STATE DOCUMENTS COLLECTION
m 3 0 2001
MONTANA STATE LIBRARY
1515 E. 6th AVE.
HELENA, MONTANA 59620
r»l | 1 1
SULLWATTH
MONTANA STATE LIBRARY
DEPARTMENT OF
NATURAL RESOURCES AND CONSERVATION
MARC RACICOT, GOVERNOR
STATE OF MONTANA
NORTHWESTERN LAND OFFICE
2250 HIGHWAY 93 NORTH
KALISPELL, MONTANA 59901-2557
Telephone: (406) 751-2240
FAX: (406)751-2288
December 19, 2000
TAYLOR SOUTH TIMBER SALE PROJECT
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
Enclosed is a copy of the Taylor South Timber Harvest Project Draft Environmental
Impact Statement (DEIS). I encourage you to carefully review the information presented
in the DEIS and provide comments to Mike McMahon, Project Leader, Stillwater State
Forest, P.O. 164, Olney, Montana 59927. Comments must be received by January 18,
2000. Along with your comments, please be sure to include your name, address,
telephone number, and the title of the DEIS for which you are providing comments.
The proposed project is located just north of Whitefish Lake in the Stillwater State
Forest.
The Department does not present a preferred alternative of the four action alternatives
analyzed in the DEIS. Proposed harvest volumes range from 0 to 4.6 MMBF.
The DEIS is written in a different format than previous Stillwater State Forest DEIS
publications. The Summary incorporates pictures to convey information and is written so
that all education levels can understand the contents. The DEIS consolidates chapters III
and IV into one section that summarizes the analysis in plain English. The bulk of the
scientific analysis is located in a tabbed Appendix. I hope this format change improves
our ability to communicate with all of the individuals interested in the management of
State lands. I welcome your thoughts and comments.
Robert U Sandman
Unit Manager
Stillwater State Forest
P.O. Box 164, Olney, MT 59927
(406) 881-2371
KALISPELL UNIT
2250 Highway 93 North
Kalispell, MT 59901-2557
Telephone (406) 751-2240
Fax (406) 751-2288
STILLWATER STATE FOREST
PO Box 164
Olney, MT 59927-0164
Telephone (406) 881-2371
Fax (406) 881-2372
LIBBY UNIT
14096 US Highway 37
Libby, MT 59923-9347
Telephone (406) 293-2711
Fax (406) 293-9307
PLAINS UNIT
PO Box 219
Plains, MT 59859-0219
Telephone (406) 826-3851
Fax (406) 826-5785
SWAN STATE FOREST
Swan Lake, MT 59911
Telephone (406) 754-2301
Fax (406) 754-2884
"AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER"
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2016
https://archive.org/details/taylorsouthtimbe2000mont
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
VICINITY MAP (back of front cover)
PREFACE
ACRONYMS
CHAPTER 1-PURPOSE AND NEED
Description of Proposed Actions 1
Purpose 1
Proposed Objectives 2
Relationship to the SFLMP 2
EIS Process 2
Draft Environmental Impact Statement 3
Final Environmental Impact Statement 3
Notification of Decision 3
Proposed Schedule of Activities 4
Other Environmental Reviews Related to the Project 4
Other Agencies with Jurisdiction/Permit Requirements 4
Public Concerns 5
CHAPTER II— ALTERNATIVES
Introduction 1
Development of Alternatives 1
Alternative Descriptions 2
Alternatives Considered But Not Given Detailed Study 10
Table II -3— Summary of the Environmental Effects 12
CHAPTER III -EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
Introduction 1
Project Area Description 1
Hydrology 2
Fisheries 4
Vegetation 6
Wildlife 10
Economics 14
Aesthetics 16
Recreation 18
Air Quality 20
Soils 22
PREPARERS AND CONTRIBUTORS
REFERENCES
GLOSSARY (grey)
The Resources Appendices are bound separately
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENT
PREFACE
The format of the Taylor South
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
is different than, probably, any
other EIS you have ever read. We
felt it was important to have a
preface to explain what is unique
about this EIS. The key reasons for
this format change is:
- We wanted to present a document
that all interested parties
could, regardless of their
knowledge level, read and fully
comprehend the project and its
analyses .
- We wanted a document that was
scientifically and legally sound.
In the past, our experience has
been that it is extremely
difficult to produce a document
that is easy to understand by all
interested people and still
withstand the appropriate
scientific or legal review.
The Executive Summary of the EIS is
designed to encompass the Montana
Environmental Protection Act (MEPA)
rules. The information is written
so that it is easily understood with
the supporting photographs and maps.
The body of the EIS was redesigned
to combine Chapters III and IV into
a single chapter, Chapter III. The
analyses and conclusions that were
completed by the ID Team are
summarized in plain language, thus,
ensuring that all interested
parties, regardless of their
scientific or technical abilities,
can understand this proposal and its
effects .
The Interdisciplinary Team (ID Team)
members prepared the resource
appendices; the discussions include
citations from other sources such as
research documents, environmental
assessments, etc. The lengthy
technical discussions of
methodologies, research, monitoring,
baseline studies, analyses, etc.,
have been completed by the ID Team
and are presented in the appendices .
Because the analysis work required
highly advanced technical procedures
and terminology, that information is
presented in the appendices . The
information in the appendices would
need to be utilized for any
scientific, technical, or legal
review .
■t
ACRONYMS
A.C.B. Montana State University
Grant
A.C.I. Montana State University -
Morrill Grant
BMP Best Management Practices
CCC Civilian Conservation Corps
C. S. Common School Grant
dbh Diameter at breast height
D. D.& A. Deaf Blind School Grant
DEQ Department of Environmental
Quality
DFWP Montana Department of Fish,
Wildlife and Parks
DEIS Draft Environmental Impact
Statement
DNRC Department of Natural
Resources and Conservation
EA Environmental Assessment
ECA equivalent clearcut acres
EIS Environmental Impact
Statement
FEIS Final Environmental Impact
Statement
FI forest improvement
FNF Flathead National Forest
HB House Bill
ID Team Interdisciplinary Team
FOGI Full Old-Growth Index
Board
Board of Land Commissioners
MBF
thousand board feet
MCA
Montana Codes Annotated
MEPA
Montana Environmental
Policy Act
MMBF
million board feet
NWLO
Northwestern Land Office
SFLMP
State Forest Land
Management Plan
SLI
stand- level inventory
S.M.
School of Mines Grant
SMZ
streams ide management zone
S.N.S.
State Normal School
SSFI
sale-specific forest
improvement
TMDL
total maximum daily load
TPA
trees per acre
USFS
United States Forest
Service
WYI
water yield increase
124 Permit Stream
Preservation Act
Permit
3A Authorization A Short-term
Exemption from
Montana's Surface
Water Quality
Standards
Land
1
CHAPTER I
PURPOSE
AND
NEED
<■
Stillwater State Forest, Montana
Department of Natural Resources and
Conservation ( DNRC ) , is proposing
the Taylor South Timber Sale
Project. The proposal includes
timber -harvesting activities,
replacement of a bridge at Upper
Whitefish Lake Campground, and
drainage improvements on roads
within the project area.
If a harvest alternative were
selected, 4 to 5 million board feet
(MMBF) of timber would be harvested
from, approximately, 640 acres; most
of those acres would be prepared to
grow new stands of timber. The
dilapidated bridge at the outlet of
Upper Whitefish Lake on the East
Fork of Swift Creek would be
replaced with a new bridge and
bridge abutments. Several large-
diameter culverts on Lower Whitefish
Lake Road would also be replaced.
X, Section 11) . The Board of Land
Commissioners (Land Board) and DNRC
are required by law to administer
these trust lands to produce the
largest measure of reasonable and
legitimate return over the long run
for these beneficiary institutions,
Section 77 - -1-202 , Montana Codes
Annotated (MCA). On May 30, 1996,
DNRC released the Record of Decision
on the State Forest Land Management
Plan (SFLMP) . The Land Board
approved the SFLMP 's implementation
on June 17, 1996. The SFLMP
outlines the management philosophy
of DNRC in the management of State
forested trust lands and sets out
specific Resource Management
Standards for 10 resource
categories .
The Department will manage the lands
involved according to the philosophy
and standards in the SFLMP, which
states :
The project area is located
approximately 6 air miles northwest
of Whitefish, Montana, within
Sections 6, 7, 17, 18, 19, 20, 29,
30, 31, 32, and 33, Township 32
north (T32N) , Range 22 west (R22W)
(see VICINITY MAP) .
PURPOSE
The lands involved in the proposed
project are held by the State of
Montana in trust for the support of
specific beneficiary institutions,
such as public schools, State
colleges and universities, and other
specific State institutions, such as
the school for the deaf and blind
Our premise is that the best
way to produce long-term
income for the trust is to
manage intensively for healthy
and biologically diverse
forests. Our understanding is
that a diverse forest is a
stable forest that will
produce the most reliable and
highest long-term revenue
stream... In the foreseeable
future, timber management will
continue to be our primary
source of revenue and our
primary tool for achieving
biodiversity objectives.
Environmental Impact Statement
Page 1-1
PROPOSED OBJECTIVES
In order to meet the goals of the
management philosophy adopted
through a programmatic review of the
SFLMP , DNRC has set the following
specific project objectives:
• Harvest 3 to 5 MMBF of sawtimber
to generate revenue for the
appropriate school trusts. The
sale would also provide a
sufficient amount of sawlog
volume to contribute to the
sustained yield for DNRC, as
mandated by State Statute 77-5-
222, MCA.
• Replace the bridge at Upper
Whitefish Lake Campground.
• Improve the long-term
productivity of timber stands by
increasing stand vigor, reducing
incidence of insect infestations
and diseases, and regenerating
portions of the stands where
timber-stand growth is
decreasing. Actions would be
done in a manner that maintains
site productivity and favors the
retention and regeneration of
appropriate species mixes.
• Provide for additional benefits
and maintain options for
sustained revenue to the school
trusts by completing site
improvements on existing roads to
improve drainage, water quality,
and safety as recommended by
current Best Management Practice
(BMPs) Standards for Forestry
RELATIONSHIP TO THE SFLMP
The SFLMP is a programmatic plan
that provides field personnel with
consistent policy, direction, and
guidance for the management of State
forested lands . It contains the
general philosophies and management
standards that will provide the
framework for project-level
decisions .
The planning of the proposed Taylor
South Timber Sale Project was guided
by the SFLMP. The SFLMP philosophy
and appropriate Resource Management
Standards have been incorporated
into the design of the proposed
actions. The Taylor South Timber
Sale Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) is not intended as a
programmatic or area plan and is
limited to addressing specific
proposed actions in reference to
issues that were identified through
public involvement and
interdisciplinary input.
EIS PROCESS
EIS DEVELOPMENT
This EIS was prepared in compliance
with MEPA, which requires State
government to include the
consideration of environmental
impact in its decisionmaking
process. It also requires agencies
to inform the public and other
interested parties about proposed
projects, the environmental impacts
that may result, and the alternative
actions that could achieve the
project objectives.
PUBLIC SCOPING
The initial stage of an EIS is the
pubic scoping process, which is used
to :
inform the public that a State
agency is proposing an action,
and
receive comments or concerns
about the possible impacts of the
proj ect .
Three public-comment periods have
taken place; each comment period was
initiated with an advertisement, a
letter, or a newsletter. Several
small field tours in the project
area have also taken place; the
project was discussed during those
tours .
Page 1-2
Taylor South Timber Sale Project
In March 1998, DNRC solicited public
participation in the Taylor South
Timber Sale Project Proposal by
placing a paid advertisement in
Kalispell's Daily Interlake and the
weekly Whitefish Pilot, Hungry Horse
News, and North Valley Advertiser
newspapers. In addition, a letter,
which included maps and general
information about the project, was
sent by mail to individuals,
agencies, industry representatives,
and other organizations that had
expressed interest in Stillwater
State Forest's management
activities. The mailing list
developed for this project is
located in the project file.
The public comment period for the
initial project proposal was open
for 30 days. The issues and
concerns identified through public
scoping were summarized and used to
further refine the project.
By October 1999, the ID Team, which
is made up of DNRC 1 s wildlife
biologist, hydrologist, economist,
and the project leader, further
defined an action alternative,
complete with maps of potential
harvest areas and their respective
silvicultural treatments. The first
newsletter explained the action
alternative in general terms and
where it was located in the project
area. The newsletter was mailed out
to people on the updated mailing
list; the second 3 0-day comment
period followed.
In May 2000, a second newsletter was
mailed out displaying further
project refinements and the
introduction of a second action
alternative. Another 30-day comment
period followed.
Numerous field tours were conducted
within the project area since 1998,
some relating directly to the timber
sale proposal and others relating to
other interests or resources within
the project area.
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENT (DEIS)
Preparation of this DEIS was the
next step. Public comments related
to issues that could affect the
project have been incorporated into
the document. Upon publication,
notification that the DEIS is
available will be sent to those on
the mailing list; the DEIS and/or a
Summary of the DEIS will be
circulated to interested parties
requesting the documents. Comments
will be accepted for 30 days.
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENT (FEIS)
After public comments are received,
compiled, and addressed, DNRC will
prepare a FEIS or adopt the DEIS as
the FEIS. The FEIS consists,
primarily, of a revision of the DEIS
that incorporates new information
based on public and internal
comments .
NOTIFICATION OF DECISION
Following publication of the FEIS,
the Stillwater State Forest Unit
Manager will review public comments,
the FEIS, and information contained
in the project file. No sooner than
15 days after publication of the
FEIS, the Unit Manager will consider
and determine the following:
• Do the alternatives presented in
the FEIS meet the project's
purpose?
• Is the proposed mitigation
adequate and feasible?
• Which alternative or combination/
modification of alternatives
should be implemented? Why?
These determinations will be
published and all interested parties
will be notified. The decisions
presented in the published document
would become DNRC 1 s recommendations
Environmental Impact Statement
Page 1-3
to the Land Board. Ultimately, the
Land Board would make the final
decisions regarding the actions to
be implemented.
PROPOSED SCHEDULE OF ACTIVITIES
After a decision is published, and
if a timber-harvesting alternative
is selected, a Timber Sale Contract
package would be prepared in the
winter/spring of 2001.
This contract package is tentatively
scheduled for presentation to the
Land Board in June 2001. If the
Land Board approves the timber sale,
the sale may be advertised that
spring/summer . Harvesting and
roadwork would occur for
approximately 3 years after the sale
is sold. Postharvest activities,
such as site preparation, planting,
and hazard reduction, would occur
following harvesting activities.
OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS
RELATED TO THE PROJECT
In order to address the direct,
indirect, and cumulative effects to
resources on a landscape level,
resource analyses will consider
potential effects from past,
present, and future actions as
required for that resource and
within a defined analysis area. A
list of other ongoing projects and/
or timber sales can be found in
Appendix A - List of Related
Environmental Reviews .
OTHER AGENCIES WITH JURISDICTION/
PERMIT REQUIREMENTS
MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF FISH, WILDLIFE
AND PARKS
Montana Department of Fish,
Wildlife, and Parks (DFWP) has
jurisdiction over the management of
fisheries and wildlife in the
project area. DFWP is on the
mailing list and has received the
initial proposal and newsletters.
DNRC has had an ongoing contract
with DFWP to collect data and
monitor streams in Stillwater State
Forest for existing fisheries
habitat and the presence/absence of
bull trout and westslope cutthroat
trout .
A Stream Preservation Act Permit
(124 Permit) is required from DFWP
for activities that may affect the
natural shape and form of any stream
or its banks or tributaries.
MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY
A Short-term Exemption from
Montana's Surface Water Quality
Standards (3A Authorization) issued
by the Montana Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ) , may be
required if :
- temporary activities would
introduce sediment above natural
levels into streams, or
- DFWP feels a permit is necessary
after reviewing the mitigation in
the 124 Permit.
MONANA AIRSHED GROUP
DNRC is a member of the Montana
Airshed Group, which regulates slash
burning done by DNRC. DNRC receives
an air-quality permit through
participation in the Montana Airshed
Group .
UNITED STATE FOREST SERVICE (USFS)
The Flathead National Forest shares
a nonexclusive easement to segments
of Taylor Creek Road (USFS Road
9790) within State ownership
(Sections 6 and 7, T32N, R22W) .
Page 1-4
Taylor South Timber Sale Project
PUBLIC CONCERNS
Through the public involvement
process, resource specialists of
DNRC and other agencies and the
public raised concerns about the
project's potential impacts on the
environment. DNRC used these
concerns in developing the project
design, mitigation measures, and
alternatives (see Chapter II) . A
paraphrased summation of the
comments incorporated into the
alternatives is presented below.
