u 4J H Id A H co i-H Ct-I 0 -ft 1 ^ § O O) ^ o +-> co CO a p ^ 5 i> o > o .p ft ft • •— 1 ii co ~ © P (D JU co P 42 £3 a U o CO o cd CX £ £ Q p (u '5b JZ OJ) H o 3 ft CO ft P o 1 i P X &1 § P •p Sb o 2 ■S o ■> ^ > o 5S >* 5:2 .ts 2 *3 § § a cr p •§ 8 §§'3 ^ J3 3 -*-• OS * £ © W -© J3 _ ft *3 2 ft C © ’3 ■rj 3 w ft e 2 •5 3 co «® 4) CO -Sa 5/1 ts 3 3 5 4) 6 {- •ft Ofi p w co /— s -ft oe 8 t- © ON X s* - ■S 1 a © ,2 l« OX) #o "co .3 *c ft ,3 3 co P 3 — 4> ft 3 3 © « © > L. s P g. 0® 8 2 © 2 ■ ~ ^ o CO V) > -h- O _ 3 « © 3 3 U 0) £ 0 OD 1 !w O 4) a '-3 3 3 3 p "O w 43 o « ox) ■p o 4) 3 3 3 P >► 3 £ 2 3 ^5 ^ o s fi tS « £ p o H cP 3 O 3 4) P ’> 4) 3 to •- 3 t ~ 4) -rt OX! a 3 O U o o 2 t« ■© t © ft 3 U. 3 © gf -2 2 M 4- La g 2 3 3 «5 ^ 4> P OX) *ft 3 «3 — 4, 4) X5 a — ZB 3 Of C > © « -Pa "5 3- G 2 4) O ■© O 4) *- 3 ■© 3 2 o" 42 ■© CO « ft O -P u o OX) 8 ’3d ox o P 3 p La ^ © « w rj li > ^ £ Q a a 2 H co 33 3 2 •- a C« 3 — X! W - Q "2 4) £ J3 © Ua. La ^ ox XI H 01 p p di P di CO 0 r id X o\ P d> •H 01 o 01 in 01 -H tn *44 p H 0} ft -H id R P o\ X) P O •rl s p Ir in R -H d) dl XI id 0 P o i.j di ft p 01 a) R 5 ft dl o d ftX d) id P x •H O 0 R X id R o dl d q * o •H Eh R •rl X ft 0 0 P X d) o > > TJ O § id s -H X) Xl d) CD • 0) dl X p u ft 0 P M-l R ft TJ P R R a) X) R O i — i > rH XI a) S p 01 a) i d) H ft 01 3 in t5 1 id p -rl s di M &H 01 Or ft -H o a) a) dl •H • ft X) 01 A tn 01 id di t~ - id R XI P p XJ d a o ft p R U TJ o ft rH >, 0) R id ft 0) •H •H X) ft d R rf P id o •H 01 d> dl dl d) dl XI rH > rH T3 CN i dl tn id 01 0 0 •H d) d) p > d) £ d id a a h id o X! d> R R P R P H ■H -H o di a) tn id •H ■H R d> id d> > o R xl id 4- bq di p p £ xl ft a id •H id O X P

P r a X) O Xi R id o 0 o d) u R O Cl d o id R P di ft id 0) •H X •H •H H 0 a) ■H a) - — . rH xl • R id ai -H * a dl dl & R 01 d d rH rH to P X X) 01 •H rH S p d) rH 01 d 01 01 R d> -n *H xq i — i X) dl tn id d> R -rl X) Q) id •H r — 1 id a CO q > •H id P o •rl > i O ft 01 p • O X) W Hi 0 R X di X) rH a tn x) XJ di R -H a O id •rl 0 id p > (d "rl d> tn i o ft R dl rH X) S R X) p p P -H aJ *d a a X ft X id •H 5 p — t -h X tn Xl P d > d) 01 a5 di R ft P ft CH rH R p o d) rH rH * ft id id B id P xJ di id P -rl 0 R p d> a cq •n O id P o d> X) id rH R id U tn s 01 O •H d) -H a a) d) 01 dl P d •H d id dl 01 O R dl o o

<1 R tn xl o R R 0) P id p X X XJ d> ■H P tn h d> -H -H ■H S id C p x> X) P id ft p *44 H ft p rH U id R o n) d X O H z; > O 01 01 r — 1

dl id d dl d> p d> dl o O w >1 R 0 ft £ P ft d •H rH TJ ■r 'o d) dl ft Xl P -rl R id * xl 0 dl d> p X) P id •rl X tn •R 01 id U ■rl S S X •u xi tn 01 x! •rl Id r— 1 •rl n a, P ■rl id £ xl EH o ft Xl X a di -H > 4J tn 01 rH dl > U s p Q* 4J P R oi d i— 1 ■H ft x x) H p O p o di d 01 (tJ B ft d dl ft pq ai B •H R 01 O 01 tC P id ■H 3 % N— . o Xl -rl d> P d> rH • R -H p o -H dl X a tn 0) P ps X P 4- •rl ■H fe; cd o •H R ft 01 X) P R id R Xi d e> R 01 > P a) ft Zi d) p a B PH 4J OlTJ d TJ d) d tn p S -rl U p a -U P •H r- p ft dl ■H S ft «. R Q X a) tn •H - • d i i — i d d) ft id H d P P id ■rl id tn S d) rH d XJ X) R & H ft XJ dl P >p X C B a) X) c St d) TJ dl 0 R £ Kl d> oi d Xl (d o XJ Pi p R Q o •H dl m id R (V R dl d) 01 X 01 -H ip u Q Ei R a u * > id a) •r •rl tn -rl O P di xl 0) R O X) m X dl r—i tn p EH R d> P •d m *44 X ft dl P a 0) dl •+ m X >r B rH u 4J p 1 dl d> S -rl r~ ft id a R X X) H H p -H ft ft a) X > d) XI id X XI 01 R tn p 3 P X) XI >1 01 01 id r — I o id dl X) 0 id id i d> di u o 0 01 id to S -rl a> tn p a) d) -H d in d p rH d> dl o rH p R dl ft d X d X d Pi d> TJ *H d> X 0 id tn -H tn X m • XJ 3 c a) oi id < p R X) lO o tn S id X 01 rH > rH a) Q xi H o Cl 01 t1 rH p a) 01 ■3 01 tn o •rH p p id 01 O dl 1 0 -H p o u xJ — d) 0 0) P i H u ■H ■H s: p P p a 01 d XJ ft ft (D dl v XJ tn d) XJ 0 a> d 0) c >1 •rl d> d> X R oi O * H o p 4J rH p ft R 01 tn tn X to S R •H tn X d d 01 dl a) d> X id rH X! 6 n O xl R d dl o R -H P id di S P P R U X id 4J a) ft di O dl ft p 0 c >4 > R p id P O C p o dl tn dl ft X id a) P o 0 id pi d) X d u ft XJ 01 R ft oi X o •H 0 r- id a •H P R id d d > 01 id Xi p ft id X! u id R R o dl 55 X ft id a 0 ft q ft dl ft ip d> < 4- id 0) ft) id x) < £ O ft c. H 01 o c ft P o id X! p tn h tn tn rH tn Q p tn X ■H Cm «l 3 01 3 0 X Comments and Responses Page C&R 15 ■5 .2 13 2 2 2 £ o (J > S 3 ■a a> k. - '3 o a> Z o- ^ S/5 i» 4> V C/5 •— a> w J3 1/5 o - -S 4/ TJ JS 3 ♦- 4> k_ U O *- 5/5 2 a o o « •-C « « 3 3 a. a © O 3* a- a 4/ O 3 3 .2 « > 13 Page C&R-16 West Fork Timber Sale Project . The occurrence of roads can cause substantial edge ef- fects on forested stands, sometimes more than the harvest areas they access (Reed, et al. 1996; Bate and Wisdom, in prep.). Roads that are open to the public expose many Comments and Responses Page C&R 17 Page C&R-18 West Fork xi^er sale Project Comments and Responses Page C&R-19 3 0 >P P 0 P O (0 X) 01 •rl PP 3 0) p oi 3 p 03 tn •H x) o p d) m a a) -h oi 0) d> ft o 4 hid m 3 4J ftp p dJ -H U rH v g oi p p o 0) •H 0) 0 3 a) ■U

3 dj d> & « d ^ u w k u hi 3 P 3 (D ft -rl ai * 3 im h a) 4-i a 3 o n # d) p d) ft p 3 ft p 3 ■u •h * ft, *rl d) 3 ai ft Q 3 -rl 01 O 0) W pp z U P C -H V ai ft 0) P P -rl 01 4J 1 o ai ai a o a 01 v fc, p a> pp oi -h 3 O CO a p oi oi cp u p NX) P *H P 01 X) 01 ft 3 ft, PP Eh O *H 01 Q d) h c ai o X) ■U H -rl 4 0) s O «. dj • P X) to d) 0) fr, •rl 01 0) 01 P dj H 4-1 -H 1 p oi xJ a) oi ft) P 01 ft a oi 3 *h oi x) Q a) ft, ai a h o oi rH s p di o ai ai ai ai d) dl CS) 0 PP 3 ft PP ol pP PP 3 1 ft O -H 01 P 3 H P id ft Page C&R 20 West Fork Timber Sale Project If the landscape has been fragmented by past management activities that reduced the quality of lynx habitat, adjust management practices to produce forest composition, structure, and patterns more similar to those that would have occurred under historical disturbance regimes. > o t-i cx t: o cx s oJ > o $2 .S £ 43 13 o 43 £ aj i o o U S w a a, ri c/5 92 II C/5 u 8 13 J3 ^ DO §“ .9 & (tj a >1 o 43 d) 43 o 01 01 o a w ai Cn n) a) 43 XJ H a in o O o w ai •U a. x) o 0 U -rl a; x) ai -u a a X) rl X o t3 oi ai o 3 a a) 0) y> x) m a • o ai (fl 01 t3 -u a) •H cn cn cn 01 -rl X) 0) s rt) rH d> *H rH S u u m w ai ai a oi at x) ft n) •rl 43 -rl cn cn v cn u N-rl C3 oi ai H H) O -H 4J m a u 43 r— 1 c y) -a h 4-1 •H O O i H c AJ d) 0) 01 cn u ai y 01 a rH -rl O JJ d) •H O < o o M-i a) d) o 1 ft 01 4-1 ai oi ai 4-1 Q) a -rl d> 43 -h cn o 4J -rl 0) d) X 04 X >, < H W Ei 43 Page C&R 30 West Fork Timber Sale Project 1/1 a o .. -C oo 3 g os 2 « -tS « 1 a c t ^ « g a L -M 5 ^ 4> _ -r y - G« 5 .5 g £ a !> - £ y 0> £: JS N U 3 >. ^ « 8 .5 c -o . W 5g y ■§ " Ja « w « 53 y j C >« u tu .2 JS •a “ «*- © o t/1 © i/i ■o _ _ £ 13 * =2 S ” £ § j= w '5 H 0 2 a» £ J5 g> M a ■a y > 3 V © o •- k* y y a 1/5 ~ Wl 2 3 © -a g H 0X1 bi) 3 .2 x> a 5 3 £ u O -O 3 — v “ T1 3 _>> a 12 a , y — * fc. y y y y ja > a ■tot . "O -M *•* W t« 0-3 sl s y ox a a © fc, o ’a y a -2 o 2 -° 5 «+H O 8 o « >5» w «S (A •«■« •— « y _ y •- j -s 8 ■ « s- .t3 -3 £ 5 ® 2* ,r 2 © •W y 2 3 3 a « y © -o a _r O y > _y a o y y > o y y j§ 2 3 2 jgj y a . 