WATER QUALITY AND WATER YIELD
• There is concern that logging and
associated activities may
negatively impact the water
quality in Whitefish Lake, Swift
Creek, and 7 tributary streams to
Swift Creek. Concern was
expressed that long-term timber
management may lead to cumulative
effects to the Lower Swift Creek
watershed .
• Timber- and road-management
activities may lead to
sedimentation from in-stream
erosion due to higher water
yields and soil disturbance
associated with these activities.
The increase in siltation may
have an effect on water quality
and "beneficial uses" .
• Concern was raised that timber-
harvesting and road-management
activities, including culvert
replacements, may generate
sediment above naturally
occurring levels if not properly
mitigated .
FISHERIES
The primary concern is that
cumulative impacts of all proposed
activities on bull trout and
westslope cutthroat trout habitat be
fully analyzed.
VEGETATION
Landscape
Timber harvesting and the associated
disturbances (site preparation) that
could result from this proposal may
cause a change in stand development
and the structural composition of
stands within the proposed harvest
areas. The concern involves whether
the proposed actions would be within
the range of natural variation for
stand structure, species
composition, and diversity of
vegetative components related to
natural fire regimes.
Maintenance of Forest Health in
Relation to Timber Stands in the
Project Area
There is concern that the present
species mix and stocking levels in
timber stands represent risks in
terms of insect and disease
outbreaks, potential losses to
wildfire, loss of sawlog value due
to rot and firewood gathering, and,
potentially, lower stand
productivity .
Old Growth
Concern was expressed that old-
growth levels should not fall below
the amounts necessary to ensure the
viability of old-growth-associated
species and that those components
naturally occurring in the old-
growth structure be maintained or be
moved toward.
WILDLIFE
Threatened and Endangered Species
Eagle
• Concerns were raised that the
proposed project may increase
human disturbance or alter habitat
that may cause the degradation and
abandonment of the Whitefish Lake
bald eagle nest. Important
Environmental Impact Statement
Page 1-5
habitat elements include perching
and potential nesting habitat on
or near Whitefish Lake and Swift
Creek .
• Another concern is unrestricted
access on Smith Lake Road that may
allow for direct and indirect
human disturbance of the Whitefish
Lake bald eagle nest and may have
possible impacts on the eagles'
reproductive success.
Grizzly Bear
Concerns were raised that the
current road densities, past timber
harvests, and the proposed timber
harvest may affect the seasonal
habitat, hiding cover, and security
core areas of the grizzly bear
within the Lazy Creek Bear
Management Subunit.
Wolf
Concerns were raised that the
proposed timber-harvesting project
may displace wolves from relatively
secure seasonal habitats, which
include the big game winter range
and den and rendezvous sites for the
wolves .
Lynx
Concerns were raised that the
proposed project may affect lynx
habitat by increasing human
disturbance and reducing habitat
patch size and connectivity.
Concerns were also raised that the
harvest of old growth would reduce
lynx habitat.
Sensitive and Old-Growth-Associated
Species
Concerns were raised that the
proposed project may increase human
disturbance to several sensitive
wildlife species and cause increased
fragmentation by reducing
connectivity within these species'
habitats .
For old-growth-associated species,
concerns were raised that old-growth
stands of sufficient size, shape,
and quality supporting species
associated with mature to old stands
would not be retained due to the
location and type of proposed and
past timber harvesting. The
concerns emphasized that the old-
growth stands should contain large-
diameter trees and snags, abundant
coarse woody debris, and connective
corridors between stands.
Big Game
Timber-harvesting activities have
the potential to affect forage
availability, hiding cover, thermal
cover, and travel patterns of white-
tailed deer and other big game
species .
ECONOMICS
Some concerns were expressed that
adequate information be presented to
enable decisionmakers and the
general public to consider both the
short- and long-term economic
effects of the proposed activities,
including no action, on the
individual beneficiary trusts. DNRC
completed a report on the return on
investments for classified forest
lands in September 2000. For
information on the return on
investment by beneficiary, please
consult this report.
Some individuals are concerned the
State is not producing the largest
legitimate return from School Trust
lands due to complicated harvesting
plans and contracts with a high
degree of restrictive clauses. An
additional specific concern about
costs related to the required haul
route .
Other concerns related to the haul
route include potential damage to
the road surface of East Lakeshore
Drive and safety.
Page 1-6
Taylor South Timber Sale Project
AESTHETICS
Concerns were expressed relating to
the foreground, or close-up views,
of harvest units as seen from
traveled roadways. Individuals have
expressed dislike for abrupt edges
along cutting-unit boundaries,
visible skid trails (primarily
excavated trails and a high density
of trails), landings with ruts, and
incomplete burns within landing
piles .
RECREATION
Concern was expressed that
additional road improvements made to
the Smith Lake Road would increase
traffic and recreationists on and
around Smith Lake.
Some people are concerned with
potential conflicts between winter
recreation (snowmobiling) and
logging activities on Lower
Whitefish Lake Road if harvesting
activities are conducted in the
winter season.
Conflict between project activities
and recreation may result in a
decrease of revenues generated from
licenses and permits.
AIR QUALITY
Some people are concerned about the
dust and smoke particulate generated
from logging and hazard-reduction
activities during the spring,
summer, and fall seasons.
SOILS
A concern was expressed that
cumulative soil impacts may reduce
site productivity through soil
compaction and displacement.
Environmental Impact Statement
Page 1-7
CHAPTER II
ALTERNATIVES
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of Chapter II is to
introduce 2 action alternatives for
the Taylor South Timber Sale Project
area and summarize the effects of
implementing each alternatives,
including the No-Action Alternative.
The chapter will first focus on the
development of the action
alternatives and summarize the
description of each alternative.
Then the probable environmental
consequences associated with each
alternative will be briefly
outlined. TABLE II -3-SUMMARY OF THE
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECT summarizes
effects of the detailed
environmental analysis in Chapter
III or the Appendices .
DEVELOPMENT OF ALTERNATIVES
An ID Team was formed in the spring
of 1999 to work on the Taylor South
Timber Sale Project. The role of an
ID Team is to summarize issues and
concerns, develop management options
within a project area, and analyze
the potential impacts of a proposal
on the human and natural
environments .
Throughout 1999, ID Team members and
other DNRC personnel were involved
in a thorough field reconnaissance
of the project area. Data was
collected for the project area
resources to aid in the analyses of
wildlife habitat, hydrology, timber
harvesting, road standards,
economics, and the development of
mitigation that could be applied to
the proposal. The ID Team developed
an action proposal within the
framework of the SFLMP and
associated Resource Management
Standards; public comments were also
taken into consideration.
Water quality is a major concern
during the development of projects
such as this timber sale proposal.
The EIS for the Chicken/Werner
Timber Sale Project ran a WATSED
model to determine conditions in the
Lower Swift watershed in 1999.
Since this proposal is within the
Lower Swift watershed, threshold
levels and current cumulative
effects to the watershed have been
updated. Therefore, the proposals
for this project were designed to be
within threshold levels for water
yield .
There is an overlying public issue
with any harvest proposal that
includes clearcutting . The initial
harvest alternative (Action
Alternative B) proposes a clearcut
with group retention in most harvest
units, regardless of the issue of
clearcutting, for the following
reasons :
— Previous harvesting has left very
few shade-intolerant trees that
are healthy and fire resistant,
which would be good candidates
for retention as seedtrees or
snag-recruitment trees.
— The clearcut with group retention
treatment emulates natural fire
disturbances in the area.
— The clearcut with group retention
treatment prepares the harvest
units well for regenerating a
species mix that includes a high
Environmental Impact Statement
Page II -1
percentage of shade-intolerant
species (western larch, Douglas-
fir, and rust-resistant western
white pine) . This would meet the
SFLMP biodiversity objectives.
The proposed treatment includes
some retention of vegetation
along roadways, irregularly
shaped harvest units, and
retention of small groups of
trees within the unit to mitigate
for visual impacts.
A newsletter defining this
alternative and requesting
additional public comments was
published and mailed in October
1999 .
The concerns against clearcutting
were again brought forward several
times during the public comment
period; some people do not want any
clearcut harvests. The concerned
people provided examples of previous
timber harvests that had less than
desirable aesthetic results. In
regard to visual considerations of
logging along open roadways, the
issue against clearcutting remained
and drove the alternative
development even though the proposed
clearcut with group retention
prescription was not described as a
typical clearcut.
Based on this concern, the ID Team
developed Action Alternative C. A
modified shelterwood harvest is the
primary silvicultural treatment of
Action Alternative C. When
possible :
- 15 to 35 trees per acre that are
greater than 7 inches diameter at
breast height (dbh) would be
retained, and
- visual buffers would be left
along open roads .
Implementation of forest management
practices under Action Alternative C
would attempt to follow the basic
philosophy of the SFLMP, meet the
associated Resource Management
Standards, and still meet the
project objective of generating a
revenue return to the trusts.
ALTERNATIVE DESCRIPTIONS
This section describes the No-Action
Alternative A, as well as the
developed Action Alternatives B and
C. Components and mitigation
measures that are common to the
action alternatives are described in
this section. Stipulations and
specifications designed to protect
resources during harvesting and
road- improvement activities are
incorporated into the timber sale
contract or site preparation clauses
and are implemented through contract
administration. These stipulations
and specifications are a form of
mitigation; those that would be
applied to an action alternative in
this project are listed in Appendix
B - STIPULATIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS .
Mitigations designed to reduce
impacts on a particular resource are
also discussed in Chapter III and
the corresponding resource appendix.
• Description of, J\o-, Action •Alternative ./
No timber harvesting would take
place; salvage logging and
firewood gathering would likely
continue. Road reconstruction,
beyond coordinated maintenance
agreements, would not be
conducted. The bridge over the
East Fork of Swift Creek would not
be replaced at this time.
Unauthorized off-road trails would
likely be closed when DNRC has
equipment in the area. Numerous
off-road trails have been found
throughout the project area and
appear to be used to access
firewood or dispersed camping
areas .
Other recreational uses of the
area, such as hiking, biking,
berry picking, and fishing, are
Page II -2
Taylor South Timber Sale Project
expected to continue.
Fire suppression and weed control
efforts would continue.
Natural events, including plant or
forest succession, windthrow,
insect and disease outbreaks, and
wildfires, would continue to
occur. Future actions, including
timber harvesting, would be
proposed and go through the
appropriate environmental analysis
before implementation.
No-Action Alternative A, which can
be used as a baseline for
comparing the environmental
consequences of Alternatives B and
C, is considered a viable
alternative for selection.
• Description of Components Common to Jlction
,/lltematives B and C
Introduction
(The decisionmaker may select a
modification or combination of
alternatives . )
The ID Team developed the timber-
harvesting alternatives based on
an analysis of current and
appropriate timber-stand
conditions. Proposed treatments
would move the timber- stand
conditions toward the desired age-
class and cover-type conditions
that were historically present
upon the landscape. Details on
appropriate conditions are
described in the DNRC Biodiversity
Guidance .
Action Alternatives B and C were
designed to be within the
allowable water yield increases
for all watersheds influenced by
this timber harvesting proposal.
This project was designed in
accordance with The Montana Bald
Eagle Management Plan and The
Habitat Management Guide for Bald
Eagles in Northwestern Montana.
Although a site-specific bald
eagle nest plan is not complete,
the Report on the White fish Lake
Bald Eagle Territory, (Paige,
1991) was used as an information
base .
Concepts Used in Project Design
The following concepts were
instrumental in the design of the
harvest unit prescriptions and
locations :
• Forest health:
- By harvesting grand fir stands
infected with Indian paint
fungus, the sawlog volume loss
would be reduced.
- Species with a higher
resistance to root rot
infections would be
regenerated .
- To increase the growth and
vigor of the remaining trees,
portions of the stands would be
thinned .
- To minimize the risk of intense
stand-replacement fires over
the long-term, fuel loading
would be reduced.
• The design of the project limited
the harvesting of stands having
high-attribute old-growth levels.
• Portions of the project area are
west of Swift Creek; this area
was dropped from further
consideration because:
- approximately 50 percent of
Section 31 was harvested in
1995-96,
- most of Sections 19 and 30,
west of Swift Creek, are in the
old-growth western larch/
Douglas-fir cover type, and
- this portion of the project
area is accessed by a different
transportation system; the
installation of a temporary
bridge over Lazy Creek is
Environmental Impact Statement
Page II -3
required to access this area.
No harvesting would take place
within 165 feet of those perennial
creeks listed on the timber sale
proposal maps, with the exception of
Vars Creek. On perennial streams,
this 165 feet meets or exceeds SFLMP
Resource Management Standards and
guidelines with respect to watershed
and sensitive wildlife species.
Less than 3 acres are proposed for
harvesting within the 165-foot zone
along Vars Creek; the harvesting
would be accomplished in small group
openings less than 0.4 acres in size
and distributed approximately 200
feet apart. These openings would
not be within the streamside
management zone (SMZ) of Vars Creek.
Follow-up, or forest improvement
(FI) , treatments usually follow
harvesting activities. Both
alternatives would:
reduce the slash (fuel load)
caused by logging by piling or
trampling the slash;
burn landing and slash piles
(some piles may require repiling
to ensure a complete burn) ;
machine scarify the soil in
logging units to prepare the soil
for natural regeneration and,
potentially, sites for planting
seedlings ,
sow grass seed on spur roads,
landings, and some of the main
skid trails;
plant a mix of western larch and
rust-resistant western white pine
seedlings .
Road Work and Road Use
Existing roads and temporary spur
(jump-up/ jump-down) roads would be
used to access harvest units. Jump-
up or jump-down roads are short spur
access roads leading to landing and
loading areas off the main road.
These spur roads, which would reduce
logging operations along the main
road, would be reclaimed following
logging operations.
Road reconstruction would:
- replace 1 culvert each at
Anchor, Brush, and Hemlock
creeks on Lower Whitefish Road;
- replace 1 culvert at Vars Creek
along Lower Whitefish Road if
project road-development funds
are available;
- replace 1 culvert each at Vars
and Taylor creeks on Taylor
Creek Road;
- replace a bridge and its
abutments at the outlet of
Upper Whitefish Lake on the
East Fork of Swift Creek;
- improve all roads to be used
for log-hauling purposes to
meet BMPs by improving ditch-
relief and road-surface
drainage .
With one exception, the log
trucks and equipment-transport
trucks would travel the route
through Olney and not along the
DelRey or East Lakeshore roads.
Approximately 15 truck loads of
timber harvested from Section 32
and 33 on East Smith Lake Dam Road
would be, due to the design of the
existing junction, hauled on East
Lakeshore Road.
• Description of . II tern afire II
Alternative B suggests
clearcutting as the method to
convert the current species of
trees toward the desired forest
cover-type condition of
predominantly western larch,
Douglas-fir, and rust -resistant
western white pine. This species
conversion would be similar to
results expected from a mixed-
severity fire to a more intense
stand-replacement fire.
The method to achieve this goal is
described as "a regeneration
harvest with groups of retention
trees and/or varying levels of
Page II -4
Taylor South Timber Sale Project
individual tree retention" .
The Clearcut/Seedtree with Group
Retention prescription proposes to
harvest most of the trees within
the units, yet retain healthy
individual seedtrees, groups of
trees in all size classes
(saplings to large diameter) , and
trees within stream corridors in
the major harvesting areas,
primarily Sections 6 and 7. This
treatment proposal was designed to
create a landscape patterned after
a combination of mixed-severity
and stand-replacement fire
regimes .
This proposal would harvest an
estimated 4.4 MMBF of sawlogs . An
estimated 85 percent of the
proposed harvest area would be
harvested to the clearcut/seedtree
prescription option. To meet
other objectives, such as
feathering edges, roadside
buffers, and SMZ regulations, the
other 15 percent would leave areas
uncut or with heavier retention.
FIGURE II -1-ALTERNATIVE B TAYLOR
SOUTH TIMBER SALE PROPOSAL depicts
road and proposed unit locations
and TABLE II -1 - SILVICULTURAL
TREATMENTS AND OBJECTIVE OF
ALTERNATIVE B describes aspects of
the harvest treatments particular
to Alternative B.
• Description of , Alternative C
Alternative C proposes shelterwood
harvests as the method to reduce
the visual impacts of timber
harvesting and promote the
conversion of tree species to the
more appropriate cover types over
time. Achieving and maintaining
the desired cover types, in the
long term, would involve a
commitment to reenter the harvest
areas in 5 to 15 years with an
additional harvest proposal.
The shelterwood-harvest method is
based on a regeneration
prescription, which would retain a
uniform distribution of individual
trees in the overstory. Stream
corridors would be maintained on
Hemlock, Vars, and Taylor creeks.
This treatment may portray a light
underburn .
This harvest would produce an
estimated 4.6 MMBF of sawlogs.
An estimated 95 percent of the
proposed harvest area would
receive the shelterwood harvest.
Minor areas, such as within SMZs
or within 50 feet of those roads
driven by the public, would leave
more trees .
FIGURE II -2-ALTERNATIVE C TAYLOR
SOUTH TIMBER SALE PROPOSAL depicts
road and proposed unit locations
and TABLE II -2 - SILVICULTURAL
TREATMENTS AND OBJECTIVE OF
ALTERNATIVE C describes aspects of
the harvest treatments particular
to Alternative C.
Environmental Impact Statement
Page II -5
FIGURE II -1
ALTERNATIVE B
TAYLOR SOUTH
TIMBER SALE
PROPOSAL
Ko,c
_ A A
LEGEND
Clearcut with
Group Retention
Areas
Seedtree
Improvement Cut
Open Roads
Restricted Roads
A
Page II -6
Taylor South Timber Sale Project
-SILVICULTURAL TREATMENTS AND OBJECTIVES OF ALTERNATIVE B
CD
Oi
d to
cd d
h cd
>1 Q
a d
O CD
a e
cd ,d
U CQ
*H
CD rH
A A
cd
4-)
cq
o
LD
cq d
<u 0
*H
a a
CD o
a-H
CQ 4-)
cd
CD d
(D cd
d a
LD
CD
00
>>1
a
CD
4-J
cd
£
■H
X
o
d
(D
A
to
i — I
d
0
5
d
o
d
u cd
cq cq
(D (D
(D A
d U
4-4 d
■rH
(D 44
04
a
-H
d
a
CQ
5 CD
a
cd
44
vo
tn
0 CQ
*H
rH
d
i — 1 (L)
04
44
i — 1
-H
rH d
44
d
cd
d
d
Cd 44
-rH
cd
d
cd
CD
CQ
i — 1
Of1 d
a
0 4H
ft
44
0
44 0
04
0)
44
04
d
CD
d d
04
•
•
d
04
44
01 44
rH
CQ
CQ
44
44
cd
d S
a
04
04
TO
cd
CD
0 0
£
d
d
04
0)
d
d d
O
u
U
04
d
U
04 01 U
cd
cd
CO
Oi
d
u
d
d
04
O
CQ
d
44
-H
CQ
a
CQ
CD
04
04
*H
CD
0)
rH
u
i — 1
d
d
CD
0
44
cd
a
a
i — 1
CQ
04 •
-H
01 0)
44
cd
CD
to d
*H
>
0)
0 -H
rH
cd
d
a a
cd
44
d
d
' 04
U1
04
1 1
d 44
d
cd
U -H
d
d d
CD
cd 5
d
04
CQ
1 — 1
44
U
d
1 1
d
<D
d d
cd
d
44
d 04
04
0
cd
04 44
d
CQ
d
44 CQ
CD
CQ 04
d
TO
d
04 5
-H
04
CD
5
cd
04
01
TO
44
CQ
CD
cq d
04
ft
cd cd
ft
cd
O H
CM
LC1
O LD
LD
ft
CQ
o o
rH
CM CM
d d
cd cd
a
o
rtf
d
cd
rd
o
d 0 rH
<D tn cd
u * E
o
d
CQ
04
44
04
d
44
-H d
04
d
S -H
d
TO
0
MH
Eh
1 1
d
CQ
d
Oi
0) TO
0
0
d
0) d
44
0
04
d cd
CQ
d
d
44 d
04
04
04
d
Oi
CQ
U
O
44
cd
d
44
cd
CQ T h
04
cd
04
d
£
04 d
CQ
44
rH
0
d
04 cd
*H
CQ
44
-H
cd
CQ
d
TO
-H
CQ
44
>
04
44 - '
CQ
-H
d
04
CQ •
04
£
04
TO
d
TO 04 CQ
CM
d
44
1 — 1
44
04 CQ 04
O
TO
04
d
a Cd 04
04
d
d
0
TO
a cd d
44
e
cd
04
O CQ 44
d
0
d
a
44 -H
d
CQ
44
0
d
a
d TO TO
0
CQ
cm
o
0
04 04
£
01
d
-H •
44 •
> d N
cd
d
d
TO
44 CQ
d TO
O O -H
-H
04
d 44
04 04
CQ
rH
Cd
d
CD
i — I 4-4
a w
C/J
d -Q •
d *h
CD d
4H 4-4
rl (1) [/! JJ
d rd 'H -H H d -d rd
oi cq e to ,d aQ4->
> 4-)
O CQ
CD
(U >
£ d
0 cd
co d
4-4 CQ
CQ 44 til
(DUO
> CD
d CQ
cd d
K H to
S3
O
H
W Eh
W ft
> H
H ft
Eh U
U ft
W ft
0> ft
ft ft
O
Eh
ft ft
D ft
O* >
H ft
IS
ft
o
d
CQ
d
.
04
04
cd
CQ
.
A
40
•
A
O
CQ
d
s
u
r— .
44
ID
£
0
Oi
d
, ,
CT(
cd
CM
e
£
d
TO
-H
rd
CQ
rH
TO
04
d
04
d
d
rQ
CQ
d
d
CQ
•H
40
0
cd
r~
TO
04
X)
04
d
44
04
04
44
1 1
i— 1
04
rd
0
CQ
04
TO
04
O
44
rd
44
d
d
d
TO
04
d
44
rd
rH
CQ
cd
44
44
-H
d
0
•H
Oi
r— 1
*H
d
d
d
a
rn
-H
i — 1
rH
•H
CQ
04
1 1
0
CQ
0)
cd
Q
04
44
1 1
04
d
a
04
rQ
d
cd
OI
0)
44
d
d
cd
d
i — 1
CQ
04
44
d
d
■H
u
cd
0
0
04
44
d
CQ
■rH
44
£
CQ
d
a
04
CQ
04
04
44
d
TO
Id
04
Oi
04
d
cd
Oi
CQ
MH
04
d
0)
0)
Oi
44
0)
04
04
O
44
cd
A
d
>. TO
d
04
d
>
d
44
44
40
0
rd
rQ
d
0)
d
CQ
-H
CQ
44
i — i
u
cd
cd
a
Oi
CM
cd
i — 1
d
44
A
d
TO
cd
•H
d
cd
TO
cd
cd
CQ
TO
0
d
d
44
•
04
04
i — i
a
d
Oi
d
cd
CQ
0)
X
04
40
N
d
d
cd
d
Oi
04
0)
i — 1
■H
d
0)
0
*H
CQ
d
-H
rQ
d
CQ
d
44
d
04
IS
d
Oi
*H
i — 1
04
■rH
-H
1
04
04
Oi
d
0
■H
d
cd
T3
>
CQ
cd
04
44
£
u
rH
cd
■H
44
i — i
cd
CQ
44
i — 1
CQ
cd
04
cd
rH
44
d
0)
-H
0)
0
04
O
04
-H
rd
0
04
a
ft
rH
a
ft
a
S
Eh
MH
ft
CQ
d
o
H
4-4
H
44
CD
a
£
O
o
d
0
d
o ^
CD 00
CM
LO
LD
00 ft
H
CM
CO
CMOOd'LnCDr-OOCTCOCN
rH rH
A
<
eh
o
Eh
rH ro
rH rH
3
Eh
o
Eh
rH
I
H
H
ft
S
g
<
ft
D
H
5
rQ
O
44
A
!h
04
O
44
CD
d
CQ
d
44
CD
CD
d
H
-H
' —
04
0)
d
0
H
0,
44
Eh
s
u
d
O
*H
s
TO
d
ft
\
d
d
u
CM
44
. — „
1
CQ
M
04
id
t>
r \
H
44
0)
0
04
cd
04
cd
CQ
04
04
3
TO
£
ft
d
0)
■H
a
Q
TO
d
04
04
04
04
O
04
04
Kj
U
u
d
44
0)
04
04
CQ
d
>
d
s
d
>
H
>
. *i
W
d
44
a d
o
A
TO
44
d
0
44
d
o
44
"H
O
ft
cd
TO
d 04
ft
44
r — 1
cd
04
a
TO
04
’ 1
TO
04
fd
d
hH
H
cn
ft
04
04
O 44
d
04
Oi
d
04
CQ
04
d
44
a 44
ft
i — 1
0)
d 04
O
4H
0
d
04
d
04
04
O
04
U
04
£ d
U
CQ
Oi d
44
0
s
44
d
a
ft
d
44
CQ
<d
d
H U
Environmental Impact Statement
Page II -7
FIGURE II -2
ALTERNATIVE C
TAYLOR SOUTH
TIMBER SALE
PROPOSAL
00060c
LEGEND
Shelterwood
Improvement Cut
Open Roads
Restricted Roads
Page II -8
Taylor South Timber Sale Project
-SILVICULTURAL TREATMENTS AND OBJECTIVES OF ALTERNATIVE
U
X
£4
-P
QJ
4-1
QJ
QJ
cd
X
<:
44
44
B
X
0
0
cd
•H
•H
1-1
x
QJ
cn
X
rH
CD
Cn
-H
£4
0
p
cn
cn
cn
£3
£4
0
£4
X
0
a
5
cd
P
a)
44
0)
a
i — i
cd
4J
£3
£4
44
cd
S3
0
cd
CJ
44
0
4-1
i — 1
i — i
cd
0)
QJ
-H
a
p
a, ft
1 — 1
X
44
0
a)
B
£4
£3
p
B
0
QJ
QJ
X
QJ
cd
X
u
•
a 4a
1 — 1
X
u
cn
cn
p
QJ
QJ
cn
cn
X
0
£4
••
a)
rH
14
QJ
QJ
1 — 1
5
£4
X
x
cn
u
1-4
QJ
P
£4
QJ
4-1
cd
QJ
cd
u
£4
0
44 Q)
0
X
4-1
-H
cd
44
5
QJ £4
44
£4
a
cn
u
in
QJ O
0
-r4
0
QJ
cn
o
m
43
44 cd
cn
a cn
o
m
X
QJ
cn
cn
£
cn
cn
X
O £4
-H
£3
cn
0
£3
X
QJ
CJ
•H
P
1 — 1
QJ
0
3*4
£3
cn
a
QJ
<:
-r4
rH
QJ
a
cd
0)
rH
a
0
p
rd
1-1
£3
0)
43
£4 cn
cn
r — 1
0)
44
0
44
in
U
QJ QJ
1 — 1
a
0
-H
cd
r4
S3
> QJ
X
0
0
4-1
QJ
44
B
-H
QJ £4
0)
44
cn
cd
-r4
£3
44
£4
CD
43
QJ
14
X
0)
f-
QJ
£4
QJ
4-1
cn 43
cd
0
QJ
QJ in
0)
X
cd
P
44
a
£4
£3
£4 CN
44
X
0)
0
QJ
a
44
cd
44
0)
£4
£3
44
14
a
QJ
43
0
£4
p
u
0
0
a
cd
PQ
4J
< 44
ft
-H
£4
cn
0
P
0
0
p
0
X
P
* H
-H
cn
-H
a
X
0
1 — 1
rH
cn
a
5
0
rd
cd
X
QJ
X
X
£3
cn
£4
-rH
p
X
cd
0
P
cn
u
QJ
cn
P
-
B
-
-
cn
£4
cd
£4
cn
£4
-H
cn
-H
p
■H
V
X
X
-H
X
cn
1
QJ
1
CJ
0
1 — 1
cn
0)
cn
cd
X
P
cd
cd
cn
cd
a
P
■H
£4
1 — 1
- — •
1 — 1
cn
cd
a
QJ
cn
-
cn
£4
cn
P
QJ
P
Cn
Cn
0
0
P
PQ
0
P
1 — 1
>1 Q
•rH
Q
-H
-
0
X
a
0
X
X
a
-r4
>
-
0
CJ
0
1 — 1
X
QJ
-r4
X
0
0
cn
cd
CJ
X
X
CJ
B
1 — 1
X
P
£4
-r4
cd
£4
B
0
cr
cd
X
P
cd
0
0
rH
1
1 — 1
£4
1 — 1
P
X
QJ
0
-H
X
QJ
£3
p
X
P
a
P
p
£4
£4
£4
1 — 1
£4
£4
cd
X
0)
0
<
0
0
0
X
X
X
X
X
X
-
QJ
cn
cn
£4
cn
*H
cn
£4
QJ
QJ
0
0
0
X
0
-H
cn
5
£
X
5
5
£
X
•
•
•
X
0
X
cn
0)
>
£4
cd
X
0)
X
cd
B
cn
0)
0)
£4
-1-1
X!
CD
Ci
a
o
X
£4
0
>
o
0)
B
o
co
£4
•H
44
x
x p
-p id
■H £4
£ Cn
cn x
<u p
< u (d
i-i
4-1 -
W
' E
CQ 0
0 i — I
0 X
£h O
4-> £4
a •
xi cn
000
tttl D
a cd £4
0 0 X
4-J cn
k -H T3
CL) X) I)
>
O 1-4
o
4->
cn 4-i
(D a
> a)
£h cn
rd p
03 -h
N
*H
cn
i
Cn
o
i — i
5
cd
cn
5
O
H
CO H
ft ft
> H
H ft
H U
U CO
h Pa
h) ft
pa ft
o
Eh
pa co
& pa
a >
H ft
S3
ft
O
Cn
X
.
cn
p
P
X
p
P
0
0
P
P
cn
cd
0
-H
P
-rH
X
cn
0
cd
0
cn
-H
CJ
£4
X
cn
0
rH
X
0
cn
cn
X
0
0
P
0
0
0
CJ
£4
P
P
-H
a
X
X
>
£4
0
X
P
p
Cl
-rH
•
-H
cn
X
cn
cn
-H
£4
X
£4
0
-H
■H
cd
5
cn
£4
B
0
0
£4
cd
cd
a
0
0
a
cd
a
0
X
X
X
1 — 1
cn
r~
0
OK
1 — 1
LD
cn
0
B
0
u
cn
1 — 1
>1
a
0
£4
rH
<7\
£4
0
£4
£4
X
-rH
0
P
0
p
1 — 1
0
cd
p
0
rH
X
X
0
X
cd
P
X
X
Cl
X
0
0
X
cd
X
P
cn
1 — 1
cd
X
X
£4
a
cn
X
0
P
p
— I
B
X
cn
0
cn
a
X
X
X
0
X
£
cd
P
-
£4
cn
P
X
Cn
' —
p
0
X
£4
P
0
£4
£4
0
0
cn
cd
-rH
>4 X
0
cn
X
cd
0
£4
0
0
P
X
0
X
0
X
£4
cn
cn
P
X
u
cn
X
-rH
-H
£4
cn
0
X
1 — 1
CJ
cn
0
-H
-H
cn
X
cn
a
•
P
0
Cn
X
1 — 1
£4
1 — 1
1 — 1
0
-H
0
0
0
0
P
cd
cd
-rH
cd
X
cd
0
X
cn
0
B
0
X
0
p
P
1 — 1
•
0
0
rH
X
rH
cd
p
£4
£4
£4
cd
r — 1
-rH
<d
cn
cn
X
B
X
N
Eh
X
X
-H
X
0
X
£4
cn
0
a
0
1 — 1
£4
-rH
P
1 — 1
cn
X
X
0
cd
a
P
0
P
-rH
-rH
p
cn
£4
cd
0
cn
P
p
0
P
0
0
*rH
£4
-rH
X
-rH
1
0
£4
0
-H
a
0
X
cn
X
cd
X
cd
cd
X
cd
0
X
. — .
0
0
>
cd
P
cn
Cl
X
-H
X
0
X
£4
p
X
1 — 1
cn
X
P
£4
£4
X
X
X
0
P
0
X
0
X
£4
0
0
-rH
0
0
0
X
0
0
cd
0
p
0
ft
cn
rH
£
ft
0
cd
ft
X
5
ft
a
5
X
Cn
5
X
ft
cd
ft
'tfr'-HcNLnoLnincnorocn
rO [- C" rH CN CN CO ■-P H
o
00
in
00 CN
CN CN in
nn'finiohmoioHrn
i — i i — i i — i
X
<
o
E-4
CN
cd
4-1
o
F4
CN
i
H
H
ft
ft
ft
s
4-1
p
<L)
B
0
>
O
£4
& 4-1
B P
H U
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT
NOT GIVEN DETAILED STUDY
SMITH LAKE ROAD MANAGEMENT
OPTIONS
The ID Team considered several
options in regard to managing Smith
Lake Road in Section 32. The
options initially considered
included :
- closing the road at the DelRey
Road junction,
- applying seasonal closures, and/or
- reconstructing portions of the
road and obliterating other
portions .