3 u >» y *p* a ,fcJ -2 y a a q, y © WO a- as « .2 5 JS a ^ ° 2 3 „© 2 3 (© W — * V) >-1 y s „e s- ■<— a £#, 3 , « J3 3 >►» +-. SO •tS V5 a y. is cl o x to £ 3 y X! > '2 o +-* a ^ 2 « a y — „ o 2 y y +- y c n A +* 3 " c *1 a © O 'W •»N ^ C a a 3 S o“ E Q. O © 2 (A **- 3 © a in © ts y a jd y TS S a « a y .2 *2 13 2 U £ y *3 ■w JB a •tS T3 -£ s y y •— s_ a y £ > S 2 Comments and Responses Page C&R-31 CO b. H 41 cq 43 0 Q 01 rH P aS a> O •H 0) M V p 0) 43 a 01 > 44 a> o rl 4J r- 1 4-1 io o o id CN Q* in a 1 -H 14 b, a> T) ai A •u 01 4-> rH 43 o, c n a) 4-1 w rH 0 s 3 Id n co o a H cn o 44 co *H ■rl « TJ 4J ■o ►3 id a R cn M 3 ■ •H 0) ■o 01 S a 44 &J H id O &4 ai >3 U 43 H a> 01 0) & 4J *H > rH 44 •H i -H 44 0 id &4 I 44 01 0) C 01 •rl 44 >4-1 O a) <0 4-1 43 44 H cn X ® ti O X o o 3 1 M 01 & •rl X d) X X *H 01 X •H 4-» 0 1 X u >: X) X 44 o 3 4H 1 «. o ® i m 3 0 ® ® Of O 3 *H C3 0) CV| 3 X 1 id Cl a •n rH •H H TJ O 1 u Cl m X) 44 3 ti :< ® Cn TJ cn N > ft ■U cn a) 44 XI 1 M cd Cl 1 Cl ® >H X -H oti fd c 1 cn > •H •H 1 X : tj ® M rH 3 44 cn •H c 1 ® •H •H M 1 s U X 1 ti X ft • td 0 >4 fd *H M ft X X 43 c > a) ti Cl •H ft -H 4- ) 4 ® i a> X Cl 01 fl U 01 ® 4- 1 -rl M *» - 9 0 o 6 i M o ■rl X 01 d) ■rl S 44 44 44 TJ (d tu CO PQ a o Ol g ■H 3 ft HH ® O d) fd & n ■H ® a i a 01 a g f — 1 o 01 Ol B 1 0 S ■H ■r4 rH Cl u 3 X X 3 3 *H « 1 O u 0) r— 1 44 CN| X i X 3 0 & fl o •rl fl cn X n id cn 1 *H O id 1 o 01 X X) i — 1 3 > 6 >1 c i 3 •H cn 6 a cn 1 T> o 01 ® ® •rl 3 fl 3 o rH •r 1 -rl U cd X id aj ' 3 s *rH £ 6 ® ft s X fd ® fl 0 a) X > Q< O & ■H • X X CJ •H 4. 1 U o > • X *H S O >• 3 o O X of 3 d) O -H •H m 44 cq 1 o 44 a rH •rl 3 01 2i M O > ) X • cn 4J -u a a 0) 4-1 6 ® 1 cn cri 0 Cl ti 0 m X 3 •H X -H s u 4J 0) M V C3\ -H X fd X 01 O 3 •rl rH cn 44 2 cd rH ® a >4 44 01 fl 01 X ■rl 01 fd fd o o 43 O fd ti id 0 X > fl ® 43 w ® d) 0* w n) o P X ® (d fd o X P ® ® S 3 44 p 1 rH T3 W O co 3 CO •> 8 §Pf S cd O T3 Sn b (D o T3 c o O, CO B * * 60 60 s s 'do '5b go oo 3 ° ? . . Ch 43 2 4h o O a> c/5 60 « Ch <2 © x3 • 2 O B o £ O a) o -O > O o o > O 5i ^ O td u O CO — ^ O Cd a ^ § * y m u S ® fl 03 cd r» d4 f— ' g © © • S Xi i O o to s- « O 41 4> Sr cd > S 2 4> > S3 •- f-H T3 ^ S fl tu to u O 3 B' ■ s 4> ? . flj CO fl .2 '3 © B a> B O. V On to 3 a. © fl b £ .2 to © © XO S B > O • — «p« 4-* 4-* o o w w — •w H C/5 « — C3 2 o. B Jr w tp- CO ° 3? 3 O Z c — to a> 3 60 -t; 03 S fl 2 3 £ e a — © 3 .£: B > co Cm fl 0 o "*£ 1 £ S S 3 to JS B ^ CJD B .2 3 O ’— a. E ■o B 3 60 ^B ‘fl *3 Xtf a» a> u u 3 60 ■a a j- S3 3 ^ ■© (/3 3 A o .3 „ W « Q •o cu H xj 3 s S 2 ® Cm 03 § "£ © a. 2- © b a ■g -a 22 co - ~ IS CO Ci ^ to *- T3 r_ ty fl 22 xi b M >, § s B 2 3 u fl 3 Comments and Responses Page C&R-41 u o 44 • • 0 m n q N o r-t 01 ® n) q ® id p p tji 0 a p o 01 44 9 o X to H to Q 0) 3 43 43 P O 4-1 p o l u a > -rl *H 0) P tp id H rH id ® C P id ® ai a> ® -H •H P p -rl « m 43 a a ® -rl X 4-1 X « ® 43 O H P x 0 p *a p R An s A R 43 ® 0 X 3 ip 0 ■a 0 •H 73 Q) 0 ■p ® p •a 0 0 >a 0 3 ® CO XI • •u q 0 •rl ® > 44 p 44 0 q P > 0 •a 43 u R 4J id id CO 43 i — i -rl ® x (3 0 P P 0 0 P ■a P p -H 0 •H R d) to * ® P 44 43 0 X) d 0 0 P £3 0 p 0 -a p X •H d) * o\ 0 M 4J a) p-** p 0 0 4J 0 ® 0 01 •d »p 0 M •a M 0 P 0 0 4J > >, *H O u CO a p > 0 X p 0 14 ■a p 3 q 0 to 0 a H 43 tj) 0 TJ -a V 0) 'O tn id a) p P (3 0 • 44 P id id 01 V 0 0 0 u 43 ■a O X 'a P •H 0 O a3 0 • ■u q d) •H d ® 0 -v 0 « X X 13 C3 u 43 0 0 0 X 0 Q V 0 dJ 0 q CO q id • A A p 43 •H M tv X) 0 (3 ® 0 -a p > Qt 0 d 0 •H 4-t u 0 T3 ■H co XJ a -H ® p p 1— 1 Ol a p id 43 O -a X •a 0 p & P 0 ip d) 0 n 44 4H X Q) XJ 0 4J a) CO p 0 0 d Ol ® r'—P a P 01 p <3 0 p 1 X 0 0 •a 43 0 d) 4 H 0) 4J q rH R ® N 43 H d P -rl 01 P 01 0 -a § 0 ip P q P 0 -rl 73 O X .q id 1 0 rH d) p x -rl r— 1 d ® ® 0 u X 0 q 0 0 0 X X 0 p dJ p d) 0 O -u 0) 73 -H (3 1— 1 ® M 0 0 X P -a t3 4J q p 43 P a 0 0 1 — 1 U to O 0) fd 0 r — 1 0 (d 43 0 > p M q id p 0 « P 0 0 p •a 0 0 • •H 0 u d 0 V P 4J q M 0 1 0 X 73 P P p id 0 * •a 0 43 0 0 0i •a 0 3 0 > — N A 0 0 & V "H K a) id o P ® P ® P 01 -a 0 43 0 0 0 0 X CO V X 4-1 0 d) q s 0 -rl d (3 01 « > 1— I 01 p f3 X •a p P P u 0 0 73 •H 0 M (d 4H 0 0) co d) q q 4-1 0 ® 0 -H r— 1 P ® d 0 0 •a {3 0 P 0 P •H — N 4H 43 4J XJ 0 id -H p D> is P 9 0 (3 0 X 43 P 0 ip 0 u X R to tn 0 to d) P *H q 4J 0 -a 3 e •H to O 0 , 4-1 O AJ 0 A 1 R O d p d a ® -rl p P 3 it p 0 0 0 0 0 CO rH 4~J q •H u u W CO U d) co 43 43 K O d) 0 U 0) p •< 0 q X} q tn 01 - — s. P — X) 44 X) 0 0 & 0 9 a) •a P M P p 0 X 0 p 0 P aJ a) -U -H rH # "H d) q # to R 0 (3 pi i a 1 — 1 p 01 0 0 p P 0 q 0 0 •H to > 1 -H i s -a X Oi -a 3 5 0 0 0 U to rH 0 •H to R *0 ts CD CO *h R 0 1 -a id -rl > ® 43 ® 1 0 p 0 0 43 A! 0 •H •a 0 Tp q a) 3q -H 0) O q CO d) d) e I p 4J 43 P -H 43 P. P 1 X 0 0 P 0 0 q 0 X 0 0) A to g 'd to T) fd 0 q # q s »H q a 1 -rl P P< ® P P 0 1 c (3 0 M 0 0 0 0 •a ip >p P •A CO H a ® id > id P 1 -H 1 id X 0 a P r-t p 8 >a Q, 4J •H Cp O to ,R u d) # a rd •4 0 co id x) •h 1 X ® 0 id a 1 X > a •q 0 a: i P 0 P 0 s q p O d) to rd •H d) >1 id iH 4J Ss id S X -H Oi -rl d X 1 id 1 ® Oi •a 0 0 •a q 0 0 •a s«— rH > tit 0 s -u A 0 CO d) q •rl 1 id (3 0* X> c > p 3 p 0 X •a p 0 a 0 p ■ q -H a -H 0 d) q > q iH rH H 1 O 0 ® -H ® H p 1— 1 0 a p 1 a) 4h P p 0 0 P q 0 0 0 p p 0 d) d) O a tj u § CO q 3 a; 4: ! O ® 43 1 -a •a 0 p 0 0 0 3 0 3 >a 0 •a U to u Oi u 0 Oi 'H CO q id Ol E- ( 4J 0 1— 1 0 73 rH 1 4. 1 X * a 0 p 0 X Q 43 0 0 X 3 4J Q. •H a) jq 3 A d) Oi CO M co •• co d) id <*—•* — s oR a R rH a) A * CO 0 S, xi o 03 d d' 4J •V V) 1) d Q th an ec u oJ 0 XJ XI it d a ol rH XJ • d •H cn Q) 0 o cn P a u Si % u 6 a) .3 TJ P 44 rH d U cn M o3 -rl nJ 1) XJ ft d cn xi •rl a) 'b m a) o xi Oi d Oi o a > nJ IXI cn 44 5 03 04 cn o P u Ol a cn a h O 4J XJ rH X) 1) 11 s • • d d d •H 44 d XJ 0 cn XJ d E CD o •H « d 0 H id O Kt xi pi mod cn o rH d jM d X) 03 o cn XJ -rl d Ol d o3 a tn si Xi d xl P xl d nJ xJ a x> Z rl -rl d -rl •H XI u O O i) rH ■P X) 44 0 O TJ XI o cn O •H o3 d d XI P (H > o3 d CD S 3 Q rH IQ XI tv XI •rl ci 44 o cn g d d 1) d rH d td o3 -H a i (fi CD a xi «3 a Xl CO d id xJ d o\ XJ 03 cn V «* o3 cn d o3 D 1) *r-> p * CD d Oi Xl N cn s ft xi 0 cn WjJHH 11 Oi d ft d m D ii oi o cn O 1) XJ XJ > 1) Oi 03 -P XI id d X) •-x TJ D 8 d XJ rl d 0) -h -n d > ft M Oi 01 d d « o fi a d 03 o XI CD P •rl d d d d XJ CD Oi rH a d Oi d d id d -H 03 cn X) •H O -rl rH D 1) o3 1) XI 03 rH XI CD 03 o3 xl CD rH CD -rl XJ •H U cn t) HI U N ® Oi cn d M CQ ft o XI d Xi XI rH 44 d XJ 03 d rH ol xi o a: d 44 rH P > > o Oi d •U d 6 -H •H 03 d d XI 03 o3 id V C) 44 CD d 4J CD 03 d d p P *r| (0 id ol O XJ xi rH si 1) -H d d D XI P O ft cn 44 P XJ o Oi 0 J *1 0) r| 6 id 1 d xi o o d O •H CD XI rH xl CQ d Q 1) o d 03 cn 44 0 a k. •rl Ol cn O 0 O td d d id rH O d XJ s 0 d 1 — 1 03 d -H 44 ft id 1) XI CD ft CD o Ol O id cn o XI O d d K rH d M d to 1) 01 XJ rH d d d XJ D 1) Xi •H XI xi oi XJ • -rl o O XI P P •rl 44 ft a 03 CD 0 d id a) Oi x) 1) d ft ■s— •y ft 1) id 03 X! 03 d oi d 1) O XJ u tn ft d •H 03 d P cn o Ol a d cn h • a) -u xJ B XI o R XI X) XI Ol d D d -rl cn XI o cn Ol o u d D i u d d Ol CD rH d XJ XI D N XI 1) cn 03 d CD id d CD Ol cn -rl ■rH *H id •H Xj d -H d CT3 D cn XI u d 1) XI H u 11 -H 03 d o ft •H •H rH XJ id XJ o d XI A rH CD XJ d -rl d XI Xj 0) si ft n a) 1) P d rH ii o -H XI cn d d O rH XI d 1 — 1 o d O H XJ •H o X CD cd U 0 > ftfl 0 O u • d o ii -n *h 44 id xi cn o * o •H ft XJ d 03 1) 0 o3 d > xi CD XJ o p; P -H Id Id d -rl cn id X! o XI o ■u 0 rH • d d 44 cn cn X3 CD rH o d ’1 i CD XI o o P a CD o S CO Xl d O O. ' d d o d id i — 1 cn 1) 0 1) o3 o3 o d 44 03 o CD d • p •H d rH xJ rH Q o3 Oi d Ot d cn o3 cn XI ft < o CD 1) rl 0 id a) cn Oi x! 03 D d cn d ii cn o D P rH XJ xi cn d o cn id ft O cn p CD CD 03 d rH d * Si 0) ai v d >d oJ d o P cn 1) •H 1) u X) X! d 03 rH o cn 1) d X) Ol o d d > o 44 03 cn XI d tJ) (tJ C ctJ O m oJ d id -H i> d d o d Ol O > <1 o d ft xi d o3 1) 03 CD 1) o3 ft d XI • d XJ rH x! id d rH K d xi d D d 03 d a D O CQ cn rH id u rH xi a 44 1) cn ci 1) d CD u xj xi x> S *H P O X) Ol cn rH o rH •H rH rH rH *r| 03 d ■P XJ 44 P cn cn XJ d o > Cd d ■H 1) Oi cn o ® rH cn cn o a u 1) d id D ft (0 03 rH xi > O 1) CD CD o ■rl d CD o •H 1) d O d xJ id d u d XJ 03 CQ xi d) cd h d o ai ai cn •H 1 o id ii d o d 03 1) X) ft Ol -H «. xi CD o d •H ol o 1) CD ft XI Ol Ol o XJ XI -h cn d x> > aJ rH d rH xi d d o d 1) cn •H S CQ d £ 0 ft d x> d xi O d -H d P a XI -rl a d ci _ -H d ^i S in ft « ai a. o o ctf Oi 0 U S -U X) a XI O •H XI XI 1 — 1 £ o o> cn ft xi ft d •H d d D •H -H a O 0 d d a) d cn b Xi -H -H d CQ d D 3 d rH cn 0 P •H Ol rH d CD O d D d •H V b > cn o3 XI oi a) o to d o XI cn o o d •H D rH 44 XI I) XI XJ d cn d CD o XJ d CD cn s CD cn •rH o CQ CD ® cn > XJ O H O d o oJ o 03 d 1) cn rH cn P D (0 1) 03 XJ CD o •H cn d ft XJ •r| § P P D XJ a O d d -H 0) 0 bj o O d Si d rH X! ft d 03 d 44 id o xi xi xi o id d d cn 03 xi cn ft o xi O d o d CD 3 d xi — ' 1) Oi xi V, 3 o XI o cn ft 4-> xJ E-* d xi 03 CD d XJ P < 03 ft XI U H d ft cn d o w Comments and Responses Page C&R 43 q d> q 3 1 q q 0) H q d) < >! tu O 3 q in o3 q 44 M 0 M q • 3 q X o d) Cn X O X o3 X q 4J X o q 01 q o w X q 01 X •H q 03 q X q d) 0) in X d) rH 3 •rl m H 01 X • M •H O 3 4) q ft d> C q 01 o d> O 44 rH 01 -H M M a A u a> 0) X a) q q q q 3 tn 0 q X •H q q Eh 03 0 d) X -H o & 03 0 > q M P q X -H P d) • 03 4- X •H o 0 q 3 d) 0 id 3 q •H q X 0 X • q 0 rH D < q P q o3 X 01 q q X o q d> q q El S >1 d> O d> 0 0) q 3 , u q >h 01 o * s q X 01 3 o3 01 q -H 03 X tn h *r • q 01 1 44 0 x q rH o 0) q 01 ft 01 w ■rl 4J «* tn q a C n> d) 0 q q q -H q q 01 a) d> q 0 01 01 03 o X U •H d> 0) oo o q >1 a) cn 03 a> X — s r- 01 tn X 44 03 01 01 tn d> 0) X q d) rH id X a 03 01 03 0 q X on 0) tn a) a) X) X q 01 01 ON 44 q q 4J o tn d) • 0) X q q o q d) o3 !* 01 q 0< H q P A a) q q 3 •H ai 3 q CD 0 ■H 0 X -H d> q X 01 q q u o o3 o3 01 X * q o 0) 0 d> X H 01 -H oi p 0 u > 03 d ON 0 q ft d-t d> 44 01 •H X a o 03 1 3 q> tn 0) p q •H X q d) a s q x * 01 P o3 o o P H d 3 01 0 ft •H d) X q d) X i X X rH tn -h P 03 0 O q -H £ o X 44 q d) o: q di o X X q O X q X q q 3 q W 03 rH s X 0 q o a q (0 —V X 1 ft X s P q q oi to 0 a) o\ 0) X 0 tn 01 01 N d) 0 0 q o m •H 01 ■H X 3 d> X q 0 o3 X X ft 0) C/1 0) a; q X CO 01 q •H 0) q q d> X •H > 3 01 d) tn o 44 3 01 d) X ft q 01 rH 01 X 3 t> 4J q o\ 3 3 q d d> 01 •H o3 01 q H O c 3 oiK h q q X d> • id t— in q o X rH q d) 01 -H q q •H d) -H d) p S a) 0) a) 01 q X q X o3 O rH X 01 >, X 3 44 q o3 3 q q ft d> P n q 44 A 0) oi o o rH X d> 0 q X -H rH 01 -H q rH 0) 01 T) 01 q o u a x ft ft a id 1 01 0 3 u rH X rH tn rH X a r— q' C X ■d m 01 -H rH i q tu q dl i rH 03 q id id d) 03 o tu 3 q s 0 q — S 4-1 (0 q iH rH d) 0 o X d) 0 3 q 01 id & d) q 03 q X 03 o ft X q q d> 01 01 03 on 0 X 0 *H rH 03 01 u A *H P q 01 o « 3 •H X o q q 44 q o 0 0 n> ft 01 X P d> 0) X 00 3 q 01 X -H 0 ft L P •H ft 0) o X q q q r~ 1 id •rl d) 0 ft o •H 0 X d> id rH •H Q) 'H on a) m s 01 C) E d) q -H •H 0 d> q X > o P d) q q 3 03 q > 3 *H q q a) d < d) X X 3 q q 4J q 1 X in OO q d) 01 0) X d) X q O q •rl *H C5 q m X 01 q X u 01 i in q q X O d> q u q c q in 01 d> q o q x tn q o3 d) >. 3 q jj m X) q •H 0 w c •r X -H d) q 44 0 01 0 x 0 q 0 rH 0 in •rl q q P ft q q q u q to 0) 01 01 44 P q tn d) 44 u n) o tn q 44 0 03 0 3 •H tn q X id 03 o3 X 01 -H 44 u o q q 01 d> d) in id o •H 44 G1 x ■U * q q q to 0) 2 q a q d) d) ft o 03 -H d> w q 44 X 44 X > q X o X 0 44 o X 0 rH 0 H q X q •H 0 d) q 0 q ft 0 <0 q t q r— 6 -r q 03 3 C X q rH q 01 id q id rH X 3 u •H d> rH O a) 0 > •H (0 01 •H o *H ft ai 03 & o3 0 X o rH in -H -H 0 3 o3 n> n> 03 o 0 0 X P to 0 01 q o •H 01 P ft 0! q c ! O d) o3 •H U X 01 q id 01 01 01 01 o tu q tn • X 01 ft 0 d) q a) q 3 X a) r— -rl ■u c i X u X d) 3 0 d) n> 3 q q d> q 01 •H q u q 0 0) o X H q X >i CO T i d) X 01 03 0 q tn q q X q ■p o3 n> id P 03 •H q 3 q 01 o N x) •H 0 $ 01 01 r- 4- d) d) d) H X o •H q o •H •H < 01 q X 03 03 ft >1 o 0) 01 H k tn q 5 rH d) q o3 0 01 01 ft rH 0 e q o 0 q O q 0 o: 03 o o 3 X 44 X X 01 01 -H tn •H tn 01 0 q id •H -H •H 0 s id d) -H w q i rH q 01 rH •H 0 d) 01 q 03 rH q X •H rH •H 01 tu rH u q 0 >1 Jq o id 3 •H o 0) X q q q P X tn (d i •r 01 q o o3 tu tu 44 44 3 04 «H tn n> tn d) q d) u X d) T i q 2 o 9 q q 03 03 01 q 01 .q C i o 03 q q 03 4J X X d) - •H o3 0 03 o q o q q ft q q q q X q P N HU1*-* X P 01 ft Eh q •r ■U E K a ft 03 3 01 q ■U q 0) >, q 0 q 03 •H 0 -h id 03 o3 03 03 ft d) ft Page C&R-44 West Fork Timber Sale Project Comments and Responses Page C&R 45 P ® bi q ® ® ® 0 cn 01 a 44 H q q 43 0 ® M ® *H q ® ® id 5 44 44 01 O O 43 r— 0 rH 43 p • id 4J P 44 rH p ® 43 ® 0 44 S 44 o m cn <44 TJ ® -H o ® ® 44 q 01 > (d q • i ® q 3 0 0 , 2 < 43 q T> 4-» 44 c. > ® 44 44 •H 0 id 44 • > M cn cn >1 ® 44 01 44 o ® co -v g a) 43 •n 01 to — N 43 o o (d (d a 2 01 44 id 2 oi u a oj oo -a q -u q s 4J a; ® «d 0 •H 43 ® o 6 ® rH 44 6 ® (q i T) U 0. 3 a fti 1 44 44 q T) q o 01 id cn > CJ P fn U ® cn ® ® h U Id ® T) c q V O cn id ® q •H 0 rt till ® > 3 cn 0 *H id q id rH ® rH — N 43 4 q 0 cr 44 •H id 0 ® cn rH 44 O M q o rH U M o J ■P ® 0 Tl T> 43 43 V- ® ® CJ -H 43 ® x> t) 4-1 4-1 43 44 J ® ® ® U ® O q q *j o Ud ® o • 44 a. cn > 43 > ® 01 q P 0 rH Oi H 0 id id a 43 N ® -H c cn W -rl O ® U >1 m ® P 0 U1 X) o ® 01 0 »H ® cn 44 c P 4- 44 O 43 ® q e 43 CJ 6 § 1 ® M q C) 1 43 , 44 *44 q 0 rH ® 0, a> -H id a. 44 0 cn q % 0 o 43 Q| n -d h « P Oi Qi 01 (3 O ® X ® 3 ® T> cn rH 0 ■rl 44 44 44 ■X ® h u ® oi q «d ® •H (3 cn q cn rH ® q 0 44 q 2 bi 3 cn •H •H Cn *H id 4 0 u -rl 43 X) id 3 43 P W O rH ® 0 CO a ® T3 ® > 4 43 T) 43 43 id P H ® N H *H 0< •H q n h cn rH 43 44 4. cn p 3 q IT cn rH Cq v w ^ oi 43 0 v cn ® cn C cn X) -a q q 0 Q 01 HI Ol 01 f3 ® a q CO ® •H 44 • 1 ■d cn q q oi «H 0 ® id q H > U P o H cn >4 ® • 5 6 3 •H •r ® *r 44 4 ® a q 44 q q H O % s :< q a> o 0 1 ® cn o -rl s 4J •rl o O 0 r-> q 6 id 0 a ® 43 u s P 44 01 0 rH ■o 3 XI X) •H 3 3 XI 3 3 3 3 S •H 3 3 3 3 1 xl O ft 3 3 ft A s *H 3 0 rH 3 A 3 3 m 0 i cn 0 0 3 rH ft 3 «H 3 3 id 3 0 3 0 3 s a 3 Xl 3 1 l 3 a 3 r H • o a 3 i 3 0 3 1 O V i 3 3 3 3 3 to ft A O ■H co 3 0 3 a i fH O H Cn 3 3 *H 3 3 > 3 a *rl i id 3 -H 3 3 3 bq 3 H 3 ■H 3 rd Tl 3 3 .3 03 * : U i — 1 3 "0 0 Q 3 0 •rl 4J 3 3 4J 3 * — 3 XI 3 3 3 Oi ft 3 XI K 0 XI * 3 3 > •H •H rH 3 3 3 3 XI rH 3 a 3 Eh O ■ 3 3 CO 3 3 3 o 3 X! ft ft 3 3 •H 3 CO > 3 rH 3 3 3 3 rH 3 3 ft •H 3 a 3 rH 3 a rH 0 3 •H 3 3 S 3| ft ft XI X) 0 • 1 3 0 d) 3 ft 3 3 01 3 to 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 a 0 3 3 ■H