This issue was discussed with the
decisionmaker, and, although all
options are feasible and would
likely have beneficial effects to
various resources, the level of
public involvement has not been met
to proceed with a road-management
option. Early in the development of
the alternatives some timber-
management options were considered
that would have utilized this road
system. These portions of the
stands were dropped from the
harvest proposal, partly due to the
status of the stand in relation to
old growth and its associated
attribute levels.
DNRC's preferred approach would be
to develop a management plan for
the Smith Lake area. This may
encompass road management and
biological, recreational, and
developmental strategies for the
area. Proceeding with this plan
would depend on various factors,
including appropriation of funds
and time.
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Table II -3-SUMMARY OF THE
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS summarizes
the primary environmental
consequences of the alternatives by
resource issue, as well as
describes several design features
specific to the issue. The basis
for the conclusions of
environmental effects summarized
here is discussed in more detail in
Chapter III and the associated
resource appendix.
Page II- 10
Taylor South Timber Sale Project
TABLE II -3 -SUMMARY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL
G\
co
X
i
rH
0
X 0
vo
m
m
N
0
4J
0
0
rH QJ
03 Vh
—
P
rtf
X
0
0
0
>
0
3 >
0
03
-H d)
ttl
LD
0
i — i
-rH
a;
is
0
o
O 0
0
■H 0
>
r >
• — •
4->
P
0
01 0
a
u
0
(T
S 0
ch
dJ
0 0
a
0
o
0
in
u
0
G
ro
TJ
*
' 0
O'
Ti
0 >
0
u
w
P
0
0
0
0
rtf
0
0
-H
03
if]
a
4J
4->
0 0-0
04
0 X
P
•H 0
-H - 03
(L)
a
O
u
0
Q
0
**
rH
a
*4-4
0
a
X
0
0
-H0a
X 0
0
U-l
Q4 03
-H
>
0)
0
0
a
U
u
0
<D
1
0
LD
-H
0
0
a 0
in
-H d
0
1 - d)
0
n
u
0
0
X
o
0
a m
0
m
u
0
£
U
£
1 U 0
£ o
E
03 03
0 0
0
a
0
a
a
Is*
U
0
14-1
0
rtf
E
rtf
rtf
4-J
0
0
4->
W 0 X
0
0
P
a) 0
P u
d)
<d
0
-H
-H
o
0
rtf
1 — 1
*H
o
(D
-H
0 -0
0
-- 0
-H
-H 0
P
03
p
>
a
CM
ro
o
rtf
X
0
X
0
m
o
rH
X
X
a E
a X
x a e
01 o
X
-H
<U
o
H
i — i
O
0
O
0
0
O
is
0
E
OltD S
0
£
0 0
3 o
CJ
0
M
H
0
o
0
i — 1
u
i — 1
0
0
r-
4-J
0
O
o
0
P
0) r-
0
0
0
o
<;
03
m
0
0
1
Ti
X
X
X
u
0
0
b
LD
u
0 0
0
B
u
Q oo
0 LD
o
rtf
fn
Z
0
rtf
0
rtf
i — 1
0
0
X
P
\
0
0
0
4->
Q 0 0
0
P
\ 04
0 -
w
a
03
0
in
0
rtf
0
is
0
0
X
o
0
U
-H
0
0 0
U
-H
0
43 l>
< V If)
Ti
00
rtf
0
rtf
0
P
X
X
rtf
rH
i>i
u
X
0
E
0
0
X x
0
£ 0
0
o
p
d)
CM
M
Eh
0
u
0
u
o
in
in
-H
0
X
0
*.
03
0
£
X
>
0-03
ai
E X
>
0 0
CO 0
X
vo
>
i-i
0
0
0
P
0
0
£
*
0
rtf
4-J
0
a
o
X
o
0X0
a
0
0
0 0
0 0
-H
H
<3
u
1 — 1
*H
i — 1
o
1 — 1
-rH
3
p.
0
3
i — 1
0
u
0 0 is
O X
rH
3
E
VO
H
a
rtf
rtf
0
rtf
P
0
N
0
00
1 — 1
«.
rH (D
in
l — 1
<
*H
X
X
4J
*H
X
x
0
0
X
X
14-1
m
rH
0
U
• -
rH
0
3
03
o -
00
u 3
03
G P
P
. ^
0 ■
o
1 — 1
o
0
1 — 1
0
X
P
0
0
0
0
4-J
00
0
0
0
0 0 X
r-
0 0
0
0 0
P c
P
0 X
x
p
0
P
X
P
0
u
H
0
0
p-
>
0
0
0
>
0
0 0 0
> is
0
0 0
0 0
13
j3
G
i — 1
O
i — 1
0
0
0
•«*
0
►n
•H
4-J
a
0
0
0
u
0 a 0
0
o
o
P U
0 U
0
~ 0
h
0
P
2
4J
0
P
is
0
1
>
4->
-H
X
X
03
b
X
0
rtf
X £
X
0
rtf
W 0
£ 0
E
x E
b
o
0
0
0
a
a
0
0
a
u
0
r-
4-J
Ti
*
0
03 O' p
- 0
0 0
X 0
P
d p
2
0
1
0
2
0
1
U
u
0
i — 1
0
0
£
o
- H
03
14-4
04
(D O -H
Ti
03 <4-1
CO
s a
d) -H
u
u
u
ro
\
U
rtf
0
rH
rH
£
i — 1
0
- H
o\
SHE
i — 1
<D -H
04
E
E
u e
1
0
o
0
1
0
u
a
0
0
X
>
i — 1
1
£
3
0
0
KD
£
3
0 0
l£>
I r-
E (N
£
0 £
0)
0
0
\
VO
-H
0
0
0
o
0
o
0
u
O
i 0 O
()
U 0
o
0 <N
0
0 0
rt!
a
m
a
<
a
a
<
in
a
in
u
u
<
X
u
is
rtf
u
IX)
a x u
is
0 O
KD
U H
U 00
u
a u
no
0
X
0
X
4-J
fa
0
(V
o
X
0
X
0)
o
o
0
0
0
0
N
0
0
0
C
j>
XI
P
T)
0
0
Ti
■H
X
-H
03
C/3
(1)
i — 1
rtf
0)
i — 1
in
i — 1
in
03
0
H
X!
X
0
>1
X
rH
X
0
0
0
0
-H
03
O
1 — 1
CJl
P
4->
rtf
0
o
0
o
tj
o
Ti
0
W
Ti
2
a
•H
0
0
0
4J
X
01
3
i:
0
a
&4
2
i — l
o
rtf
i — 1
0
0
0
rH
0
0
0
O
0
fa
3
3
X
-H
U
0
in
rtf
0
0
rtf
m
4-J
in
V
-H
0
3
w
n
o
X
0
01
rtf
X
0
o
X
0
in
0
C/3
4-J
o
a
j
3
0
rtf
0
a
0
U
X
£
U
0
TJ
0
0
Ti
0
rtf
MH
H
0
0
4J
a
rtf
E
o
0
-H
o
0
*H
£
0
U
0
0
1 — 1
m
X
0
>,
d)
0
rtf
4-J
O
rtf
4-J
U
H
4-»
o
a
w
0
X
X
j — 1
0
o
o
-H
4-J
0
0
4J
rtf
0
rtf
0
o
0
03
«
0
X
rtf
r— 1
m
£
-H
c/3
0
rtf
o
0
a
LD
0
a
14-1
0
H
H
fSj
X!
0
0
0
0
rtf
o
0
— 1
rtf
X
-H
in
0
m
CJ\
0
m
£
0
0
Q
a
H
o>
1
0
X
0
s
1
01
-H
0
H
X
0
ro
0
-H
H
rtf
a
in
0
P
0
0
X
0
0
(L)
(U
0
<u
4-J
a
H
1
rtf
U
rtf
rtf
o
1
U
rtf
rtf
u
1
b
l
01
0
1
Ol
0
0
0
h
XI
\
ai
X
o
0
X
4->
0
E
0
0
0
0
X
0
0
<
u
a
E
o
4-)
•H
<
a
u
in
H
<
-H
a
0
4J
u
0
4J
Eh
a
o
00
Ti
>1
0
0
0
rH
X
C/3
o
0
03
O
• *.
(i)
03
0
rH
0
In
0
1
P
X
0
1
P
X
Q)
>
0
X
X
0
03
0
0
03 -
0
0
0
IN
0
S
in
0
0
o
rtf
4-J
<1)
Ti
u
-
0 X
0
X
u
0
u
X
4-J
0
u
4->
\
rtf
0
rH
0
£
— 1
rtf
03
a 0
E
— 1
rtf
03
a
rH
o
01
■H
X
0
>1
0
0
-H
X
*
Ol
01
0
4->
3
X
0
Hi 0
P
2
Ti
0
>
0
0
0
X
X
U
a
1 — 1
u
X
X
u
X
0
0
3
O
H
o
CT\
ai
0
3 u
H
o
m 0
0
H
a
0
0
rtf
0
0
s
0
s
0
rtf
0
is
0
0
b
rtf
0
0
£
is
ro
X
04 U
O 0
E
is
ro X
CN U
E-*
m
c n
X
14-1
u
rtf
4-J
>
0
rtf
C/3
rtf
X
U
0
£
ro
H
U3 0
Q 0
£
' & -H
VD 0
C
0
rtf
rtf
o
-H
0
0
— l
*rH
M-l
0
i — i
rtf
m
O
\
a
o
0
«.
£
\ a
0
0
- £
z
X)
0
0
0
X
0
0
4-J
0
0
0
0
X
u
0
LD
VD
X
u
0
if)
VO
0
0
0
0
O
0
0
£
0
O
0
0
0
0
I^
0
u
>
H
•«.
Q) 04 •
U 00
H
d) 04
a
X
u
o
4J
u
U
0
4J
0
>
0
V
14-1
4-J
0
U
X
4-J
0
O
0
a
0
P
X Ol x
U O
0
a
P P
X oi
p
H
1 — 1
0
0
rtf
rtf
1
m
0
0
i — 1
0
-H
m
0
0
rtf
rtf
rH
0
u
0
- 0
rtf i — 1
0
0 0
13
X
0
•H
0
-H
-rH
— 1
X
0
0
4-J
u
rH
0
0
0
4-J
-H
«.
-H
rH
>
0
(I)
X U3 0
H
>
0
0 X
(L)
<
a
m
X
a
0
X
is
m
o
O
O
s
m
>
X
0
o
4->
«.
E
a £
0
0
P
H
E
ffi
is
TJ
0
X
0
X
0
0
u
b
u
0
0
rH
0
0
X
H
P
P
3 0 x
0 X
H
p p
^ P
P
i — 1
rtf
1 — 1
b
0
•H
X
0
is
-H
rtf
• «.
is
-H
0
b
0
X
0
H
0 0-0
0
0
a -h
0 0 -
H
u
0
0
X
0
£
X
£
rH
X
14-4
X
m
14-1
>
E
0 X
03
is
0
£
3 E
0 X
03
is
0 E
3
£
<
0
0
U
o
-H
rtf
0
4-J
Ti
1
0
0
0
0
X
1
•H
-H
-P
H
0
u
£
- E
P rH
0
O E
=
a
0
2
P
£
4-)
4-J
0
o
0
cn
Cfl
£
X
0
0
C/3
4-J
03
3
0
0
0
0
0XO
m 3
0
a
0 0
0 X
o
Xl
0
0
0
0
0
X
3
• «-
rtf
rtf
rtf
rtf
-rH
U
rtf
rtf
u
o
0
o
u
0
0
U
0 0 u
0 0
u
0
0 U
0 0
J
H
o>
1
0
s
1
<u
£
X
H
m
i — i
0
in
2
rtf
rH
0
£
X
rtf
0
a
MH 0)
2 5
rtf
0
a a 0
0
U
u
— 1
0)
0
0
01
0
0
Ol a
4->
0
-0 U 0
P
0 -
H U
H
1
rtf
u
0
1
u
0
1
0
1
a
0
0
0
U
0
1
H1
0
0
rH
1
1
0
o
03
ro
0
0 0 0
1 0 M
03
O (D
0 0
0
X!
\
0
\
0
o
S
u
H
0
0
X
-H
o
0
H
<D
0
cr\
>
0 0 >
-H
3
(i)
ro >
0 0
>
<
u
m
a
<
a
a
<
is
a
4-J
rtf
a q
-H
n
U
rH
a q
u
<
a a
>
is
>
o
o a o
U a oo
3
03 0
u a
0
01
01
cn
0
X
1
0
0
0
P-
0
X
Q)
r-
0
•H
*H
0
0
o
0
VO
VO
X
O
0
VO
0
X
-H
X
rtf
rH
X
CM
cn
0
cn
0
0
0
M
-H
X
in
0
00
in
X
cn
£
o
0
in
0
0
0
E
03
0
03
r-
0
«.
-rH
in
»
H
H
u
O
0
X
Ti
X
p
-H
c^
3
03
in
E
vo
vo
Eh
Eh
03
0
u
03
0
U
>
a
0
u
-H
H1
CO
H
-H
0
0
-H
0
0
0
0
0
rtf
0
u
u
0
0
■ ~
U
U
•*.
u
0
H
Q
>
>
o
X
0
P
cn
rtf
•H
o
0
X
d)
O
(D
P
CO
O
0
X
*5
o
>1
IN
0
>H
X
03
0
H
P
>
0
a
>
0
-H
>
W
O
rH
rH
rH
1 — 1
01
£
0
1
0
0
•H
-
O
dJ
0
U
P
X
rH
P
X
rH
0
X
X
U
a
Ch
03
X
£
04
P
B
U
P
G
0
rtf
03
a
0
rtf 03
H
0
(D
0
U
rtf
0
-
X
0
V
P
d)
0
(U
0
U
rH
d)
0
V4 rH
p
0
0
P
0
<D
rH
0
m
-H
<u
(D
03
*H
p
<D
0
u
U
3
<D
in
O
2 d)
03
0
-H
0
P
Ui
U
0
E
p
U
dJ
6
-H
U
0
Jh
0
P
>
U
0
P >
H
0
>
0
0
03
3
0
0
£
•H
Jh
0
B
0
U
0
p
0
rtf
(U
2
0
rtf dJ
X
0
o
0
>
d)
0
0
U
0
43
dJ
o
0
0
(D
U
U
a
rH
U
a
a rH
W
0
u
u
o
2
Q
a
0
u
£
04
rtf
V
O
04
0
Ti
X
X
X
0
p
rH
0
a 0
0
0
- H
0
0
rtf
X
0
0
0
X
0 0
0
X
P
d
Ol
0 0
43
0
•H
0
0
0
-0 -H
0
0
£
0
a
0
O X
P
0
0
In
3
u
X
>i X
u
X
X
43
rtf
X I
0
0
£
£
0
0
i — i
0
0
X
I
-H
0 X
X 3
P
>
03
0
X
03
^4
X
X
0
0
0 0
X
0
0
0
U
03
0 a
x a
dJ
03
o
E
*H
iH
0
a
0
0
0
a
0
0
0
P
d)
u 0
3 a
P
<D
U
-H
£
(D
P
0
•H
X
0
X 0
-H
X
0
>
03
Jh
0
O -H
rtf
U
0
o:
0
£
>
rtf
0
£
0
q
0 0
3
0
0
0
- H
03
U
0 a
0 X
P
0
0
£
o
dJ
a
c n
3
<
3 a
w
3
£
u
Ti
0
<
a o
01 w
cn
0
Q
E
u
i — 1
X
u
<
H
fa
o
CO
H
U
fa
fa
fa
fa
a
fa
fa
H
fa
« g
|s
fa H
fa
3
d
d
d d
(U
o
l -H
CO
0
-H
4-
a) -h
dJ
X
r — 1
i — 1 03
P
0
d
X
X oi
Tl
X!