N S u 3 3 3 3 0 3 3 3 CO X! *H XI 3 3 3 to to 3 01 0 3 a i 3 1 3 XI 3 3 XI X) ft N 3 3 a 3 3 3 A XI ft e 3 3 o 3 31 b| 3 3 •H 3 3 rH •H C > 3 E 3 rH > rH XI 3 s Q Oi S X) 3 3 3 3 rH id 3 3 XI H X) 3 3 0 3 O > 3 a 3 * 0 3 3 •rl rH 0 iq] ft X) rH XI a ■H 3 1 0 O a 3 3 3 3 ft 3 3 o 3 ■H p 3 3 1 ■H T3 3 3 3 • •rl 3 ft •rl S 3 c X) a 3 3 i S 01 a rH N 3 rH >1 3 O 3 to o •rl 3 4-4 3 X! 3 l 3 0 id 3 3 3 3 1 o >1 H 3 3 O 3 CO -H rH X) XI 3 3 X) 3 3 ft rH to ft - 3 3 to H bq Q at ,3 3 : a) 3 3 o ft 3 3 X) 3 o 3 A a -H a) 3 3 3 3 m 3 3 S-o 3 3 O. n O O -H •H 3 3 t3 a 3 3 a) o u 3 a) ft a o ai at o Oi o 3 3 to 3 xJ 6 3 o rH 3 rH ■H 3 S -rl 3 3 a 3 3 o ta 3 3 A 3 ■H 3 ft 3 3 3 m m 3 X) 4J 3 0 3 A XI O 3 3 3 3 u 3 o 3 3 a 3 a a •rl ft 0 •rl p 3 ft ■rl 3 s a 3 A ■rl £ *H - X) X) 3 a a • U 3 o 3 • a o 3 H 3 3 3 «H C 3 XJ 3 • 3 0 3 ft Vo A O <*> C Xl •rl 3 3 in 3 O 3 ft a 3 O 3 Comments and Responses Page C&R-47 be es to rH H 01 y <0 ft « 0 01 Q ft * y id ® ft 01 (1) XJ y xj y > G 6 to Id -y q H VI V •y to Ol ft 01 tj q ' Id ® s § X! * % u o rH tn 3 ft ft 0 01 oi t5 Vi •rl O a oi tj q y o H u a> x ft 0) y q ■n id ft a) o xJ y ft 33 y a y q S TJ •y Z rH T o ai id y 5 3 Q y q & ft id ft ® rH y to B ft 0) ft! 0 y ft o 0 id Ei • y S 3 ft q ^ 00 «J -H O i §tj Di ai y i u 01 U XJ q y 01 y ft -H <8 y 0*3 tj y •rl ® H o q o B y d y 3 ft y y ft x! y y a) ® ft y 0 ft ft ■o o ® ft m q q y X! «d i id -y 0 Eh U ft 01 0 ® 0! id y oi y ft ft XI y -H id H Eh TJ oi ui ft • s oi id ft •H 01 ft ■ s S H ® O H ® ft rH oi y id y 3 ® H i 1 id q id r— 1 XJ ft o ® Ol id XJ id y ft t) y q y > ft X) O -H 01 q g ><5 01 q y -H 01 ® •H 8 H 3 -rl 01 XJ TJ oi 5 % P 0 ■H y q y y o ft y a) -rl y o ft •rl 0) q 0 ft * ft ft XJ Tj o • ft o i ■ y a) ■ ® ft ft U y oi ® y y ft ® Oi 3 01 q >H H 01 y q id ® 01 ft ® id -y y ® rH y ft Oi * TJ ® y Id « ft id 3 ® u > n a TJ rH XJ q •rl tj ■ 01 ® O 01 •rl 3 •I -H ft y q tj S' q ft 01 ft O -rl Id y ® 8 >1 N ® a> 0 ® ft rH to a ' y y XJ O) Id ft X oi a y 3 y ft 3 ft ® ® 01 g O ft id -rl ® y o Eh ft « y < u id y TJ XJ -rl U y ® q a rH y > w ® rH •H ® ft -h ft o i •H O TJ 4J ® TJ ftO®oxJ®o®u I VJ -P Id h xJ 4J 4J M O id 4J «J S»J 0) IX U U T) Vl N y q o oi • a ® o q idftftidfi®qft5; ) I? n a « h b ti o jj xj h o ft up Uri n j n aa xJzqHftooiqy; Eh «d -y id 01 Tj y 01 y TJ y q n ® O ® O n + ® p ® o TJ y •y ft q a o ® •> u y Ol ® 0 q ® rH TJ ® 0 ® y TJ o 3 q y q O XJ ft ® fi •y 01 9 •H rH O -y o -y y ft ® y •rl y ft 0 q 0 01 y 3 ® y id 01 id y u o 1 y y ft a 01 y > ft ® ® rH 3 y e'- ® O ft -rl y •y y id o o 01 XJ O ® TJ id ® en y y q to Tj q X 01 XJ tj q ® y -y XJ ® XJ B id 0 ft 9 ® q d -y y > y y y o id y ® -rl ft —v B 0 y 01 3 y 01 CO y y Eh oo y •y ® u 01 « 01 o q y 0 q TJ H y y ® y tj ® ® q CJ 3 T) q id q q rH y 0 •y rH q y u q H o q •y H ed •y « ® 3 o ® y •H « * y T> 6* m y Q y > H XJ a < y 01 XJ o •H ® ® ® Ol ft o •H • Q y ai •y id ft y •y rH i — i y y oi q Q> id y 01 2* & X ft q ® rH ® •y ■rl tj -y ft y o ® Cl} ft 2 ® • y m 2 > ft TJ id y Ol q y ft ® rH ft I CQ (i & O ® 1 ft ft o id « TJ 1 ® ® > ft -y » ® ■rl ft HH o -rl q ft T-l ® ft y oi > 01 id ft TJ s y rH ft y y V ft ® o 01 o ® U Ol 6* y id y to TJ 0 > •y fi 01 3 & 9 V •y ft y y 2 b TJ a TJ y i y oi ft TJ ft XJ (d H 2 y 01 o\ Q * q ® Oi OH > (TJ ® TJ t5 -y s ft a 0 ® ei q y y U-J S -y q O ■H O y o y ® •H y m 0 9 01 9 H •y y •y O y cn •rl id q q > « 3 •y TJ q » TJ ® > OH o .u y TJ o ® 0 XJ CQ y - y y 0 ® H 0 ® •H o a ft y y TJ 0 q oi ft o 01 • oi 3 y « y TJ id 4-1 01 s 0 G 2 d o -H H 0 0. co -d O X) ft. P G 0 ft 0 ft rH P a) m oi x) a) n) ft o •d id P a> x) g o p in q 43 P •H > Q) P 0 u 3 01 G a) d xJ a) a) G ft n o H p ■rl o o ■rl Cl ft! ® •H Q) O. d d - 43 0 p rH > m O rH ® o 01 o 0 ® X) d o O — N P - - •d 01 jq 0 H ft rH XJ i — 1 A P i — 1 d ft! i 0 Q rH d P 43 o H o p u ® •4 ft 0 d £ i jq Q ■ — ■rl •H P H * d d Z rH id d ft. ® CJ 3 X) rt oi ® ft p ft ft X) XJ rH 0 id oi O 0. -H d •H d i oi id id S O g p d oi .d P XJ id o G CJ d S id 2 A 0. ft 01 O — CJ d H CO 0 d H Oi o bj id >p Q Q. oixjCio;r-iuidO--iHa,nj 0 Q CJ bi a 0 H ft u M 0 ft d bi a nj d « 2 -d d XJ 0 XJ XJ q 0 -d ® d P d d to ft 10 XJ d Q rn P 0 -d 0 0 0 H H R 3 0 0 o P ft, co P 0 XJ ■ X) •d ft 0 0 00 •s ft. 2 «H 0 0 X 0 0 rH U1 ft 0) 01 O ft a 0 d > 0 1 rH s 2 p o ft ft d Oi H 1 2 ft • Cd 'd d 2 < Oi 0 0 H N 01 1 ft co u ft d •d 43 d H p d 3 ft •d 0 -H 0 H ft. •rl 0 0 ft P XJ 0 0 C5 Co a p bi -d h 0 0 0 0 d Oi nq O N d d 0 S 43 i-H p 0 XJ 0 bl ft 2 0 H s E-. 3 CJ O ft 3 O Q ft O) M CJ 0 ft XJ 0 2 0 ft ® 1 H

d 0 CJ Ch CJ 0 ft d H p H 43 P o CO I U oi oi p v o co d) H 0. CO X ft. 0 A S X) 2 d 9 id p d a> a -rl x) ® 01 x) • id oi O r-l rH 0 X> ft 0 0 « 0 0 X) rH X) -rl ® ® S P 01 « d ® A O ® ft d ® O d ® X) oi ® > •H • *0 P m ® 0 a p d 3 o d ® ® ® d q. p p X H co ® 0 01 •rl id O P P d ® d d d u a o d ft, d XJ ® ® > u •h 3. rH X) ® ® XJ d Comments and Responses Page C&R-49 C/} >, 01 a oi a ® X3 ® 1 Oi rH iq H a ® q > P 03 01 X! q rH id ft a 43 o rH ■rH q 0 X) X) q 03 *H X) id > bl Eh -rt fc, (0 rH AJ •rl Xi iH ® q id 0 • -H X) P q u M ft < q q 3 id Q rH rH q a q rH q id P q 01 id •H 3 0) 5j O 4J (0 X! X) 4J q 5 X) P 3 ■H H ® ® 01 a id *H q oi H H oi oi x) oi -rl q «T| K q 0 XI ft ® * id X) q ® ® H X) q 01 T> ft Eh ® ® -h X! V O i e •*> •H q H q id ® id •H 03 id a q a a ® •H • q q on) s n w q q q •H S fd q q 0 • u ® ® q q o R IT) 03 a Ol id Id o i a q o 0 id q ® X! ® ® 3 ® >1 0 ® -H -> D 3 rl 43 H 3 -H E-I O 4-1 *H 0 P ® P id q & U X) P q 43 ® q q 43 q rH q XJ U M 1? oi -H O IT) q & X> R 01 0 XI •rl q ® P xi a ® 01 ® 43 3 id q q id Q) id O o U q q q q h <3 p q 3 P O 2! ■X H ■U X) q a i P q 3 P P •H X) * O Q, O.Q x! ft X> ® a q Cr) Eh Sfc q ® q X) q q •n ® ft ® ® id O 0 * q ® ofeRtcQ®oix)o ■0 q a H Oi ® X! 0 *H 0 q ® 3 ® P O q q rH O ® id 0 0 ft ft & 6 x-i 03 0 p 03 q ft q q X! o m id q q o a q oi a a 03 •rH o O P q X) q O) q P q O >H q -s 43 q (x, id ® ■q Eh Eh x) 0 a> q b X! H 01 03 T) q q q o 01 q ® 2 -rl •rl ® rH o a •H q P 43 oi ti q i jj ® q a h a 0J ® q •H q P a X! 01 IT) ft H q ® q >. q ft •h a -H p o p X) H 0 0* X) q o q P -H a ® u • o 01 a ® 03 •H rH •H 03 01 rt X) q q p q i ® *3 -rl d q rH q 0 x a u 03 ® 03 X) q X) id q 01 ♦d a ® p N b ® ® ® 0 0 43 a * q -rl q x! ft til X) rn a ® ® a a q x! q ® -rl id a q ■q xi o rH ^ q ® 43 q ® a q Eh b ft ai P q ® a Eh q X) P o> rd P •H X! 03 ft !3 id rH P ® id 3 43 q q rH i oq a ® • ® 03 P P ■H rH ® q q q P X! 01 9 p q a 0 3 43 oi ft W co q q 3 03 XI -H • a q ® q q % 3 a 3 O q 01 01 q p in a q ® q O id 3 . 