1
a;
d B
d
01
i d
CO
P
N
c
U X
d d
4-1
a
4->
>,
1 — 1
X
X 0
m x u
d
0 X
d
0
N
fa
0 0
0 -d x
0
o3
o3
o3
0 d
d fa
d •
o3
0 d 0
o
CO
03
ft 0
x d
4-4
g
P
d
P
x - 2
d
0 CO
X
x d fa
-H
d
P
X
p
x d
P co o3
>1 co
0
0
-H
X
Tl 0 0 Q
d
*H
X 0
u
X X
X
O
d
d
o X
CO CD
p
a)
d
p
03
T) rH *
x p X
0 o
p -H
0 0
*H
Tl
0
0
a
O 0
0 > 0 cn
0
-H
f;
d d 0
X d x 0
X x
P
O X
X
0 d g •
X
-H
u
X
F
3 d
ft d x ft
d
(D
03
tj
<D
mod
x X
p p
o3
0
x d 0
d
d
d
p
0
0 0 -d
4J
>
&
£
d
3 -d
0 X 0 X
u
P
x >
p
P P (D
o
d
0
c
n X 0
X X x X
XI
(D
03
X X
x d >
o d
*H
X X
o3
X d o x
u
O
ft
d
o:
0 X
P 0} CO
o3
x
d)
CO
m m 0
X O 0 >1
X Tl
X
•H p
ft
XX 0
U
-H
d
X
■d d d
U
x
Tl
(U
0 0 m
O X X
0
03
3 u
-H
0 0 X
>1
00
X
03
0 X
3 0 d 0
•H
d
03
03
-H
0
d x m
d 0
0 d
X
03
u
d d x
ft
d
P
s
0 i — i
fl ° c
03
(D
4-4
X
0
P
d
i x x
X Tl X
tj
d
-H
X x O d
o
03
00
-H
X 0
d B 3
>
a
d
•H
-H
d x
X >, 0
Tl 0
o
0 01
P
rH -HP
d
3
d
-H 0
o -d cn o
<
d
X
1
CO
i — 1
0 CO 0
d d 0 w •
< >
d
x d
d
d d x x
03
d
0
a, 3:
•d X 0
Tl
2
CO
d
d
0
ft d x
o O X 0
- H
•H
X X
03
0 0 0 0
U
03
0
03
a.
P -HP
1
G
u
•H
Tl
0
0
CO
O 0 x
x s cn g o
1 P
d
0 X
12 *H i — 1
l
TJ
ft X
0
a
1 P
u oi x d
03
d)
4-1
(U
ft X
03
Tl
x d d
03
d
-H CO
0
x d x
-H
d
o3
d d x 0
u
CO
0
U
o
X
1 3
U d T5 B 0
U X
0
O 0
s;
i u e 0
0
d
X
03
X
U X
d -d > u
P
4->
2
Tl
Tl 0
d 0 X X Tl
\ d
TJ
o >
d d 0
CO
rH
0
\ -H
-r~) 0 -H 03
PQ
CO
(U
•H
Tl
i
o3
0
O 03 rH
T) > d d x
fa B
CO H
1
U X U d
0
0
d
0
0
m x
d U) P -n
\
<D
x!
X
0
0
X
\ O 0
0 0 0 X0
n d
P
0 0
^ 0 u 0
i — 1
X
o
X
d
\ 03
o d u x
<
d
4-4
s
d
d
p
m d x
fa u 3 B 0i
C o
0
0 X
<
m d 0 x
u
P
3
p
u
d X
a o 0 0
0
CO
kN
0
4J
0
0
0
X
co t3
T I X
d
d
0
0 0 d
ti
m x
ft
0
X
0 0 0
Tl
< V
0 X
X
3
o3
d d
X
a)
4J
e d 0
d
0
0 X
UP-
0
p
u
d 1 d
T3
0
u
>i
x d
X 0
d 0
X
p
03
Q)
CL
03
0 d 0
0
03
P
d
03
U 0
-H p
-d x u
U
03
0
a-
e
x 0 x
P
B
X
e
0 X
ft-d
0 d •
0
0
d
X
1 CL
u
>1
0
d 0
X
>•000
d
1 — 1
0
U
a)
CD
CO
cn 0 Tl
0
CO
P
0
d
CO
-H -H
X 0
ft 0 X d
-H
-H
3
0
d m
ft
Ol 0
•H
X
Ol 0
X x
0 X
x 0 0 d
Tl
ft
P
<1)
X
cn
-H
0x0
X
d x
d
Tl
d x
d
T3
d
0 d O w
d
CO
£
u
a
P
x O d
0
•H P
d
1 — 1
•H P
x o
d d
X U 0 0
•H
o
d
X
<!
03
CD
-H
-H
1
Ol X
u
rH
•H
OVH
* P
0
0 0
o d x x
p
0
0
X!
d
0 0 X
0
0 d
0
d
d
0 d
0
•H
x X
d-d U
0
X
*H
1
CO
0
d
d)
sw m
X
d d
0
co
o
03
U 0
0 fa 0
P
0 O
ft
fa
CO
u
4-4
4J
CD
0
P
d
m x
0 X
d
3
d
0 X
d x
-H
d 0
O X >,
p
0
-H
a
u
0
P4
d
-H
1 0 0
T5
fa d
-H
1
0
fa d
x i o
P
CL CL Tl P P CL
1
u
ft X
\
a)
C
0
i — 1
d x
r — 1
0
rH
0
ft
0
iH < V
d
X
x so
0
X
d
CO
4-1
1
Q,
U
u u
d
l ft
u
u
CO
B
l ft
u U X
(D
1 0
d 0 o d
u
4-1
o
0
\ 4-1
d)
Pi
0
^ d d
0
ft
0
\
03
0
0) \ P
X
0
O d d 0
\
4-4
0
Tl
<
0
X
<
0
X
m x o
3
< 0
T)
fa
X
P
< 0
X fa 0
-H
< 3
3 X Ol U
fa
<D
3
-H
£
LD
-H
B
X
d
H
03
0
0
0
0
B
d 01
01
d
u
X
«.
CO
0 LD
x d
CO
d
03
d
U
-H
d d •
■H
•H
-H
X
0
P rH
0
0 d
d
P
0
ft
0 0
CO
X X >
u ft •
CO
d
03
d
X
P P
p
1 — 1
i — l 0 !>-<
d 0 Tl
p
0
P
0
-d 0
Q)
u
d
d o x
0 0
u
X
•H
0 X
0
X E
U
d)
o
0 0
X 0 u
0
X
x d
3
03 -H
03
p
3
3 Cn x
d X d
p
0 •
03
0
X X
p
d m
d X Tl
p
rH TJ
X
x u
X
0
CO
0
CO
X X g
X 0
0
X 0
i — 1 H
0
d d
P
0
d T) X
cn d d
-H p
d
d 0
p •
0 ft
U
p
-H
xxx
-H -H
p
CO CO
0
0 ft
0 X
X ft
Cl)
u
P
x o
u
CO 0
X
3
0 0
a 0
4-1
0
-H
d
cn >,
0
o >
CO
LO
rH P
0
44
d
CO
0 CL P 0 rH
d
ft d
•H
P H
-H 03
ft -
a)
-H
d
cn • a
0 *H H
•H
o3
P
o3
ft ft
X >i
x
0
0 0 0
X 0
TJ
X X
p -
-H
O X
4J
Tl
0 d
CO *H -H
0
d
■H >i
O 0
0
U
d
d x to
0 > X
d
0
-H
rQ rH
X x
3 X
Q)
-H
TJ
U rH 0
u x d
•H
0 X
0 0
p
(V
d
03
d 0 u
d x 0
0
CO
X X
w d
X 0
-H
0
0
x cn d
0 o X
0
d X
0
03
0 0
0 d
X
oi
d
0 Tl
X 0 0
Cn •
U X
Oi •
d B
01
x X
TJ
Jh
T5
1
>. X 0
U ft
d T 3
0 d
d X
(D -H
d 0
0 0
0
a)
03
0
d x d
cn
0 0
0
0 0
X X
0 d
0 d
S
4-4
X
P
a)
-H 0
d -
X X
LO S
£ P
CO 0
X 0
1 — 1
03
u
03
ft
d X 0
• -H 0
O 0
o
U 0
-H V4
o
-H (D •
1
a.
a
o
0 x X
x x X
ft
CN P
ft
fa a
p
fa X x
-H
o
-H
d
d m
O X
o3
0 -H
a
O 0
d
u
a
fa
U
1
0 3 0
1) 0 0
fa u
1 p
2 u
1 03
fa X
i X 0
-H
-H
CL O rH
U > X
-H
-H
-H
-H U
PQ
4-4
1
P
u
& • H ^3
d d d
1 P
U X
1 X
D -
i X
U d d
\
a
a
\
0 0 0
0 0 O
d
\ o3
d
0
\ O 0
<
03
<
03
fa
x X 3
ftX 3
rt! 0
fa X
< 0
m x
< X
fa 3 ft
d
p
CO
T)
d
a
0
0
0
*H
0 rH
-H
0
CO
CO
Ol
(U
-H
>
0
CO
X
u
x 0 d
03
p
d
0
0
o d
d
d)
P
03
d
CO
•H
p
fa Tl
u X X x
0 X
03
d
d
d
-d d
03
— 1
T3
o3
CO
X
o3
0
fa d
fa x H 0
> d
P
P
u d
o
P ( u
X
0
0)
d)
■H
X
d
Q cn m
S B B
0 0
H
03
0 0
0 X
d d X
CO
03
o
d
o
CO
0
P
U
03
d x
Q B
x u
X
B
*h
1 — I
0 0 u
-P
4J
3
o
d
d
d
H
H
X
>i -H
— 0 • m ■
o3
o3
0 o d ■
o O
d 00
CO
-H
0
0
03
*H
cn
0
CO
X
p
X Tl 0
u — -H P
X
P CO
X O 0 X
O
X >, 0 ft
aj
d
d
d
X
03
d
X
d
3
-H X
X 0
co o3
0 X
0 CN ft 0
CTi X
ft d X
d
CO
•H
d
ft
d
P
0
CO
X fa 0
x cn d 0 x
0 B
01
d
H - *H P
- d
0 0 ft 0
ix
Tl
d
0
X
•.
CO
0 P
d 0 0 0 x
d
d
0 0
x x d x
m 0
0 d 0 o
V
d
d
P
0
-
P
0
co cd
0 X u d x
u X
H
0 X
X
0 0 d 3
■H
03
CO
iH
>1 X
d
rH
U d 0 0
0 0
d
d 0
P P o3
0 0
H U
r— 1
-H
m x
— 1
03
0
0 0 d
d 0 0 X
0
d
u
d ■ d x
d d — X •
4J
tj
P
Oi X
03
<D
P
0
u
P
duo
0 u ft X
Lf) P
0
0 X
0X0
0 d
X 0 0 X
d
0
03
d
0
U
d
d
d
d
x d
ft d u cn
CO
X
i — 1
0 0 0 d
X
0 d d x 0
(D
4-4
P
■H
0
d
0
1
0
0
r — I o3 H
0 o 0 d
r- o
o 0
0X00
a) oi ti a) 2 o3 p
d
03
-H
P
CO
X
T3
d
d
ft
u
0 Tl 0
CN Tl -X X
o
X
o
d x d X
d g
h U CO (L) -H
d
U
X
P
d
p
0
d
0
d
m x >
• x 0 d
0 o
d
x X
ft X ft 0
0
0 d O X X
2
0
03
d
03
o
d
d
ft CD
0
m d 0
cm d o d ft
x -
S
- Jh
dJ 03 0) *H
X x
P 0) i — 1 -H 0j
u
— 1
X
u
U
m
ft
u
o
ft X Cn u
0 Cn x ft cn
fd ^
H
m 0
d X d x
gc 0
0 ft U ft X
d
d
0
X
u
0
ft
X
0
o3
o
0
0
3
1 1
X
Oi
T)
o3
>1
0
<u
— 1
d
L)
N
0
o3
X
N
X
X
0
1 1
H
£
CO
H
o3
d
H
H
m
O
X
Xl
L
Cn
cn
g
G
s
3
X
0
G
X
g
X
1 — 1
g
O
G
•H
G
G
G
G
>
0
73
4-4
G
X
0
G
0
4-4
Cn
a)
<D
0
4-4
X\
G
G
ft
cn
73
G
G
X
44
G
P
3
G
3
•H
G
0)
•H
G
X
Cn
U
o
l — 1
G
G
G
G
-H
C!
g
G
1 — 1
G
Cn
0
O
73
G
-P
-
*H
-x
rtf
*H
a>
G
>
G
G
p
cn
Cn
0
G
0
P
a
• H
•H
tjl
G
1 — 1
0
G
rtf
G
X
P
CO
1
73
X
G
Cn
u
U
-H
>
ft
X
rtf
G
G
m
G
G
4J
rH
4-4
a)
G
G
0
id
>1
»
X
rtf
<u
o
4J
o
x
ft
G
4-4
X
G
Td
G
cn
X
X
U
o
G
G
g
U
3
rtf
U
4-4
0
cn
■H
i — 1
Q
4-4
i
0
rH
G
■f—)
p
G
i — 1
1 3
0
44
fU
73
rtf
G
tn
0
•H
U
05
1
id
0)
tn
0
O
-H
0
G
p
P
X
i — 1
1
kN
0
P
-x
Q*
cn
cn
G
U
X
U
fO
4-4
0
3
CJ
tn
(L)
G
\
u
G
X
cu
<L)
<D
tu
-
cn
>
P
X
CQ
-H
H
>,
cn
i — i
G
P
g
73
-H
P
*H
E
\
X
0)
fd
-H
0
-H
0
G
G
X
rtf
P
*H
<
3
tn
E
G
Q
P
a
X
G
G
D
Eh
G
cn
0
G
cn
G
cn
tn
»
X
0
rH
XI
d)
XI
<D
t3
xl
tn
cn
rtf
Cn
>
Cn
4H
(L)
G
<D
T3
G
0)
rtf
p
cn
G
T3
cn
kN
G
Q)
G
XI
a
75
P
Td
73
4-1
XI
u
4-4
X)
u
G
i— i
rH
-r|
d)
G
G
G
G
G
6
XJ
-rH
0
r-H
rtf
XI
-rH
1 1
0
4J
1 1
0
n
4J
G
G
>1
rtf
XI
P
G
G
G
O
4->
G
0
P
P
73
G
G
,P
cn
«S
G
T 3
G
G
0
G
u
U
* H
G
G
G
4-1
cn
44
P
cn
G
(D
G
0
u
rtf
0
0
LO
i — l
o
0
o
i — i
o
3
3
G
3
P
TJ
4-4
4-4
G
cn
G
4-4
<D
N
XJ
u
3
o
P
3
CO
G
04
3
o
G
4J
4J
cn
(D
G
-44
G
>
MH
3:
>
-H
P
0)
rtf
E
co
0
CN
ro
O
rH
in
Cn
G
rtf
' —
P
kN
G
G
T3
G
G
P
o
<D
P
E
G
G
1 — 1
1 — 1
4J
G
G
tn
3
tn
3
4-)
G
0
P
rtf
P
ft
U
G
>
G
<D
P
•rH
rtf
-H
4-1
G
G
XI
rtf
CO
G
cn
G
• «.
X!
G
--
XI
u
-rH
ft
cn
•H
-H
0
tn
G
0
X
>
G
4H
>
Xl
G
0
G
G
rtf
2
Cn
G
G
TJ
tn
V
G
T3
tn
4J
G
■P
4-1
(U
u
P
<D
0
<D
44
X
■H
a
cn
o
G
O
(U
G
-r|
u
G
G
-H
44
T)
cn
0
0
o
0
(D
G
X
-
G
*G
rH
73
4-4
E
P
H
u
CJ
*.