1 QJ q O o xi o ® *H H u * 0 id rH q p ■H -rl ® i H P > O rH 01 q U O o q q m a X! q P q ® 03 ID q 01 o 43 01 ftj id P Ol •H X q q r-| -rl CS q - ® o ® , a q q 0 ® a ® rH q *H ® C/3 q ® ® a q 43 q «d M S q i Eh q -h q a ® q x) Q o q 03 o q ft P •H rH q Ol p H •H p •h a id q •H > (0 O q R ft q xS X) o X) ® a q q 03 q o q ® q q q p w > id q a 0 03 0 03 q •H a a • •H •H > 01 o x! X) q q 01 3 43 a 43 q P U q q ft <3 -h q q q q mb —V P P o q P P 01 X) q ® id ® ® a o 01 q ® o 03 rH 01 ■H ® cq 0 q X! 4J 03 •H o a ^ a •H O b •H 03 •H q o P ® X3 X! 3 u •H i q q ® a rH 0) M T-, «< ft ax! s 01 >q q Eh a M X) i ® X) P id P XI q P ® q P q a N O 0 q q N o a ® X) X! * P q >1 • ® q 01 q u D X) a » ^ 3 a a 0 X) q ■u a ^ CN o 03 q •H q 43 ® q a ft -rl 0 id 01 xi « H q o q S. q q a x) q N O a p rH q P id id p q •H o P 0 q Oi id P D 0 P *H q q “H •H X3 01 oi q H o q 03 ® a h c H 3 3 ft q 03 ® 01 q P q 03 X) 43 ft q 3 X) q 0) oi q g h ° o a o 03 q a > o a q q ft O X) 03 S *H X) o ® q id id q q ft 01 ft q 2 X) ■q cn ft q id q X) P o q Eh ft 43 q o sc > ft o b id Page C&R 50 West Fork Timber Sale Project ■ 0 3 ft id 3 a ft 3 3 • id 3 s 3 XJ at a 3 a* 0 id 4) 3 0 01 il) 3 0 > n ai 01 O rH a> 01 id O 3 -H 3 3 ■ 3 ■H * -H O 3 id 3 3 3 3 3 3 id a ii X) 0 43 3 Id 01 a> a) CJ cn 0) i 0 ft CJ a) 01 4) > >1 a 43 3 3 H 3 3 43 Ul ai rl X) 3 a) 3 3 3 •0 o w H 3 3 3 3 •n 43 ■H 01 a 3 a) 0) 3 0 cn •H a> 3 01 0 o O ai oi h •rl ft d) 0] 3 01 0 3 ft ft ft 3 3 3 43 •H XJ 0 3 a) ft 3 *5 3 a) E-i 43 *H 4J 43 3 d) T) a u id ft 0) 3 iH 3 01 4-1 3 3 O X) 3 3 3 a) 3 Q Q 43 *H O 3 id •H ai 3 3 3 o > a) 3 01 3 • & 4J 0 O d) a) o ft 3 01 3 3 Xj jq O 01 p o 3 XI ft B 3 3 id 3 id 3 « id ai a) 03 rH 01 d> 43 3 H (3 it I H 3 3 01 •U X) id 3 43 3 ■H » 0) 3 m 3 oi 3 XJ to 3 X) - 3 d> 3 ft N O -H o -H 3 XJ o 3 o 43 43 3 3 X) & 3 a) o oi o 3 43 rl 3 3 id 3 01 01 a) xJ a) oi 3 a) 3 o a) oi 43 at i — i 3 id 0 oi ' 3 01 a) 9i U P Cn CO - cd § 43 3 CJ Ol 3 O oi 3 ft oi 3 d >3 01 3 3 ft 3 d> id 3 ■P id •P 3 d> rH 3 3 43 u H u y a 3 CO X) d> 3 ft ft a id O 3 3 01 -H X) 1 > 3 3 p 43 01 rH 01 id 01 -H 3 •H 3 id -n d> dH o p ft; * 3 -H d) a rH 43 01 d> d> 3 0 d) 3 a 3 •rl 3 O 3 d> O H 4) O 0) Q) H 0 d) 3 43 o 01 >i > XJ X) d> 0) X) •H 3 ft 3 0 3 01 id ft 0) 43 3 H 3 1 — 1 3 43 ft m •H 3 d> 3 rH 3 01 d) 3 > p d) rH id •H 3 3 o 3 O 01 3 3 ft XJ Ol rH d) 3 rH 01 43 01 01 O ■H rH 3 O CJ d> 3 rH ft XJ id 3 01 01 r — 1 3 3 3 3 d) rH 3 X) d) Cd 0 Xl d) •» 3 3 X) O id 01 43 O 3 d) 3 3 ft id 55 •H ft O •H a XJ Oi 3 •H id 3 ft dH 3 dH a u O * u Ol ■H 3 3 3 43 rH id O a 0 Ol ft 3 O •rl pi 3 ft 01 3 cj 3 ft •H P d) 43 d) 3 0 01 a id 3 2 3 d ft * -rl 3 < d> 3 O 01 ft ft O 3 O O) 3 O > s 3 ■H 01 X) 3 XJ s •H dH d 3 43 X) ft Q <3 d> d) d •H 3 O) -P O •H d> s -H x> 3 rH id d> * X) X) id V 01 XJ 3 p d) 3 d> 3 > Q 01 3 3 ■H 3 O 01 P X) Cs * 3 O d> o 3 43 di 3 3 • d> rH H XJ d> 3 O •H XJ 3 •rl 43 01 d) 3 id •rl Id •0 •H 3 •H O a\ id 3 > 3 O 0) o id O 01 a ft H id 43 id id i — 1 d) 1 — 1 3 ■H rH 01 3 3 43 dH rH 3 rH 3 cd ft o\ w ■H d> 3 • 3 O 3 O o Eh 3 3 > •rl 43 •H 01 O CJ 3 rH d) 0) id rH •H 01 43 3 rH d) 01 d> M id d> id o 0 « 3 * 3 P O O 43 dH 3 •rl 01 Xj ft O X) 3 ft XI rH d) CJ O 43 rH 3 3 01 X) d> 3 Cd d) 3 P S O ■H 0 o 01 ft 3 id ft 3 O 3 O id S d) cd cj 3 a 0) 3 d> id • d) 3 id ft ft 3 Eh 3 • o O O 01 id 3 2t O d) id ft -rl a O 01 ■H X3 o id 43 > » *0 3 0 id •H ft O a 3 U 4H cn m 3 3 3 0 ft ■H 3 Q i 01 cj o P 3 3 n> ft 3 O d> 3 TJ 3 in a d) id fe; 3 O O 3 ft Q 3 >1 43 * 3 d) ft •rl id ft 01 ■p 3 i — 1 id •H id XJ « m 43 3 3 CO o CJ ft •rl 3 CO id d) rH CO 01 3 3 id 0 p 0 d) -H d> Jg id 0 3 ft Ol d> • U 3 3 d> ■H P H d) 01 3 O a) rH 43 • rH •H XI B H 3 *H m 0) 3 rH CO XJ X) 3 3 a 3 U 3 3 3 CO 3 3 O Eh -i— i d) id CJ u p 3 3 d) cd MH 3 a d> -H id V 0) 3 3 XJ •H •« o 3 3 id CO di 43 X) P P 3 3 X) 3 •H cn S d) ■H 0) P U 3 3 d) CO o 01 3 •H CO rH X) d> cd u id rH & Cn 3 O 3 A N d> 01 0) 3 0 g H d) > id 43 cd H ft d> 0) 43 •H * ft •H d) P P d) 3 43 £ •H 3 d) 1 P 43 3 o Ol •H 3 3 3 ft u ft > O a -H rH ft 43 -H 3 CO 1 Ol CO 0 3 01 rH d> 3 3 id •rl U •H •H Ol d> P a O ■H 01 4H 3 0) Q O 3 P H 0) 3 3 O 43 3 3 •H •H 01 d) 43 'd CJ d> 3 0) P 3 M -r-> 0 •rl d> X) O cu 3 01 XI O ft u 01 •H 43 p£ p 01 id d) Cn U 3 d> X) 3 X) a) id ft 4J CO 3 CJ O u 3 ft XI id X) O d) ft Ol id 01 •rl ft O d) a 3 cd *H 43 a O cd 3 43 0 id 3 CO 3 d> 3 cd 3 id 3 A -rl X P 0 3 3 u 43 a O 0 d> 3 ft 43 3 ■o ■H Q rH dH Eh 3 rH > 3 Eh a 3 id P ft 3 O 5 *0 id 43 ft Eh a d) cd 3 id •H 0 Eh •H rH 3 X) cn ft 3 id id Comments and Responses Page C&R-51 «•! £ ^ a Si au *7 a -i, T3 3 ■o ■ a S a fi ■a a 8 ~ OX) •** 3 a ■a a !2 01 u4 .E & zz +* x 2 3 CM S 1 O OX! D. U.S E " "2 - 3 © o La CM -t-> flu _ sg > « s « “ “* a o E M g C cm cS — “ flU a au b 5 cu ^ 3 a £ cm a, a Jr o o 2 j= 5 •= o CM Ca-a >, flU — * aj 2 | j2 ox) 3 fi I s S§ o ^ c c H CS n _ — -o a/ o> l. « a r- a ■S a a 2 ^ W ^ Q S *-* H £ CM >» !* a ;> a '-S 2 = ® ■§ = 2 OX) Q. a +- — fj OX) cj ox) sS 3 a OX) — £ 3 © e - c« .m cm CM o O 2 a CM ■® CM a a u £ au u — E jg x> &S g a a 2 S 0/ ~ 2 u a E a •- -M -M ““ cm cu cm a o> 0-0 > l- _ £ a a .g flU > S * *-S « 2 u 3 a _ 2 "2 « 2 -c a _ c/3 33 *H >— « O fad w S g CM3 w a* -2 cu a a flu O ■o C/3 A H i jj 3 • 1 a ^ 3 .5 2 3 ox: 2 "O ox a — o 2 o — a W CM s •- s CM - s « .2 .© t- fc a M -W 3 O r La as u au ■ OJ as 2 > -3 E >• o *C flu a. ox -a E >. ox -O a a a o 3 s 2 CM La JS £ *- a .a o a CM 0> *- U ox) a 3 J§ E T3 *- cm g 8»2 ^ a r O..E H 1/5 Z u u- 2 a «« « -2 53 cm * * § .2 o (j ~ a a E 3 .S | ■o *-C E a tj .2 » G. i| « s CM « -3 — 1 E O o ^ «« V • a o «- C/3 c2 3 dj 0/ j= 2 *- *S > — w gj O 3 ^ O* ^ *- "O G .2 jj a l. ?" ^ ou a — ■*-* f3 CM ^ 2 CM o 4» rr). = "S > w o 7j — _r u z Q flu a 6 43 O © H fc a 2 CM -g c£ 4 « a 2f E .§ | •c «> 2 2. ® Tj -ka CU O *5 ■© a s ox a o 42 = a — 4, ■O U 8 ■*■» a a u = ’a w> a 3 ox — Sr o o >> cu ox 3 B <>> a •a «> o .£ +* « ■S 3 T3 ^ 0X"= E CM cj ^ 3 a »: p >» ^ O" *o a “ flu “ o 2 CM 3 T3 •■= O © E ^ „ Q« 3 3 CM a flu cu QU o flu •1 = flu •*£ CQ O E ~ a - CU 3 a w a t o. "sJ cm a O «u M. 8 La 3 2 o a E a 3 2 a 3 £ a a © ■o a rv & 00 ON CM La © f 3 a ° © 3 "O SI La 8 *■* © a a a r* b> .2 3 L > I" O -fi C3 Page C&R-52 West Fork Timber Sale Project Comments and Responses Page C&R-53 o P T> a a) cn cn cn a 01 > 3 fl a in rH 1 X) (3 ■H •H o O cn 3 p •H cn cn •H 01 p o O ■rl 3 >a 0) cn > X) 0) cn i3 cn X (3 3 •o •d a) 0) 0) p X X) Pc cn O 0 0 o u cn p cn a) 3 a H 4> ■o X Pc <3 o O ■rl (3 ■d cn 01 CO 9 a) A 0) P 3 -rl P 9 p P 3 (3 X 0 X) P ■H 3 <3 u 0 •rl -H • • 4 * p 0 a> <3 0 0) <3 3 P (3 a N cn U p p o> a cn Pc 0 i 41 •H ■H 0) X •rl <3 ■H p a 01 P 0) o (3 cn ip rH H 3 P 9 P 3 •rl P -rl •u ■3 ■H >a ip 0) ■rl •rl ■rl p P 0) (3 3 o Pc a rp 0) •V 0) a 3 01 a rH 0 0 fi •H (3 -H A P X) p •rl cn a K -H a 9 4> f— 1 P rH X) 01 (3 0 0) i3 o 3 3 xl 3 0) cn P rH 0) iH 0 0) cn

P 3 3 0 0) rH 0) >41 0) 01 •rl 0 X) <3 p P <3 cn a p 0 o •d >41 13 •H rH rH p 3 P rH cn 41 a 141 P P 3 Pc 3 3 0) 3 a> 0) a) 01 X3 3 P O 0 0) P > 0 > a ■o 41 0) X 0 o p U A rH 0) ■rl p -H a) a a> •H Qc cn P 3 rH P (3 •o 41 -H A

0) -H cn ■41 a> a) X 3 •rl 0) (3 TJ rH A P 0 M p <41 <3 13 > XJ A 0) P •H 0) •rl Pc ai 3 ■H 3 p 13 ai ■d 3 cn •rl a X A in P & p J3 p 4H 3 (0 a X> 45 o (3 ai u 0 0) U OH TJ 01 p ai > p X) a <3 p P 0 3 p 0) (3 a 0 •rl i— i Pc 3 3 0) a (3 a> a) i o 3 M •rl a 0) •rl Pc 3 01 rH N cn a 4) m 13 -rH •rl Gi 3 cn Pc •H a> 0 0) P m 0) in -rl •H & • a a u •H T3 > o P 01 0) p rH cn 3 9 "d 0 01 •U a i3 p A a (3 0) 3 03 0) U o a) <3 A X) 3 X) <3 p u > cn 01 •rl 3 cn (3 rH OH 3 cn 0) -H *H cn cn o X (3 • 0) A A Pc •rt 0) (3 u cn iJ 41 0) 3 cn O A P P Oi a A a •H o •rl i3 P 3 3 rH P 3 o V 6 (3 ■d P P P * cn cn 0 ■rl 3 rH U Pa 41 Pc 3 m 13 <3 0 <3 cn P 13 u Pc Pa § X 4-4 a P •H 0) A p a) ai A P u a 2 Q a> O •rl cn x> 3 P 01 a rH P P 0 •rl Q S3 b s . Z S3 © £V ° s ■M ^ e ©■ E = b g « s-^ •0- CM B S3 .O © V) © X) O '*- CO Qj E o V) S o •- -s E ^ « 4> S3 .IS JS X © 53 — © 7 2 01 £- B S3 © £ c 2 03 a a ESC © c o 1.1 J8.a C/5 Jfl S H B © a— > © <£ oH 03 © 53 C/3 © B 3 O -C 4J £ o 3 a— » e 0) 6 •c 8 .52 J-H •*— > CO cd *3 £> S & £ ’g y l-i 4— * Q/ © o fc© £ A o &Q £ | £ S3 c o 2 5/5 2 c -G ^ ed “ u- d£ "O B ■© C3 ~ *E S 3 B 4/ i © 4a 53 t B _o H>a #B Ws a fi. •a .S 3 © © r' CO ■a 41 o E 41 41 3 © OX) ■w #JU 41 CM o a Cal U X 'S '7> X5 X 41 © © •N 53 X JS I © 53 3 CM Xa 0/ O o * 4/ « -T 4/ 4/ C/3 c/3 4/ «3 .t- © c» y 4/ a i 3 “ 03 4/ S o x 3 C/3 3 41 E §.s g a o .2 Xc — = © 3 co CM « ts fe I c/3 .3 OX) _ .E H CO . 3 co co #S 2 S 2 ■© U 4> C X! o b, IS •*- 53 cm l- •— «S ^ ts 5 3 3 CO c ^ cd ^ o> CM -P © 4a CM CM 2 *’3 O Xa Q. o n> CM x a o o a ’C C S 3 ■*= ©JO « — B CM •— -X ^ S *s E ® © -g x a. a— 4/ 3 T3 X 3 §fii ■© ^ SS £ 3 X a- 3 3 4/ JS «*> t3 O M 7^ X* g Q, 3 ST a *© E 3 O aM « 3 4/ 1-1 <•» w eg *“ « C B ■* CO O c .= 3 ■© o -o E 2 oc 3 - Z s- S CM « ja o «sa is. | ■S « 4. _ JS v " o 4- 4/ 2 O J3 js H CO C3 • O : #S QJ |S I ! O 4/ 4> O B. • a— 4/ £ O "O Os ^ H B r 3 - CM — 3 O in — — ■g o •— 2 H e c _ 0 r r B. ^ ^ fc 4a B W 3 3 -O «* ^ E i X T5 3 8 E a3 .2 § 5 4» cm _ 3 -c •- M U CM © s CM 4/ Vi 3 u = O ■g 2 3 3 5* ^ u +mt CJ 3 3 ■B ^ 4/ X ^ rnm V ^ 5 Page C&R-54 West Fork Timber Sale Project HI o 0) q XI • < ■H 41 01 A U > q oi ft 0 q q q ■ •h q >: 01 41 O A q 01 M -rl m m A q ■ < H q > 0) 0 CJ id O V q o u XI q o q i * ti •H q 0) 1 rH M 0) U a> 0 , 9 q Z ■rl q q ft xi 3 4H 4J A A x> r— 1 •H Q q 3 o o •H m id » rH -rl ft 0 id 01 43 01 rH a) ® * id •rl q 01 § 0) id 01 cn q ■U r-| a> — N O 41 > q •rH O • >i q * a> O M VH 01 m 43 i « xi XI u 3 ai 01 4 % • 01 id -h id • 1 1 XJ X) u q in xJ 01 ±j 4-» A ft HJ H X) -H 1 rH 01 ai oi id 3 q q a O H S co ■u id 4) q ' .* 3 0) •r» 01 ai rH o 0 a> a) -H 01 0] XI rH 0 q O id 0 O ■rl B 4-1 q a) 4) 4-1 3 3 3 q q oi q ft 4H • rH 0) > m rH 0 i 43 01 ft XJ q ■rl q -rl -H 41 II •H St H 0) ft u id id 0 •rl X) 3 -rl 0 0 § XI 0 01 Ol ft 0) xi ai •rl 01 0 q & 4H q m >-3 43 9 O V > q £ 0 01 rH q ai •rl O 4) 0 D s ■H O CJ 1 -rl Q 0) id q rH a 4n 0) XI Id XJ q > q 0 01 0) -rl tH Oi X) ■rl -rl 4) p — 1 id q q cn c i 01 ■H ai o rH ai 3 3 XJ A H n ai q 01 i - 0 XI 01 q ■rl 01 0 a q -rl a) q XI A 0 1 01 q •rl o 0 ai rH q 3 4J id > 0) X q i 0) a> 0 ft 01 01 XI rH O o i — 1 C/1 q o W U 01 -H O 01 Eh O q O x> id M « -l- 1 q X) O q 3 1X1 'q Jq Ol q q a) A 0) bi z oi q q -rl ft q O q q 0 S* ft q Q X 1 0) id 4H •rl • 4) XJ q q o a> -H ft ■H ai q q 01 XI o O oi A A rr St c I 0 * u xi q 0 q q o O rH a q • t>q • X > q XI 01 q o ■rl U q 01 -H (N XJ ft q ft o q id «. q O 0 Ol 4H i — 1 XJ 0) 0) ai 01 q id q O 01 o q 0) a o g XI X 1 H 0 1 0 x> q q q q *r| •H 0 id q -r 1 *H 4) ai q q q 0 q Ol M q -U XI ai 3 : O U XI ai id 9 0 XJ -rl U q •d 0 C3 U 0 1 cn id •rl q 0 o 0) q •rl rl rH 4J a) 0) a) oi rH 01 O * 3 q id q q •rH •rl o 41 q rH 4- > >4 a id q i — i ai •rl q q a s C W q ft id q cn X) ft ai Q* H 0 0) 01 id •rl 0 0) •d 41 0 X i id •H q 0 01 s • S n • 4 Q 4 ® a 4 o CD 4 9 ® 8 I ® ® ® 03 >1 0 a ft d 4 w 0 -rt 4 4J .4 O 01 4 •4 1 4 -H rH • q 4 •rl ® 01 01 id 4J a 03 4J >4 4 4 4 i > a 01 -H -H 4 ® •rl U ® 0 d ® ■rl a ® d ® 4 > d f 0 4 4 C m 4J 4 ft V t4 4 a 4 4 •4 4 0 -rl 4 4 ■H 01 u (S 4J •4 ft •H a 0 4 ® -4 4 4 4 4 n s 0 4 • i fi 03 TJ 4 4 0 4 ' i a d ra •4 O ® 4 a ■d r 1 iJ at 0 a •H rH o ® rH > cd 4 4 4 4 ® O 0 O ^ 0 ® V cd rH cd 03 H 4 d) i 0 a 4 4 4 4 0 4 id -0 a ® ® a ft -4 •H ® 0 0 o •rl O •rl o ft ft 03 4 •rH -H r — i ® 4 ® 01 id ® -rH a) o -H ® 4 i m •rl 4 4J ■H i ■rl ® M m a i — i a m 4 0 4 4 0 > 4 03 ® cd 0 > 4 ® H <0 4J cd iH 4 o o 4 0 1 a 03 a 03 ra id ® 4 5 M •H ft •H 03 4 cd m 4 : -h 4 -4 -H ® 4 ra • > ® 4 > id 0 d ft cd 0 i 4 O 03 V 4 4 O 4 01 o 4 4J o •H 4 4 X a Q > 0 4J •H ■rH 03 ® -4 ® 4 ® cd 4 4 03 O o ® CM rH M 1 > 4J 4 > 4 cd a a •H 4 U 0 ® • ® 4 03 1< -H ft 03 a) id O 4 d 05 Eh 4 U ® ® 4 o ■n 0 • 03 4 u 0) d d Oi 4 ! rH a a 4 4 4 •rl O HH ft rH 0 O •rl ft a •4 0 1 -H 03 0 4 0 4 ■H rH 4 o 0 rH X) 4 rH o 4 0 • rH 4 4 ® a ft 4 • 4 ® i • £ ■4 4 O a ® 4 4 a S O 4 0) 0 0) o >4 05 4 03 a m 4 4 a d 4 « 03 0 a> 5 •rl 03 4 ■U m 4 4 m ® 4 4 a ^ ® rH 4 • 03 0 4 ® O rH ® cd O 4 a <4H -H o 4 M 4 9 CD <4 O Q) -4 4 ® ® 4 0 a O 0 ft CD 03 4 a O m -rl H *n o o * 4 4 01 ® a a 4 4 4 -4 0 m 4 ra 4 0 03 rH id 4 a rH -u ® ® O ® ® •4 ® ■rl 4 03 ft a 0 4 4 m •rl a 4 ® 4 0 ® 4 > 4 ® ® -4 a a d 4 4 4 ® 03 ■H •H ■u 4 03 0) ® ® 4 4 ft o 4 ® o a 4 o id N •rl a a cd 4 ® 4 0 0 n ft 4 id 4 4 ra O -rl 4 -H i — 1 4 03 -U 4 4-1 O a ® 4 ® cd 4 4 O id O 4 01 0 a O -H 4 <0 03 ® U rH -4 > 0 O -H ® ® u 4 ® ■H id O 03 •H a 4 >4 a 0£ ft 4 4 03 0 ft ra 06 a 01 H-l 4 4 O 0) cd 4 4 CM 4 2 0 0 id 4H ® -4 X ® 25 4 •H 4 •H m < a 0 0 4J ® cd Q -rl 0 a 0 4 rH w 4 Q id a •rl 0 ® i •■ O 13 £ o o o « •3 03 C C/5 3 C/5 ’o C/5 4. (U C/5 13 § C _ •3 CD •M X) £ c/5 ^ X 8 & C/5 £ ~ ~j 2 11 - 2 ■= x! T3 ^ .2? 05 o Oh V) £ -g S 8 3 3 ° £ c o o * 3 w> 3 .£ 13 OX) CD C ^ 3 x »- % f/j O ■S-s O o £• 43 £ OX) ^ =3 ■S o > M C/5 cd tS ia 'O c £ a 4) 43 o 4) „ OX) t! .£ '-o OX) OX) .2 o 13 a a o a •- a co o CO N° O' O 43 o 3 £ 13 13 13 > 3 -t-* £ ^ H g a oi) a 3 a c w '5b a 3 %> 3 a ® a V— » a £ 4) x S '3 Oh C+h a o <3* co 4) 13 ! 1 ,4) s j$ 13 g 43 -a 13 4) _a "a if ^ in ■8-s 13 £ 13 ^ < S’ co x ra a O 60 co X xj CO a « 4) > |3 xl o 43 'O .a ° a 4) •a S 2 - fc a 4/ m—t X 3 « co ■O 0/ 0/ 5- ^ r i* 3 "a 5 . 5 If 3 .2 S3 0/ -rt 4> «4 m S co •— "O O o ® 4» ft cx j- 3 0 = o co 4/ co c s— 4/ .a ■*- 2 CO © Q, a a o 2 CO u -4-» 4/ Q, 4> O * 3 = 4> = 6« ►» f* NM »> £ W .2 3 4/ 43 4^' O a o vj> c ■*-* 4; ^ « a S ^ ^ g J- 3 c/3 © q-i OJ M X 3 CO 4/ C S- j3 a OX co ’C to XI o ti ^ c2 £ a 13 OX ° o = £ « “ M «£S a H .a 2 ?! •“ 4/ £■ "O 4) ‘•5 4/ a o 4> a x © 4» ^ X "O a S— o > CX a 4/ Comments and Responses Page C&R-57 oi 0 G 1 43 Ol 0) k G 43 - k -H ft CO ai 3 rH G G G -H X u n CO H 43 ai O fd d> CO 4 d) fd 01 0 P -H *rl u Ol 43 ft CO k 43 u 01 rH 43 k Ol a d) 01 k •h ? a TJ G Ol k k ai k X) X) -H CO § s •H G 0 43 0 ft 4: H 3 fd d) IT) O 01 G k S 0 rH G X) ft s •H CO rH k rH rH 5 3 43 > k 0) ai o) © ■H IT) 3 ' 1 ft X 1 k 43 a d> dJ ft ■H *1 *) 01 a 3 rH ft k X ^ . 0 01 ITS 3 •H 43 ■duo Q ■X t) ai a ■U V o 43 rH •H k k 0 • fd d> as -h s 0 0) G H G 0 01 01 V 3 s Co k fd G Oi X X CO ^ X) k "H ft ft •<* ft G H o ai ft 01 CJ P 3 G d) G 01 c H X 01 01 fd 0) N H CO p IT ai O tJl rH 4J G •H k t O b X •H k (d fd *h CJ o k rH & CJ p •H k fd 0 0 H *H oi U O a •H X k •H CO Z 2* CO O ai 5 ft G fd k fd C- CO X G a k Ei H <11 CO O 3 oi H ft Uj o IT) X) rH IT) & (d 0) '< d) 3 -rl 43 u < . N rH a> a) cr X) G ft ft ft ft a k •H CJ d) 0 Q ft 0 k k 8 as < 3 rH CO ft k k 01 k CO k 0 fd H £ oi a a oi k Ol ft 43 -s •\ p X 01 S ft CJ X •u •d 1 G d) X % E-. 