G
X
G
-P
G
G
4J
G
44
G
Q)
-44
p
cn
>
cn
4-1
>H
>
G
-H
P
44
G
0
P
CT
G
rtf
u
ft
U
rtf
U
G
G
o
G
G
G
>
cn
rtf
cn
(U
G
-H
G
G
0
Xl
rtf
G
<D
G
G
P
G
1
G
OJ
o
U
G
TJ
G
in
G
G
Td
G
*H
u
4-4
P
XI
rtf
cn
G
£
0
G
*rl
P
XI
XI
0
cn
XI
0
-G
ft
0
s
G
O
in
0)
d)
U
cn
G
0)
U
0
£
rtf
ft
u
U
i
rH
-U
X
44
-rH
•rH
G
p
6
G
O
ft X
Q
G
a
G
4->
G
m
G
G
4J
G
a
H
K
E
<u
P
<D
tj
cn
in
G
a
cn
P
TJ
Cn
u
73
rtf
- H
\
rtf
P
X
d)
tn
CJ
G
in
d
(D
G
p
P
cn
<u
X!
rtf
G
X
G
p
P
i — l
M
<D
1 — 1
G
m
P
Es
i
i
01
0
rtf
G
1
Cn
o
rtf
G
i
P
1
4J
p
cn
0
X
4-4
0)
G
44
44
i
-rH
cn
G
u
P
G
d)
E
0
0
0
-H
d)
X!
rH
G
G
X!
rH
G
c
(U
4-4
rtf
-H
XI
•H
-H
P
>
•H
G
P
•H
0
G
4H
0
Xl
G
<
P
P
4-4
4J
<
m
U
4J
Qa
ft
U
G
4-)
P4
ft
TJ
m
G
C4
-d
p
6
3
rtf
O
3
G
u
P
Td
3
XI
d)
3
P
G
0
44
M
x;
Xl
73
E
73
44
G
G
G
44
G
O
G
• -
G
o
G
G
o
0
G
o
G
G
0
u
G
G
G
-
- rH
o
0
•H
CN
3
0
3
O
G
G
rH
G
G
X
G
73
LD
U
ro
•H
-H
-H
ft
Xl
X
ft
X
MH
G
TJ
>
U
Td
44
• -
44
44
• -
44
0
73
-H
0
-rH
MH
05
d)
r-
G
d)
CN
M
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
ti
•r|
cn
73
-rH
cn
G
G
P
CN
p
ft
G
G
44
XI
G
G
44
G
d)
G
XJ
- H
i — 1
G
XJ
-H
X
td
o
-rH
Ol
H
■H
CN
73
E
0
tn
E
O
cn
XI
p
XI
cn
>
G
X
cn
>
X
X
W
d)
cn
<j>
ft
cn
G
G
G
73
G
73
G
73
G
rtf
0
G
u
>
p
0
0
X
44
CJ
G
1 — 1
U
G
73
a
73
*
0
3
73
•>.
G
O
ft
H
rtf
04
• «.
G
04
• «*
44
G
G
G
0
P
G
G
0
1 1
-H
1 — 1
cn
XI
X
cn
X
•H
G
G
H
04
d)
P
X
d)
P
ft
rH
Xl
MH
0
i — 1
XI
MH
P
u
G
£
tn
G
o
X
X
<
-rH
Td
P
44
TJ
P
0
-H
ft
G
ft
G
0
-H
O
B
0
3
0
g
O
G
73
o
P
P
44
O
G
73
G
G
73
G
s
44
3
*rl
p
G
3
-rH
X
G
73
G
s
d)
0
G
d>
o
G
-rH
G
1 — 1
o
G
rH
G
i — 1
-rH
rH
X
X
G
H
P
XI
u
-H
XI
u
*H
44
P
73
G
73
in
G
tn
cn
>
m
tn
G
G
G
Eh
P
u
u
G
G
o
G
o-
G
O
G
00
3
»
01
3
Cn
G
0
ft
J
<tf
Tl
rtf
73
Td
rtf
73
G
Cn
£
G
cn
3
G
r-
G
G
XJ
P
73
in
G
XI
G
3
0
tn
<
1 — 1
G
i — i
G
73
CN
73
G
-H
cn
-rH
G
3
-rH
cn
-rH
X
3
cn
p
P
44
P
P
44
tn
-rH
o
G
O
*H
o
G
VO
G
>
rtf
Td
G
G
>
rtf
73
0
cn
G
G
K
-rH
0
cn
-H
0
cn
-H
-G
G
o
0
rH
G
o
0
rH
p
O
-H
1 — 1
G
O
3
X
-rH
O
P
cn
s
P
cn
XI
o
•H
HO-
XI
o
*H
HO-
in
73
cn
rtf
G
>
73
cn
id
X
G
>
<
a>
P
o
P
o
G
»
44
-
44
G
G
rH
cn
G
rH
i
- rH
X
H
O)
LD
P
ft
o
P
ft
Cn
73
o
U
cn t3
73
o
O
cn 73
05
G
0i
G
73
G
0i
o
>
O
73
P
r-
G
00
G
G
G
00
G
G
G
G
oo
G
G
G
G
O
P
Td
G
G
0
P
Td
m
G
G
rtf
CO
i — 1
73
00
rH
73
G
G
(N
73
-rH
x!
G
(N
73
-rH
Xl
G
G
-H
p
0
G
G
-rH
p
73
G
xl
*
0
«.
0
X!
</>
G
44
tn
</>
G
44
cn
X
p
01
S
rtf
MH
O
01
(tf
rd
G
73
0
o
rH
0
G
OJ
o
G
u
73
G
cn
-rH
73
G
ID
-H
O
0
G
0
G
G
0
G
i — 1
G
(N
xl
XI
CO
XJ
XI
P
G
tn
O
i — 1
G
cn
0
i — 1
P
G
rH
44
05
G
1 — 1
*
X
0
G
01
0
r-
u
u
P
0
0
p
73
u
ft
O
G
73
u
ft
O
o
i — 1
cn
G
G
0
1 — 1
cn
05
G
O
G
</>
cn
73
<j>
cn
73
P
a
ft
*H
G
E
ft
-G
G
E
a
P
ft
rtf
rH
G
rH
ft
rtf
i — i
G
cn
3
1 1
I— 1
1 1
0
P
G
ii
o
4J
G
X
o
P
•H
G
Ti
-H
O
G
Td
1
i
<D
G
i
(U
G
u
i
1
cn
N
G
u
i
in
N
G
u
i
0
1
rtf
G
TJ
i
rtf
G
G
X
Td
xl
O
xl
O
u
O
G
0
u
0
G
0
o
XJ
Oi
P
G
-H
O.
P
X
O
G
-H
<
CQ
p
3
U
p
3
rtf
<
05
u
X
3
G
O
u
X
3
G
<
cn
m
P
P
o
B
CJ
P
P
X
X
X
E
G
G
P
G
TJ
P
01
G
G
0
ft
p
P
<d
P
-rH
G
X
rtf
0
P
G
P
td
rd
G
G
in
o
Xl
0
G
0
X
G
0
G
05
3
-
05
cn
P
CJ
>
o
G
G
tn
tn
G
O
G
G
Td
0
a
O
0
u
td
cn
-H
X
3
G
•H
G
*H
-rH
0
o
-
cn
0
rtf
ns
X
G
G
E
E
G
P
>
p
H
ID
rtf
p
G
0
E
H
73
o
cn
-p
Eh
</>
0
0
p
P
id
P
G
id
>
X
cn
G
73
0
73
B
io
H
i — i
P
-rH
cn
rtf
0
-H
G
73
X
0
X
G
>
G
-H
Q
-
rtf
P
-
X
XI
G
73
G
-H
u
id
P
G
rH
s
>1
B
73
P
>.
o
P
td
G
td
£
P
01
rtf
O
jq
o
X
0
cn
G
P
X
o
G
*r|
G
rtf
G
73
A
G
>1
u
X
P
0
X
X
o
td
3
X
O
G
cn
XI
-G
O
01
P
0
G
4H
cn
•H
i — i
G
•*
G
o
G
G
P
P
G
O
P
G
0
rH
G
P
cn
0
G
CN
>1
in
G
01
ft
cn
P
G
3
0
1 1
>
Xl
G
P
0
0
0
G
HO-
73
•x
G
0
0
P
G
G
o
Td
-rH
G
rtf
u
ft X
G
G
id
0
G
p
cn
O
G
g
TJ
0
cn
G
0
-H
G
o
G
P
G
o
G
0
X
0
•H
u
-rH
-H
-r|
P
-rH
U
kN r-H
73
cn
CJ
0
ft
G
ft
ft
0
p
Td
0
P
P
2
rtf
>
w
« H
g 5
8 “
w M
ft
E
0
G
x
g
G
G
X
g
G
CJ
-H
E
0
G
0 G
U X
<d
<d
g
m
4-1
o
g
•x
O
G
ft
o
G
I — 1
0
g
ft
73
<D
X
td
£ in
H X
x cn
cn o
w u
X
u
k
«3j
a)
w
p
>1
cn
g
CD
3
P4
a
3
3
k
g
o
-H
3
a
•H
3
H
05
<D
cn
Q
E
05
CO
>
CD
3
a;
tn
aj
p
0
3
Eh
H
O
x;
o
xl
-H
k
05
CJ
Eh
i — 1
P
V
• — i
P
E-i
p
3
W
c
Q)
dJ
Ex.
k
3
A
T3
O
k
05
U
P4
a
<u
05
£
P
d)
3
-H
w
W
4J
(t!
in
rcJ
3
3
i — 1
Eh
3
a)
4J
3
k
3
•H
k
u
0)
3
d)
(U
rH
>
•<
is
u
•rH
1 — 1
n
5
>
3
H
a
I — 1
-H
\
3
*H
3
Eh
i
•H
4-1
£>
a
3
k
CJ
05
<
a
0
*H
3
k
3
a
X)
0
£
P
x;
■ >.
3
3
3
i — 1
u
P
u
3
g
k
s
DQ
3
0
3
■H
i — 1
g
U
0
44
£
k
xl
03
0
3
u
rif
Cl
0
cn
p
u
CO
u
n
EACH
4J
3
Tf
a
may
O
05
01
03
Pci
Q
G
3
3
cn
cn
3
-H
3
4J
<D
Q)
w
tj
Xl
cn xl
o
i — 1
cn
CO
p_l
>
• — i
O
cn p
•H
•H
• »
£
H
3
o
rH
XI
u
a)
U
w
IV.
H
0
O
i — 1
3
44
o
•H
u
<
2
P
05
a
p
44
g
-H
JZ
k
3
0
3
44
0
i — 1
3
cn
x)
3
3
U
O
03
k
W
W
W
4J
3
p
k
3
5h
p
rH
H
U
p
3
a
44
05
4J
03
C_J
31
a)
u
-k
3
0
05
•H
3
C
44
3
s
-H
3
tn
3
U
05
w
JV^
44
&
u
3
c
3
U
3
W
X
1
X)
Q)
3
•H
3
<D
3
H
3
i — 1
o
3
cn
3
B
k
1
CJ
3
P
cn
>
B
U
C
3
N
O
3
3
0
3
O
3
H
X!
CQ
O
G
XI
rH
k
u
XJ
TJ
d)
4J
0 3
&
•H
4-1 U
4-1 -H
U Tl
\ i — I
m 3
o
< s
X)
3
05
3
05
3
3
3
cn
3
1 1
>
<D
■H
*k
i — l
cn
1 — 1
XI
3
3
3
03
0
O
•k
rH
■H
p
3
u
3
i — i
U
3
k
k
*k
o3
54
0
3
u
£
<D
3
05
3
g
k
O
B
05
3
3
g
3
•H
B
•H
k
O
g
4J
0
3
44
3
u
g
05
u
>
44
0
<D
rH
•H
05
X
u
54
44
0
44
-k
p
3
O
cn
>
44
XI
0
O
a)
O
3
3
E-i
XI
3
54
s
•rH
O
CHAPTER III
EXISTING
ENVIRONMENT
AND
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSEQUENCES
Chapter III is a summary of resource
conditions as they relate to the
proposed Taylor South Timber Sale
Project. The resource issues
discussed are arranged in the same
order as they are mentioned in
Chapter I. The current, or
existing, condition can be viewed as
a baseline condition to compare
changes resulting from the selection
of any alternative. Also described
are the how the different
alternatives may affect the
environment. For more complete
assessments and analyses related to
the resources, for both scientific
and judicial review, refer to the
appropriate appendices of this EIS.
PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION
The Taylor South Timber Sale Project
area is located primarily south of
Taylor Creek (Section 7, T32N, R22W)
and north of Whitefish Lake.
• The project encompasses
approximately 5,000 acres in 11
sections and is located primarily
in the Swift Creek drainage. The
main Swift Creek drainage flows
from Upper Whitefish Lake into
the north end of Whitefish Lake.
In that distance, 9 smaller
streams flow into Swift Creek.
within the project area flow
directly into Whitefish Lake.
The topography is gently sloping on
the western and southern sides of
the project area, steepening toward
a ridge on the Whitefish Range to
the east. Elevations range from
nearly 3,000 feet at Whitefish Lake
to 4,800 feet on the northern end
of the project.
The project area may be accessed
from Whitefish via East Lakeshore
Drive/DelRey Road, a county road.
The road is plowed in the winter,
providing year-round access into
Section 32 and 33. The project
area may also be accessed from the
north via Upper Whitefish Road,
which, due to snow, is often closed
during winter and spring months .
Upper Whitefish Road intersects
with Lower Whitefish Road near
Milemarker 9. Lower Whitefish Road
junctions at Milemarker 6 with
Taylor Creek Road, which goes to
the back side Big Mountain.
Adjacent landowners include private
ranches and homesteads, industrial
and nonindustrial timberlands, and
USFS .
Environmental Impact Statement
Page III-l
HYDROLOGY
WATER QUALITY AND YIELD
INTRODUCTION
The environment affected by the
proposed Taylor South Timber Sale
project concerning hydrology
includes the portion of the Flathead
River drainage that encompasses
Swift Creek and it tributaries. The
methodologies used to portray the
existing condition and determine the
hydrological impacts include
sediment source surveys, a channel
stability analysis, and computer-
modeling estimates of annual water
yield. In combination, these
methodologies portray the potential
impacts to water quality. The areas
analyzed include Swift Creek and all
its tributaries, the bridge
replacement site, and all roads that
may be used for hauling.
EXISTING CONDITION
The vast majority of sediment comes
from clay banks that slough
naturally along the lower reaches of
Swift Creek. Additional sediment
comes from roads . Taylor Creek Road
lacks adequate surface drainage.
Both Taylor Creek and Lower
Whitefish roads have undersized
culverts that would not work
properly for 50-year flood events.
The remaining State -owned road
systems used for hauling in the
project area meet surface drainage
standards (BMPs) . The Upper
Whitefish Lake bridge is not a
source of sediment. Channel
stability is in the good to fair
range for most reaches of the
tributaries. The stability of the
Swift Creek channel is poor due to
its naturally slumping clay banks.
Current water-quality standards
require no increase in sediment
levels over naturally occurring
levels. Given the instability of
Lower Swift Creek's clay banks, the
natural levels of sediment could be
exceeded when annual water yield
increases only 8 percent. The
current annual water yield increase
is 4 percent for Lower Swift Creek,
and 5.6 percent for the entire Swift
Creek watershed.
Page III -2
Taylor South Timber Sale Project
HYDROLOGY
DIRECT EFFECTS
• Direct Effects of Ao-Action Alternative ,1
No change is expected in sediment
sources, channel stability, or
annual water yield from the
existing environmental condition.
• Direct Effects of Action Alternatives 11 and
C
Sediment delivery to streams
would be reduced by repairs to
Taylor Creek and Lower Whitefish
roads. Replacement of the bridge
would not likely increase
sediment delivery. Timber
harvesting would increase water
yield for the Lower Swift Creek
watershed by 1 percent.
INDIRECT EFFECTS
• Indirect Effects of Ao-Action Alternative A
No change is expected in sediment
sources, channel stability, or
annual water yield from the
existing environmental condition.
• Indirect Effects of Action Alternatives It
and C
No measurable change in channel
stability is expected. Once the
stream-crossing sites revegetate,
a net improvement of less
sediment over the existing
condition would be likely in the
long term. No direct effects to
water quality were identified due
to the bridge replacement on the
East Fork of Swift Creek.
CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
• Cumulative Effects JXo-. let ion Alternative A
The number of sediment sources
from roads would be reduced due
to the repairs done by the
Chicken/Werner Timber Sale
Project. No measurable change in
channel stability is expected.
The annual water yield for the
Lower Swift Creek watershed would
change from 4 to 5 percent with
the completion of the Chicken
Werner Timber Sale; the entire
Swift Creek watershed would
change from 5.6 to 5.9 percent.
• Cumulative Effects of Action Alternatives It
and C
The number of sediment sources
from roads would be reduced due
to the repairs done to Taylor
Creek and Lower Whitefish roads
by the Chicken/Werner Timber Sale
Project and by this project . No
measurable change in channel
stability is expected. The
annual water yield for the Lower
Swift Creek watershed would
change from 4 to 6 percent with
both projects; the entire Swift
Creek watershed would change from
5.6 to 6.3 percent with both
proj ects .
Environmental Impact Statement
Page III -3
FISHERIES
INTRODUCTION
The fisheries species affected by
the proposed project, and chosen for
analysis, are westslope cutthroat
trout and bull trout. The
methodologies used to portray the
existing condition and determine the
impacts to fisheries include the
Hydrology Appendix and surveys for
fish species presence. When either
trout is present, spawning surveys
and tests are completed by the
Department of Fish, Wildlife and
Parks (DFWP) to evaluate specific
sediment conditions that impact the
quality of the spawning habitat.