2 non k 0) r- G H k Co CO CO Q) 01 43 X 0) d) •H P k 43 d> d) CO "5 k o 6 O X) c 1 -H 0) N H ft ft 01 -H k S 4. Oi G d) ft CJ -p 01 HH 43 k a o k a G c 1 0 3 ^ 43 ft ft u G > 0) 01 d) 3 k d) k 0 d) «j; ns S IH tJl 0 -rt c 1 iH b1 oi rt x ft w X IT) a> O k X 01 43 01 k d> X rH 3 its 6 c. 1 IV 01 a X d) IT) 01 k IT) ft ' k oi > X) O X H ft IT) 0) ai s: x ■U rH X •H rH rH Co (ft k k -H ft H CO 4- k IT) ft k X G ft N -H di 43 k c s a 0 O -H *H d> > P H u a O H fd G d> •H ft 1 s 0 43 k •H v 1 IT) X) 0 ai k d> ft tlj CO ft k IT) fd a P * — N X p a d) CO oi a> o ft X) 0) IT) 01 ft ft c i O 01 ft G ft o 0 43 N k x Z 3 oi ai oi G > Q ft 43 fc «k H IT) rH 01 cn k ft X CJ CN 0 0 3 4J •H *H « 0) 01 § 01 > 01 d) id cd rH 1 rH 4H G -H tn x o ft 0) * as fd oi cq k m G P d) k X O Oi k S G N rH ft X) ft > id 01 ft 43 4J k ft fd -H vo d) O O G 01 CJ CJ g g 0 -H 3 H P O os H ai 3 cn ■H k a IT) 01 H tq 4- 4- k rH ■X ■u •H 0 O 0 ITS k o IT) 3 S ft ft 43 r— 0 • G • 4J 43 3 01 d> Ol d> CJ k u CJ -H *H 3 O O ft ft 4l 3 k to (d CO — G 4-> >1 H d) Oi Q •H 01 d) (D CO « k Q> X k -h 0) ai oi ft E~. 2 ft N H 03 fd £5 m fd bi X to rH G X X k ft Z ID 43 o •H 1 -1 43 43 -H ft X ft H ft ft G ft ' 3 G O 43 3 IT) 3 % 43 O G k (TS CO Q > k c 01 ft H k x x S x ft 0) p tn m a o 4J 4) O >h 01 o q id o id o ® 0 a ‘ id P X> -rl > ■d a •rl a 4-) q JJ 4) o M o O TJ q X) 4> 4) > q U -rl -rl p q 44 X) 4) 4) P X) P H 4> a fl 41 • q q a id 4) 4) 0 P -rl -H 4J q id -ri a „ > O X) 0 q a 4J 0 a) a q o O x) co H W Q a) A q X) q •d a o •rl a a P u a -H X3 4) > O ■8 4) XJ id S 0 XI 4) M 4) A m A -rl 0 -u O -H X3 4) 4) q a 4) id xi m * 4) P 2 a > -H 4> q JJ X3 . ® ►S u 4-i tQ *) u 2 X) ■rl a p 4) Ol -r| XJ q X) H -H O 4) !> fl -r| > o a x> -h Vj -r| JJ Pi M X) 4) P< q p o 0 m q jj o 4) o x| jj o q a a o jj m jj q jj ■h 4 q jj 4) q 4) JJ 0) xl •d m q q © m •rl to q 44 •H 44 H M 4) o 4) W JJ XI © q Q m JJ m ■H 4) 9 o q X) 4) q q X) XI q m 4) q jj JJ q 0 id 4) 1 q q jj q id m q B id X3 w a w q to o d q • •rl q 44 q X3 >4 -rl S id q i — 1 r— 1 4) X) o -H q 44 id 4) id xl 0 q q n -r| 0 ►q > q q •rl id m 4) id Xl p — 1 U q 4) q iH q id 4) id xi a H id IN CO u m H 05 4) a 4) M/ 4J 01 \s o i — i CO 03 0 P< W fl CO CO 4) W w k -H a q -H V d 05 fL s P 4> q •r| a) Pi 4) CO q *H 0 •d X H o« -q u 25 fl >1 a 4-1 • U ft w H q 4) a a q rH 4) a> C/3 4) -r~> -H •rl q a H fl o fl fl a fl 44 a 0 a) W Eh q 0 Eh •H q o 44 rQ Q © T3 © 5 £ £oi Vi 'W 5~ .2 ox aj ^5 £3 C c © 3 3 x e © "3 © E B © 3 X 5/5 ~ 3 mm aj 5/5 kM 5/5 O « fj MM -X = 2* « 3 2 ® 3 B > O 41 H) •= E > E 3 > © © c © ■o o £ 5 cd x 3 Hal aj T3 mm > © 3 5/5 r« 5/5 © Mm = O. «y ^ 2 | © ft £ fl, 41 C E 2 “ O © MM Vi +* Vi O 0 5/5 1 £ 1? Cd ft t3 .2 © 4- 4-T B © r- i- ■5 »- © B XI « 5/5 — Z « ►» s Cd © St/5 'X) rs cd 2 >4 cd c X3 5/5 2 © La 2 © 2 § ft © © "a "3 = © -o •MM 8 2 2 © © C *N © *3 -MM © 2 © _ to © ^ © £ © La © © © © La ©a > - © © © ^ 2 0 T » 1 © S -2 a ^ <*> o a o — *S © © «2 S a ’g “ 5/5 B © 2 La o © T3 2 © © © X3 X3 fl B © 3 -MM MM © La © © £ ft £ ft OX 3 3 c 3 •x 2 3 — •“ aj © La © m ft La 5/5 13 5 gf > 2 -o 3 3 2 ’© © © OJ 1/5 5 © ox j2 .2 $ © " ft B 2 .2 .a 3 Comments and Responses Page C&R-59 It is OUr intention that you include in the record and review DNRC acknowledges the reference listing forwarded to all of the literature and other incorporated documents we’ve us; your use makes them Part of the record. cited herein. Please contact us if you have problems locating copies of any of them. Thank you for your attention to these concerns. Please keep each organization on your list to re- ceive further mailings on the proposal. • ^H o CG J-H > 2 CG . ■» CJ CJ E o hJ no cG > ^ c S s pq c _o *•*-* CJ CG cx E o o a o ‘3b 0) (X ■M C/3 G cd G cd -G cj G O o oo H bD O CJ o s fl) 1/2 n W -5 >-i cd W £ t: o _g 00 4-J aj o CQ Comments and Responses Page C&R-61 A. Perry, F. Richard Hauer and Christopher A. Frissell. 2004. Postfire Management on Forested Public Lands of the Western United States. Conservation Biology, Vol. 18, No. 4, August 2004, Pages 957-967. o g 3 O' "O a> c C/) a> G _o ’w 0 t: c3 0 D H C G L- 1 O O \Q O G O .2 C4 'O DO t- 00 1) ON I-c U — 00 Os 1 .G cd 0 aJ i_ 0 ^ «u rG : x: 0 1 co c 1 -5 ^ u c g ’c '5bu ^ — -o «<3 S D c3 t. w CQ 1- £- £ 2 a g? ° IS « « g cs g ^ •e -a 5 § <*-. OX) o <1> 20 2 £ <4-< o> w tp • 3 w § .5 U a to It: (1) o> o a o CJ a 3 £ CJ CQ o o (N nT 3 to to "3 o u a °- O c/D -a C u. 3 S cd to £ «" „ to O >x C > 3 < O 4> O c co •<— to w S | = o c CQ Pd 3 w - to ^ 0) A. CQ cs ■*— » C/D CQ to - £ Si S 3 £n- H 3 d .a g S3 °P 2 CQ < cT « 1/5 « * 60 .2 l— • o -2 H I oC o d3 U O tH S -2 H fe T3 C C X ^ 0) JO 2 3 -S ^ £ o !§ (u rz: ■i* £ 2 CJ 3 - C _j o ^ a. e S OX) W o «•■■ H-J 2 -a m g a «u s d. t. m 3 in Q. . « C Q .0 c/i « p * -3 -d o z o iC o 3 CU o H P-. ^ 0 5 9 -C co u. ^ J3 4J % « ^ 5 3 Os 2 to 00 6b 3 ^ ^"2 | = -g B ' D cs a „ >05 3 so I x> — y S c u u 5 •a D < *H to O cu X id ; g X g 3 0 E U E 0 r—t g CO , H 1 to CD co M O X ■H Cn >1 ai a g H CD CO X CD g CO CO Q cq 4-1 P 03 id O X g 0 rH X X 6 X Eh X U X g 0 X o3 CO 2 C P (0 g CM id <0 •H u i — 1 • O 1 — 1 ai •H ? 0 ■H g g g Cn x • — i 03 s. 9 P XJ ai Q) XJ >1 X > X w m ai ai 0 X 0 g Eh XJ g g g 0 g O f— 1 CO 04 P* 1 — 1 2 M CD 2 X g M X > g 0 X D g X X •H a •H g o H 9 2 O [j •H (0 •H 0 H X X to g X g 0 1 — 1 X a, CD X CO tn X X g X 0 X . CD bq O 0 P L40 X) X g X •H g g g X g W g •H id X 00 a) Q M 0 X) ai •H rH ai X a> s p CO OJ x CO • X » — 1 X g •H X •H X X 0 X •H CD < — 1 g 0 tn g •H g O . oj a) 00 p ai 4-1 4-1 CO g 3} g X to g t — 1 g g X 0 g l P P 0 g g g to X to g CO P p 1 X! O 03 id CD 1 0 rd g > g •H g 1 — 1 X (0 3 CQ CO 03 £ g 0 id to M X 3 ai (0 g rH ♦H X X ■H X X • 2 •d 2 H oq g a o3 to X to M tu X X to • g •H 2 X 0 3 *H 3 0 to 1 — 1 *H rH *H CD 0 4-1 CO g g •rt g O to g X g g >, X N 03 tn CO g 0 X X 0 «H TJ o XJ XJ p 0 a 03 Q) U g 2 Q) ai •H X CO g g cn 9 g X X 1 — 1 •H g g • (1) TJ 2 2 p 4-1 ai S XI CD 0 D V X 3 2 g 0) g 0 CO g a w X At g X VO 2 a) 0) 03 03 g 0 1 — 1 a Pi >1 g D tu g >1 0 X g y •H g g g Q g to g 0 g CO H p CO tr> a) g 1-1 2 0 z M z i E g g I — 1 0 eg X a g X •H •H £ g CD p CO s 2 x O ai O p a ai Q to •H X U g X 0 9 «. Eh g Cn g H rd g U 2 r^ 1 *H *H 4-1 a •H g p X g X X CD g X in g g g O g g X X X g S 2 >i u 1 oq X > g P 1-1 £ •» g 3 ai tM (U 0 03 1 3 a g S P ■ g g 3 0 X u u M •H H co CM CD 3 X * — t e O g £ g V) 0 g co E CM a g g O g 3 2 03 TJ H CD cn to a c n id 1 — 1 •H X 0 cn x ai to tv X X H «. X m •H g g g O to •H CD i — 1 P> a) •H •H 4-1 >1 p X) *H X g X X X a> X g Co CO X Cn X Cn •rH g P 2 CO v HI g id 0 ai 0 X CU X X X g g g X X Q •H 3 X g X X X Cn 0 TJ u •H Q, E g X! •H X ai V) (1) X ai rH X g X g X ** — ■ P O g •H g •rH X 1 OC CD O •«H 1 C x (T3 4-1 P X 2 ' 1 X X tn O C/3 to X g Eh g g X X X X O X z P P P 2 H V 0 4-1 frt ' ' X X X g E * m X X X co cn g •H 0 g 1 — 1 Q •H M o H to *H 3 >44 to t- tn 6 id 0 e g X 0 £ 0 X g 0 CO u g g 0 H H 03 •H H H (0 0 • O 3 N 1 g *H X X 0 0 P 0 ptS 0 cr 03 • X cn g 0 X X to O 03 a P CO 3 g XJ 0 rH •r4 2 -H X < u ai 0 2 g X g X rH — * 1 — i CM g tn X 0 *H Cn • CO 0) 2 CO >4 X Cn CD c x 0 c •H id g X X X D g g £ g g O 0 a g g g (D a V P CD •4 C •H 0 to td 6 > ai (0 g ai < O X) P *iH u ai id 0 • E E p a> X 2 g £ >» 0 CD X g X 0 g g •H 03 TJ U 03 O rH •H P >1 CO £ 03 M E to X 2 0 g 0 X g -H X 0 2 03 P p •H § e, 1 — 1 •H 2 2 5 CD ai 2 id 0 H a >0 X 0 £ •H U 03 X g 3' X g 0 •H 2 CO TJ H 0 0 XJ CJ & CD to 2 X CM 03 p M 03 rH X 0 CD P 00 CD a x *H O •H X 0 P CO CD H H to 2 1 N Q) XI •H CO P to Cn 0 rH 2 g U -H X XJ 2 g g g X g CD 2 H CO H Eh 03 CD 0 O X g 03 Q) CO CT> ■£ 03 >1 CD 2 • — 1 V 03 X XJ cn x g 1 TJ 0 0) co ? V P 0 H 4-1 id P X V X X 2 X u - g X S •H * O CO X CD X X rH •H o OJ 0; Eh M e X 2 X CD TJ H * — 1 •H 1 •H % 0 X P m H E g CO X id i — 1 P P u rH 9 JO a; co XJ CO «. a to O cr> rH O O U >1 U X X X CO CD 0 CD CO CO g CO rH g to . 