The areas analyzed include most of
Swift Creek, creeks that flow year-
round into Swift Creek inside the
project area, and the site of the
bridge replacement .
EXISTING CONDITION
Population surveys show both the
presence of westlope cutthroat
trout and bull trout in Swift
Creek. No bull trout were found in
the creeks that flow year-round
into Swift Creek, but westslope
cutthroat trout were found.
Westlope cutthroat trout and bull
trout populations that are not
connected to other populations in
the Swift Creek drainage (disjunct)
exist at the bridge-replacement
site. Currently, the annual water
yield is below a level that could
increase sediment above normal
conditions for all analyses areas.
DFWP has not yet completed the
spawning surveys on the main stem
of Swift Creek. No redds had been
found during the 1995, 1996, 1997,
or 1999 redd surveys (locates areas
where eggs are laid) done in the
East Fork of Swift Creek below
Upper Whitefish Lake.
Page III -4
Taylor South Timber Sale Project
FISHERIES
DIRECT EFFECTS
• Direct Effects of J\o-*lction . Alternative A
No change from the existing
environment condition is
expected .
• Direct Effects of Action Alternatives B and
C
Repairs to Lower Whitefish and
Taylor Creek roads would reduce
sediment delivery to streams.
Replacement of the bridge would
not likely increase sediment
delivery. Water yield would
likely increase less than 1
percent. No direct effects were
identified due to the proposed
bridge replacement.
INDIRECT EFFECTS
• Indirect Effects of JVo-Action Alternative A
No indirect effects to fisheries
populations or habitat were
identified .
• Indirect Effects of Action Alternatives B
anti C
No measurable change in channel
stability is expected. Spawning
habitat could improve with the
reduction in sediment delivery.
No indirect effects were
identified due to the proposed
bridge replacement.
CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
• Cumulative Effects of Alternative A
The repairs done by the Chicken/
Werner Timber Sale would reduce
the number of sediment sources
from roads. The stability of the
stream channel would not be
expected to change measurably.
With the completion of the
Chicken/Werner Timber Sale
Project, the annual water yield
would change from 4 percent to 5
percent; the entire Swift Creek
watershed would change from 5.6
percent to 5.9 percent . Spawning
habitat could improve with the
reduction in sediment delivery.
• Cumulative Effects of Action Alternatives B
and C
The repairs done by the Chicken/
Werner Timber Sale Project and
this project to Lower Whitefish
and Taylor Creek roads would
reduce the number of sediment
sources from roads. The
stability of the stream channel
would not be expected to change
measurably. With the completion
of the Chicken/Werner Timber Sale
Project, the annual water yield
would change from 4 percent to 6
percent; the entire Swift Creek
watershed would change from 5.6
percent to 6.3 percent with both
projects. Spawning habitat could
improve with the reduction in
sediment delivery. The bridge
replacement would have no
cumulative effect.
Environmental Impact Statement
Page III- 5
VEGETATION
INTRODUCTION
The vegetation most affected by the
proposed project, and chosen for
analysis, are the stands of timber.
The methodologies used to portray
the existing condition and determine
impacts to vegetation include:
an evaluation of the appropriate
type (timber species that grew in
this area historically) , mix, and
ages of timber stands;
an analysis of forest insect and
disease activity; and
- a comparison of amounts and
quality of the old-growth to
DNRC's old-growth commitment.
The areas analyzed include
individual timber stands to be
harvested in the project area, all
timber stands on Stillwater State
Forest (including areas in the
Tobacco Valley) , and the Upper
Flathead Valley climatic section
described by Losensky, 1997.
EXISTING CONDITION
Wildland-fire suppression, past
logging and forestry practices,
insects, diseases, and site
conditions have resulted in the
current condition being different
than the desired condition. Mixed-
conifer stands are currently
overrepresented and western larch/
Douglas-fir stands are
underrepresented. Western white
pine has drastically declined due to
the white pine blister rust disease.
Stillwater State Forest is low in
stands of the seedling/sapling age
class and high in the 40-year age
class and older.
Insects and diseases present at
normal levels include mountain pine
beetles, armillaria root rot, white
pocket rot, rhabodocline needlecast,
and fir engravers. Insects and
diseases above normal levels include
Indian paint fungus, Douglas-fir
beetles, western larch dwarf
mistletoe, and white pine blister
rust .
DNRC has committed to retain at
least 1/2 of the amount old growth
on Stillwater State Forest that
would exist with natural processes
on similar sites. Approximately 38
percent of Stillwater State Forest
is considered old growth by DNRC,
which is 2.3 times as many old-
growth acres as DNRC's commitment.
The western larch/Douglas-f ir cover
types have about 107 percent of the
required minimum; the western white
pine cover type has about 826
percent; and the mixed-conifer cover
type has about 465 percent. In this
project area, 134 acres of old
growth have low attribute levels;
1,217 acres have medium attribute
levels; 1,240 acres have high
attribute levels; and 117 acres do
not have enough data collected to
determine their attribute levels.
Page III -6
Taylor South Timber Sale Project
VEGETATION
DIRECT EFFECTS
• Direct Effects of .Vo-. let ion Alternative A
No immediate change is expected
from the existing environmental
condition .
• Direct Effects of Action Alternative ft
The mixed-conifer stands would be
reduced by 148 acres; western
white pine stands would be
increased by 115 acres; and the
western larch/Douglas -fir stands
would be increased by 33 acres.
Harvesting would change 148 acres
of 40-year-old mixed-conifer
stands to the 0 age class; 436
acres of 100-year-old western
white pine would change to the 0
age class; and 20 acres of 100-
year-old western larch/Douglas -
fir stands would change to the 0
age class. Harvesting would
immediately reduce the number of
acres infected by stem rot, dwarf
mistletoe, and white pine blister
rust by 638 acres. The acres of
western larch/Douglas-f ir old-
growth would be reduced by 0 . 1
percent; the acres of western
white pine old-growth would be
reduced 3.9 percent; and the
acres of mixed-conifer old-growth
would be reduced 0 . 7 percent .
Overall, all old-growth acres
would be reduced by 0.9 percent,
but would still exceed DNRC's
commitment for retention.
• Direct Effects of Action Altei'native C
The representation of mixed-
conifer stands would be reduced
by 144 acres; the western white
pine stands would be increased by
115 acres; and the western larch/
Douglas-fir stands would be
increased by 29 acres. Following
harvesting, the Stand Level
Inventory (SLI) would likely
display no change in age classes.
However, harvesting would take
place in 144 acres of mixed-
conifer stands, 436 acres of
western white pine stands, 20
acres of western larch/Douglas -
fir stands, and 8 acres of
ponderosa pine stands, all over
150 years old; a new age class of
trees would be regenerated. The
level of stands infected with
stem rot, dwarf mistletoe, and
white pine blister rust would
immediately be reduced by 632
acres; some infestations would
remain. The acres of mixed-
conifer old-growth would be
reduced by 0.8%, thereby
increasing the acres of western
larch/Douglas-f ir by 0.2 percent
and western white pine by 0.6
percent. Overall, all old-growth
acres would not be reduced or
increased from the retention
commitment, although the old-
growth attribute levels would be
considered low following harvest.
INDIRECT EFFECTS
• Indirect Effects of JVo-» Id ion Alternative A
No immediate change is expected
from the existing environmental
condition. Sawlog volume would
continue to be lost at abnormally
high levels due to stem rot,
dwarf mistletoe, and white pine
blister rust.
• Indirect Effects of Action Alternative fi
Approximately 450 acres would be
regenerated with tree species
similar to the results from a
wildland fire. Stem rot, dwarf
mistletoe, and white pine blister
rust would, in the long term, be
significantly reduced in stands
that are harvested. This would
be accomplished by removing
species that are more susceptible
to these diseases and
regenerating trees that are less
susceptible to these diseases.
Environmental Impact Statement
Page III -7
VEGETATION
Western larch and rust-resistant
western white pine seedlings
would be planted on 365 acres.
• Indirect Effects of Action Alternative C
Approximately 395 acres would be
regenerated with tree species
similar to the results from a
wildland fire. However, the
overstory trees made up of grand
fir and western hemlock most
likely would not be the species
that would survive a wildland
fire. Stem rot, dwarf mistletoe,
and white pine blister rust would,
in the long term, be moderately
reduced in the stands that are
harvested. Some infected trees
would remain. Regenerating trees
would be susceptible to these
diseases. To reduce the effects
of these diseases in the long
term, western larch and rust-
resistant western white pine
seedlings would be planted on 300
acres .
CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
• Cumulative Effects of .Xo-. let ion Alternative
A
Assuming the harvesting of the
planned salvage permits and the
Upper Stryker Ridge, Stewart -
Butcher, Mud Creek, Edmonds CT,
Spring Rock, Beaver 99, Beaver
2000, Good/Long/Boyle, Chicken/
Werner, and the proposed Young/
Sophie timber sales are
completed, the 0-to-39-year age
class would increase from 8.3 to
9.4 percent on Stillwater State
Forest, while the other 3 age
classes would decrease by less
than 0.5 percent each. Some of
the sales have already been
completed. When all of these
sales have been harvested, the
acres of western large/Douglas -
fir stands would increase by,
approximately, 3 percent and
decrease the acres of mixed-
conifer, subalpine fir, and
lodgepole pine stands, combined,
by the same amount. All of the
changes would bring Stillwater
State Forest, as a whole, toward
the stand type, structure, and
composition that is desired.
These aforementioned sales
harvest stands with high amounts
of stem and root rots; those
areas would be regenerated with
trees that are more resistant to
these diseases. The old-growth
commitment for Stillwater State
Forest would be exceeded by 701
acres for western larch/Douglas -
fir stands, 5,533 acres for
western white pine stands, and
6,692 acres for mixed-conifer
stands. For all stand types,
old-growth would be reduced by
483 acres. DNRC would be in
compliance with the old-growth-
retention commitments with these
proj ects .
• Cumulative Effects of Action Alternative II
The sales listed in Alternative A
also apply to the cumulative
effects for Alternative B.
Alternative B increases the 0-to-
39-year age class from 8.3 to 10
percent on Stillwater State
Forest and decreases the the 40-
to-99-year age class by 0.3
percent, the 100-to-149-year age
class by 0.7 percent, and 150-
years-plus age class by 0.8
percent. The sales would also
increase the acres of western
larch/Douglas - fir and western
white pine stands by,
approximately, 3 percent and
decrease the acres of mixed-
conifer, subalpine-f ir , and
lodgepole pine stands, combined,
by the same amount. The timber
sales listed in Cumulative
Effects for Alternative A harvest
timber stands with high amounts
of stem and root rots; those
areas would be regenerated with
trees that are more resistant to
these diseases. Stillwater State
Page III -8
Taylor South Timber Sale Project
VEGETATION
Forest would exceed its old-
growth commitment by 686 acres
for the western larch/Douglas -fir
stands, 5,279 acres for the
western white pine stands, and
6,628 acres for the mixed-conifer
stands. For all stand types,
old-growth would be reduced by
816 acres. DNRC would be in
compliance with the old-growth-
retention commitments with these
projects. Stand inventories have
not been completed to indicate
the change in attribute levels to
old growth.
• Cumulative Effects of Jlction •/. lltemative C
The sales listed for Alternative
A also apply to the cumulative
effects for Alternative C.
Alternative C increases the 0-to-
39-year age class from 8.3 to 9.4
percent on Stillwater State Forest
and decrease the 40-to-99-year age
class by 0.3 percent, the 100-to-
149-year age class by 0.4 percent,
and the 150 -years -plus age class
by 0.5 percent. These sales would
also increase the acres of western
larch/Douglas - f ir and western
white pine stands by approximately
3% and decrease the acres of
mixed-conifer, subalpine fir, and
lodgepole pine stands, combined,
by the same amount. The timber
sales listed in Cumulative Effects
for Alternative A harvest timber
stands with high amounts of stem
and root rots; those areas will be
regenerated with trees that are
more resistant to these diseases.
Stillwater State Forest would
exceed its old-growth commitment
by 728 acres in the western larch/
Douglas-fir stands, 5,570 acres in
the western white pine stands, and
6,625 acres in the mixed-conifer
stands. For all stand types, old
growth would be reduced by 483
acres . DNRC would be in
compliance with the old-growth-
retention commitments with these
projects. Stand inventories have
not been completed to indicate the
change in attribute levels to old
growth .
Environmental Impact Statement
Page III -9
WILDLIFE
INTRODUCTION
Determining the effects of the
proposed actions on all wildlife
species within a project area is an
impossible task. DNRC believes that
if landscape patterns and processes
are maintained, a full complement of
wildlife species will exist across the
landscape. DNRC also believes that
certain species and their habitats
should be evaluated to adequately
estimate the effects to wildlife.
Therefore, the methodologies used to
portray the existing condition and
determine wildlife impacts include
determining the changes of forest
structure and composition in general;
evaluating the modification to
habitats of specific species; and,
evaluating the level of human
disturbance caused by or resulting
from the project. The analysis areas
vary in size by species, with the
largest analysis area (grizzly bear
and fisher) approximating 34,560
acres, including portions of the Swift
and Lazy creek drainages. Also
analyzed is the bridge-replacement
site .
EXISTING CONDITION
The existing forest structure and
composition condition is displayed
under Vegetation on page 6. This
condition has changed since European
settlement with both positive and
negative effects to the different
wildlife species.
Individual species analyzed:
• Bald eagle - There are 2 bald eagle
territories: one at Whitefish Lake,
the other at Upper Whitefish Lake.
The health of the forest stands
used for nesting is satisfactory.
Though firewood cutting and
recreational activities cause
disturbances, nestlings have been
produced in both nest in recent
years .
• Grizzly bear - The project area is,
generally, composed of spring
grizzly bear habitat; summer and
fall habitat is marginal. DNRC's
Interim Grizzly Bear Guidance
(1995) has committed to no net
increases in the amount of total
or open-road densities and no net
decrease in security core areas.
DNRC has complied with both
requirements in the project area.
The Guidance directs DNRC to
retain a minimum 40 percent of
State lands within each bear
management unit as hiding cover.
There is adequate hiding cover on
92.2 percent of State-owned land
within the Lazy Creek Grizzly
Bear Subunit .
• Wolf - The Whitefish wolf pack
currently uses the project area,
which has an adequate prey base;
breeding occurred on adjacent
ownership during the spring of
2000 .
• Lynx - The northern portion of
the project area is habitat
suitable for lynx; the southern
portion of the project area,
which is 3,500 to 4,000 feet in
elevation, has marginal habitat
for lynx.
• Boreal owl - There are 68.3 acres
of preferred habitat for boreal
owls in the project area; 40
acres are marginal habitat.
• Harlequin duck - Harlequin ducks
use Swift Creek; observations
suggest that they may also breed
there .
• Fisher - In the project area,
there are 3,091 acres of
preferred fisher habitat; 79.3
percent of the riparian buffers
(key habitat located next to
streams or lakes) is adequately
stocked with mature trees.
• Pileated woodpecker - There are
3,876 acres of preferred habitat
for pileated woodpeckers in the
project area.
• White- tailed deer - Approximately
77 percent of the acres within
the project area have timber
stands that are suitable for
white-tailed deer thermal cover
during the winter.
Page III -10
Taylor South Timber Sale Project
WILDLIFE
DIRECT EFFECTS
• Direct Effects of JXo-* Iviion Alternative A
No anticipated direct effects to
the following species are
expected: bald eagle, grizzly
bear, wolf, lynx, boreal owl,
harlequin duck, fisher, pileated
woodpecker, and white-tailed
deer .
No changes would be expected in
the structure and composition of
the forest in general, the level
of human disturbance, or the
habitats of specific species that
would affect the existing
condition relative to these
species .
• Direct Effects of Action Alternatives II and
C
No direct effects to bald eagles,
boreal owls, or harlequin ducks
are anticipated. No change in
use by these species is expected
due to changes in the structure
and composition of the forest in
general, the levels of human
disturbance, or modification to
habitats .
The percent of the Lazy Creek
Bear Management Subunit with an
open-road density exceeding 1
mile per square mile would
temporarily increase from 46 to
49 percent. Upon completion of
the project it would revert back
to 46 percent. The open-road
density remains below the 1996
baseline of 50 percent. The
security core area would not be
reduced. Harvesting operations
would not use restricted roads
during spring, reducing human
disturbance to the grizzly bear.
Within the State-owned portions
of the Lazy Creek Bear Management
Subunit, hiding cover for grizzly
bears would decline from 92.2
percent of the area to 87.9
percent for Alternative B and
87.8 percent for Alternative C.