03 2 •H *H O Eh e> > XJ 1 — 1 •H co *H O tr> 03 O E E u X 0 X V) 3 XJ T5 0 P XJ g 2 O id X H CD 2 P | O, 9 aj 2 2 X! 0 P xs g u £ 2 g P s g 2 CM P 2 a O s a CJ td 2 H •H 2 CD 2 0 0 a X •H g > g P P g 2 P 0 •H P 0 z X 03 2 (D >H O < u 1 x CO co Ht \ — 1 3 r 03 2 03 •H p X 0 H P Cn 0 g co P X •H CO 0 XJ O CJ Q g 2 U TJ Page C&R-64 West Fork Timber Sale Project Please keep me informed of all developments regarding this timber sale, and particularly lei me know if there are any opportunities to view the stands in Area III. Thank you for considering my comments. Comments and Responses Page C&R-67 P.0. MX 1316 EUREKA, MONTANA 50817 TELEPHONE 406-207-3114 FAX 408-296-8334 \ APPENDIX I PEOPLE CONTACTED ! X Jane Adams Alliance for the Wild Rockies Frances Anderson Tony Arnold Jane Bartolini Brad and Kelly Beck Brad and Margaret Beck DeWayne Beck Jack Beckstrom Jerry Benbrook Wes and Monica Benbrook Ed Benz Big Sky Girl Scout Council Charles and Kathleen Bogle Jim Bower (DNRC) Kathy Bramer (Office of Public Instruction) Reggie and Donna Briggs Thad and Debbie Briggs Brian C. Bring Bob Brown (Secretary of State) Doug and Pam Brown G . I . Burk Norma Burk Stan and Roxy Burk Dan Bushnell (DNRC) Darlene Hersey Byers John Byers Sara Cadenhead James Carr Veronica Carr Kevin Chappell (DNRC) Cliff and Pam Christensen Citizens for a Better Flathead Nathan and Patti Conkle Ted and Val Corne Jon Dahlberg (DNRC) Tony and Lisa Darsow Connie Daruk (DNRC) Jeff Dayhuff Mark Deleray (Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks) Kay DeMoss Bryan Donner (U.S. Forest Service, Tally Lake District) Paul Engelman (DNRC) Citizens for a Better Flathead Ecology Center Steve and Christina Eisenberg F.H. Stoltze Land and Lumber Company Mike Filipek Tracy Filipek Neil Franson Roger and LaVern Fredenberg Keith and Renae Fredrickson John Gangemi Ted Giesey (DNRC) Al Gouzene Dan Grandkoski Elsie Gress Rocky Gress David Groeschl (DNRC) Dave Haake Gary and Rita Hall Harley Harris (Department of Justice) Roger and Rhonda Hatlen Cary Hegreberg (Montana Wood Products Association) Peter Hersey Gary and Lisa Hill Ruth and Rusty Hill Betty Holder (U.S. Forest Service, Murphy Lake Ranger District) Allen and Cindy Horn (Castle Rock Entertainment ) Jerald and Maimie Hudson Hungry Horse News Leo Keane Mr. and Mrs. Pat Kearney Steve Kelly Rick Kerr Kurt and Becka Keys Heather Kiedrowski (Governor's Office) Louis Knuds en Gary and Kathy Kober Jane Kollmeyer (U.S. Forest Service, Tally Lake Ranger District) Rick and Charlotte Komenda Jim Krantz (Plum Creek Timber Company) Joe and Kathleen Krass K. Kusumoto Charles Langlois Ted and Brenda Larsen Tom and Erika Larsen Tom Larsen Bill Leonard (Whitefish Water and Sewer District) Stuart Lewin LeAnn Libby Pat and Marion Libby Bob Love Jim Mann (Daily InterLake Newspaper) Jane Markland ( DNRC ) Gary Marks (Whitefish City Manager) Carol Massman (DNRC) Mike and Norma McBroom Linda McCullough (Office of Public Instruction) Mike and Sandra McDonald Mike McGrath (Department of Justice) Norm Merz (DNRC) Jeff Mielke Mike Miller Ed Monnig (Murphy Lake Ranger District) Montana Ecosystem Defense Council Montana Wilderness Association Montana Wood Products Association Montanans for Multiple Use Arlene Montgomery (Friends of Wild Swan) William Montgomery Jerry Morris John Morrison (State Auditor's Office) Geary and Debbie Murphy Dick and Carol Nelson Tony Nelson (DNRC) Rick and Nita Newton Kathy O'Conner (DNRC) Todd O'Hair (Govenor's Office) Mike 0' Herron (DNRC) Richard and Judy Ottwell Owens and Hurst Lumber Company Edwin Payne Bill and Alice Perry Fred Peters Rollie Peters Tana Rae Peterson Mr. and Mrs. Donald Phelps Sarah Pierce (DNRC) William Polus Lonny and Janet Quimbey Sheila and Roy Quimby, Jr. Vince and Mary Reed Bill and Jan Richardson Dan and Sheila Richardson Evelyn Richardson Barb Roberts Jerry Roberts Merlin and Chris Rose Roselles (Potters Field) Bruce Rowland (DNRC) Dave Russell Larry and Alice Ryerson Leanna Ryerson Tom Schultz (DNRC) Gerald and Christine Schwegel Greg and Janet Schwegel Dore Schwinden (State Auditor's Office) Sylvia Shaddon Greg Shildwachter (Intermountain Forest Industries) Ralph Simpson Mike and Rachel Singer Angie Storkson Carl Storkson Delbert Storkson Scott and Sylvia Storkson John and Karen Strean Bruce and Roxanne Street Michael Sullivan (Secretary of State' s Office) Rita, David, and Erik Summers Betty Thomas Kyle Thomas Steve Thompson Minnie Torgerson Tom and Margaret Torgerson Larry and Becky Tracy Salish and Kootenai Tribes Jodee Triplett Jeff Ulsamer (Dog Sled Adventures) Art Vail (Plum Creek Timber Company) H.T. Vars Jim Vashro (Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks) Aaron and Jo Voorhies Richard E. Wackrow (Northfork Improvement Association) Peg Wagner (Montanans for Multiple Use) Dianna Warner Gary Watson Ted Weber William John Welch Tana and Norman Weller Kay Wenzel Candace West (Department of Justice) Allen and Pam Whitaker Allen Wolf (DNRC) Kane Youngquist Donna Yutsy l l ACRONYMS ARM Administrative Rules of Montana BMP Best Management Practices cmp corrugated metal pipe CS Common Schools (trust) dbh diameter at breast height DEQ Department of Environmental Quality DFWP Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks DNRC Department of Natural Resources and Conservation DEIS Draft Environmental Impact Statement EA Environmental Assessment ECA Equivalent Clearcut Acres EIS Environmental Impact Statement EPA Environmental Protection Act FEIS Final Environmental Impact Statement FI Forest Improvement FNF Flathead National Forest IGBC Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee mbf thousand board feet MCA Montana Codes Annotated ME PA Montana Environmental Protection Agency mmbf million board feet MNHP Montana Natural Heritage Program NCDE Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem NWLO Northwestern Land Office RMZ Riparian Management Zone SFLMP State Forest Land Management Plan SLI Stand Level Inventory SMZ Streamside Management Zone TLMS Trust Land Management System TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load USFS United States Forest Service USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service ID Team Land Board 124 Permit 3A Permit Interdisciplinary Team Montana Board of Land Commissioners Stream protection Act Permit Authorization A — Short-term Exemption from Montana's Surface Water-Quality Standards State Forest Land Management Rules SFLM Rules Copies of this document with its appendices were published at an approximate cost of $11.21 per copy for printing and $3.95 per copy for mailing. DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND CONSERVATION STILLWATER UNIT OFFICE - STILLWATER STATE FOREST 742 5\HIGHWAY 93 NORTH (WHITEFISH) P.O. BOX 164 OLNEY , MT 59927 (406) 881-2371 Persons with disabilities who need an alternative , accessible format of this document should contact DNRC at the address or phone number shown above.