Hiding cover for wolves would be
reduced, although they would
still be capable of using the
Swift Creek drainage under land
management similar to that
proposed under this project.
Within the project area,
approximately 205 of the 785
acres of mature and old-growth
stands that are above 4,000 feet
in elevation would be harvested.
These 205 acres, which contain
large downed logs, may be
appropriate forest types for lynx
denning habitat.
Action Alternatives B reduces
preferred fisher habitat that is
not along streams by 597 acres,
while Action Alternative C
reduces it by 601 acres. Both
reductions are approximately 15
percent of the preferred fisher
habitat outside the streamside
buffers within the proposed
project area. Between 1 and 3
acres of the 692 acres of
streamside fisher buffer would be
harvested along Vars Creek.
Action Alternatives B reduces
pileated woodpecker habitat by
597 acres, while Action
Alternative C reduces it by 601
acres. These reductions are
approximately 15 percent of the
preferred pileated woodpecker
habitat within the proposed
project area. The retention of
snags and live trees may promote
the recovery of preferred
pileated woodpecker habitat in
harvested areas .
The acreage of winter thermal
cover for white-tailed deer would
be reduced by 6 percent on the
project area.
Environmental Impact Statement
Page III -11
WILDLIFE
INDIRECT EFFECTS
• Indirect Effects of JVo-* Iction Alternative A
Forest insects and diseases may
affect the current and potential
bald eagle nest stands, making
them less suitable for nesting.
Feeding opportunities for grizzly
bear, lynx, fisher, and white-
tailed deer may decline due to
the lack of diversity in habitat,
such as forest edge and younger
forest stands .
No indirect effects to white-
tailed deer, boreal owls,
harlequin ducks, fisher, or
pileated woodpeckers were
identified .
• Indirect Effects Common to Action
. Alternatives It and C
The effect on the long-term
ability of the white-tailed deer
herd to provide carrion within the
Whitefish bald eagle territory
could indirectly effect bald
eagles. These effects are
expected to be low or negligible.
No long-term increase in the open
or total road densities within the
Lazy Creek Subunit would occur as
a result of the proposed project.
Open-road density would not be
increased, therefore, effects to
wolves and their primary prey
(white- tailed deer) should be low
or negligible.
Security and browse for the
primary prey of the lynx (snowshoe
hare) would be temporarily
suppressed until trees and shrubs
regenerate to provide cover.
CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
• Cumulative Effects of JVo-,dction . I Item alive
No long-term, substantial changes
are expected in wolf, boreal owl,
or harlequin duck uses of
Stillwater State Forest or
adjacent Federal and private
property. No changes in uses by
these species are expected due to
changes in the structure and
composition of the forest in
general, the levels of human
disturbance, or the modification
of habitats.
Residential development, timber
harvesting, firewood gathering,
and recreational use may continue
to reduce the available bald
eagle nest and perch trees of
suitable diameter, crown type,
and security level within the
home range of the Whitefish Lake
bald eagle pair.
Grizzly bear hiding cover may
continue to decline on adjacent
private lands, although the
security core area levels and
open-road densities should remain
at existing levels across all
ownership .
Pileated woodpeckers would
continue to lose habitat on
adjacent private lands and,
possibly, on Stillwater State
Forest .
• Cumulative Effects of . Iction Alternatives It
and C
No substantial changes are
exoected in harlequin duck or
boreal owl uses of Stillwater
State Forest or adjacent private
ownership. No changes in uses
are expected by these species due
to changes in the structure and
composition of the forest in
general, the levels of human
Page III -12
Taylor South Timber Sale Project
WILDLIFE
disturbance, or the modification
to habitats.
Residential development, timber
harvesting, firewood gathering,
and recreational use may continue
to reduce the available bald
eagle nest and perch trees of
suitable diameter, crown type,
and security level within the
home range of the Whitefish Lake
bald eagle pair.
The loss of grizzly bear hiding
cover on State ownership, and the
probable further loss of hiding
cover on other ownership in
adjacent areas, would continue to
reduce grizzly bear security
within the Lazy Creek Bear
Management Subunit. The existing
amount (greater than 60 percent)
is well over 40 percent, the
minimum set by DNRC guidance.
Current State and adjacent
private timber-harvesting
activity would reduce security to
wolves in the general vicinity of
the project. However, due to the
existing road closures and amount
of vegetative cover, no
substantial change in wolf use of
State or adjacent private lands
is anticipated.
Current timber harvesting
activity on State and adjacent
private lands would reduce
possible lynx denning habitat and
security cover within the general
vicinity of the project.
Preferred fisher habitat of mature
forest stands would be less
available within the general
vicinity of the project area.
Preferred fisher habitat on the
adjacent Plum Creek Timber Company
lands, which may be more suitable
for fisher due to its lower
elevation, would continue to
decline. Within the Lazy Creek
Bear Management Subunit, 1,183 to
1,185 acres of riparian fisher
habitat would be retained. Fisher
could still inhabit the general
vicinity, but would probably avoid
recently harvested areas.
Preferred pileated woodpecker
habitat of mature forest stands
would be less available within the
general vicinity of the project.
Preferred pileated woodpecker
habitat on the adjacent Plum Creek
Timber Company lands, which may be
more suited due to lower
elevation, may continue to
decline. Within the project area
and on State land within 1 mile
south of the proposed project
area, approximately 3,400 acres of
mature to old stands representing
preferred pileated woodpecker
habitat would be retained. The
Chicken/Werner Timber Sale Project
area, which encompasses 7 square
miles directly north, retains
approximately 1,572 acres, or 81
percent, of the available mature
and old stands preferred by
pileated woodpeckers. Pileated
woodpeckers may still inhabit the
general vicinity of the proposed
project area, but at reduced
levels in the vicinity of
harvested areas until stands
regenerate to maturity.
Past, current, and future timber-
harvesting activities on State and
adjacent private lands have
reduced and would further reduce
white-tailed deer security and
thermal cover within the general
vicinity of the project area.
Grey wolf
Environmental Impact Statement
Page III -13
ECONOMICS
INTRODUCTION
DNRC does not have a formal
accounting system to track costs
from start to finish for individual
projects. Therefore, the
methodologies used to portray the
existing condition and determine the
economic impacts of a project
include determining DNRC's annual
cash flow for the timber program;
the effects to northwest Montana's
forest-product-related economies ;
and, the project's cash flow and
nonadministrative costs. The
analysis areas include the State,
DNRC's Northwestern Land Office (a
4 -county area of Lincoln, Lake,
Flathead, and Sanders counties) , the
project area, and the bridge -
replacement site. The dollars
displayed are estimates for
comparing alternatives and making
decisions and may not reflect actual
returns or costs.
EXISTING CONDITION
DNRC's timber program and the
Northwestern Land Office exceed a
1:1 revenue-to-cost ratio, which
means that DNRC's timber program is
profitable. In Fiscal Year 1999 and
2000, DNRC's total program reflected
a 1.36 and a 2.78 revenue- to-cost
ratio .
Flathead County can attribute 20 to
25 percent of their economy to the
wood-product industry. The
Northwestern Land Office currently
supplies, approximately, 5 percent
of the material used by mills in the
4 -county area. The lumber market
appears to heading downward with the
recent drop of more than $75.00 per
thousand board feet (MBF) in Lumber
Futures .
Currently, the project area's cash
flow, about $6,090 per year, is
collected from several leases and
licenses. Nonadministrative costs
are estimated to be approximately
$2,000 per year .
Money earned from timber sales are deposited into a trust to support schools and
other beneficiary institutions .
Page III -14
Taylor South Timber Sale Project
ECONOMICS
DIRECT EFFECTS
• Direct Effects ofJXo-Action Alternative A
Project area revenue would not
change from the existing
condition .
• Direct Effects of Action Alternative It
The estimated project revenue to
be deposited into trust accounts
is $721,875; the estimated
revenue to be deposited into the
Forest Improvement (FI) account
is $227,500. Nonadministrative
costs for road work and the
bridge replacement are estimated
at $280,000. Hazard reduction
and reforestation costs are
estimated at $102,760, which is
funded by the by FI account .
• Direct Effects of Action Alternatives C
The estimated project revenue to
be deposited into trust accounts
is $782,880; the estimated revenue
to be deposited into the FI
account is $242,320.
Nonadministrative costs for road
work and the bridge replacement
are estimated at $280,000. Hazard
reduction and reforestation costs
are estimated at $76,785, which is
funded by the by FI account .
INDIRECT EFFECTS
• Indirect Effects of No-Action Alternative A
No change would be expected to the
annual cash flow for DNRC's
Statewide timber program provided
another sale can be substituted to
replace this project. No change
to the area's economy would be
expected provided a local mill
purchases a substituted amount of
timber. Lack of a viable
substitution could result in a
negative effect on either DNRC's
annual cash flow or the local
economy. No change to existing
nonadministrative costs would be
expected .
• Indirect Effects of Action Alternative It
No appreciable changes from the
existing condition to the annual
cash flow for DNRC's statewide
timber program or to the area's
economy would be expected.
Initial long-term road improvement
and bridge replacement costs are
estimated at $280,000, which frees
up the nonadministrative road-
maintenance fund to be used
elsewhere during the life of the
project. The cost of
reforestation is estimated at
$102,760 .
• Indirect Effects of Action Alternative C
No appreciable changes from the
existing condition to the annual
cash flow for DNRC's statewide
timber program or to the area's
economy would be expected.
Initial long-term costs for road
improvement and bridge replacement
are estimated at $280,000, which
frees up the nonadministrative
road-maintenance fund to be used
elsewhere during the life of this
project. The reforestation cost
reforestation is estimated at
$76,785 .
CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
Because of the methodologies used to
analyze economics, the cumulative
effects (revenues and costs) of
other DNRC projects in the State and
NWLO are included as part of the
existing condition. Consequently,
the direct and indirect effects
analysis includes the cumulative
economic effects.
Environmental Impact Statement
Page III -15
AESTHETICS
INTRODUCTION
EXISTING CONDITION
The public currently views the
forests of this project area while
sightseeing; in some instances they
may see a background view. The
methodologies used to portray the
existing conditions and determine
impacts to the visual resources
include an analysis of the
foreground, middleground, and
background views . The foreground
and middleground views will be
discussed in regards to vegetation
and soils disturbances, changes to
stand conditions, and the distances
of harvest treatments along traveled
routes. Background views were
analyzed based on the openness of
the proposed harvest areas and the
patterns of trees to be left in
those areas. The analysis area for
the foreground and middleground
viewpoints is along the DelRey and
Lower Whitefish roads, and the 2
roads into Smith Lake Reservoir.
The analysis area for background
views includes portions of the
Whitefish Divide as viewed from the
Whitefish Lake area and a point
along the Upper Whitefish Lake Road
(Milepost 5) .
Along the open roads, there are both
open and dense forest conditions,
though the view is generally limited
to around 200 feet. Firewood
gathering and salvage logging cause
some damage to the live trees; limbs
and tops are left scattered along
roads and ditches . Middleground
views, which are very limited, cover
distances between .200 and 1,000
feet. Background views of most of
the project area, located in the
lower elevational portions of the
Swift Creek drainage, is broken up
by ridges and trees. Nonetheless,
DNRC ownership is visible mostly as
a uniform forest cover.
Landscape view of harvested areas
Page III -16
Taylor South Timber Sale Project
AESTHETICS
DIRECT EFFECTS
• Direct Effects of JVo-Action Alternative A
Effects would not be expected to
change from the existing condition
in the short term.
• Direct Effects of. let ion Alternative It
Harvesting would aesthetically
affect the harvest area by removing
mature trees and opening the view;
damaging vegetation; slashing,
limbing, and topping fallen trees;
disturbing soil along major skid
trails and landings; and creating
landing piles along, approximately,
2.5 miles of the Lower Whitefish and
Taylor Creek roads . Current
foreground views would become more
open middleground views. Measures
would be taken to limit views into
harvest units.
• Direct Effects of Action Alternative C
Harvesting would aesthetically
affect the harvest area by removing
some mature trees and causing some
damage to vegetation; slashing,
limbing, and topping fallen trees;
disturbing soil along major skid
trails and landings; and creating
landing piles along, approximately.,
2.5 miles of the Lower Whitefish and
Taylor Creek roads . Current
foreground views would be altered
and have fewer trees; however, in
most circumstances, the views would
not change to allow for middleground
views. Measures would be taken to
limit views into harvest units.
INDIRECT EFFECTS
• Indirect Effects to JVo-» let ion Alternative A
No indirect effects to aesthetics
were determined.
• Indirect Effects to Action Alternative B
The pattern of trees remaining and
size of the area being treated would
appear similar to the results of a
moderately severe fire. Portions of
the harvest units would be visible
from various vantage points .
• Indirect Effects to Action Alternative C
The pattern of trees remaining would
appear similar to the results of a
low-severity fire, though the size
of the area is likely much larger
than would burn with this type of
fire. Portions of the harvest units
would be visible from various
vantage points, but the pattern of
the cover would be uniform.
CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
• Cumulative Effects Common to All Alternatives
The following effects will occur by
other projects, in addition to the
direct and indirect effects of this
proj ect .
Slash would be visible from
foreground views where right-of-way
clearing, chipping, and/or slash
burning along the DelRey Road are
proposed by the Flathead County Road
Department. These would be short-
term effects, although the roadway
would have an "opened-up"
appearance .
The Chicken-Werner Timber Sale will
aesthetically affect the view by
harvesting mature trees; damaging
vegetation; creating slash and
landing piles; and disturbing soil
along major skid trails and landings
along, approximately, 5.5 additional
miles of the Lower Whitefish and
Werner Peak roads . Foreground view
would now open up to middleground
views. The pattern of trees
remaining and the size of the area
being treated would appear similar
to the results of a moderately
severe fire. Roadside vegetation
that is protected from harvesting
activities would limit views into
harvest units from roadways.
Portions of the harvest units would
be visible from various vantage
points. Openings would be visible,
with the patterns and sizes similar
to the expected results of fire.
Environmental Impact Statement
Page III -17
RECREATION
INTRODUCTION
The project area currently
experiences various recreational
uses by the general public. The
methodologies used to portray the
existing condition and determine
recreational impacts of the project
include determining the recreational
uses, approximate revenues, and the
potential for conflict between
project activities and recreational
uses. The analysis area includes
all legally accessible State land
within the project area and the
roads that would be used to haul
equipment and logs. The dollars
displayed are estimates for
comparing alternatives and making
decisions and may not reflect actual
returns or costs .
EXISTING CONDITION
Existing recreational uses encompass
most of the activities allowed with
the purchase of a State Recreational
Use License, such as berry picking,
snowmobiling, sightseeing, hiking,
biking, overnight camping, and
hunting. Revenue from Recreational
Use Licenses from the project area
are approximately $280 per year.
Four snowmobile outfitters, which
generate about $2,200 per year, are
the only current commercial
licenses. Trapping occurs, but is
managed by DFWP; no trapping
revenues are collected by DNRC .
Conflicts have occurred between
snowmobilers and loggers when roads
have been plowed open during the
winter. The Smith Lake area has
experienced conflicts between local
walk-ins and motorized day/overnight
users .
RECREATION
DIRECT EFFECTS
• Direct Effects of JVo-* Iction Alternative A
Effects would not be expected to
change from the existing
condition .
• Direct Effects Common to Action
Alternatives It and C
Recreational uses and revenues are
not anticipated to change from the
existing condition. Road
restrictions would be in place for
several days to accommodate road
work; delays would occur for
several hours at the bridge-
replacement site during
construction .
INDIRECT EFFECTS
• Indirect Effects of J\fo-» Iction Alternative A
Effects would not be expected to
change from the existing
condition .
CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
• Cumulative Effect of » Iction Alternative
A
Winter logging operations on the
Chicken/Werner Timber Sale could
increase the number of conflicts
between snowmobilers and loggers.
• Cumulative Effects Common to Action
Alternative It and C
The amount of recreation may
change during the winter months .
Revenue from existing commercial
licenses may decrease. In
coordination with the Chicken/
Werner Timber Sale Project and
this timber sale, there is an
increased likelihood of winter
logging activity on Lower and
Upper Whitefish roads. Winter
logging operations could increase
the number of conflicts between
snowmobilers and loggers.
Conflicts at Smith Lake should not
significantly change from the
existing condition.
• Indirect Effects Common to Action
Alternatives It and C
The amount of recreation may
change during the winter months .
Revenue from existing commercial
licenses may decrease. Winter
logging operations could increase
the number of conflicts between
snowmobilers and loggers.
Conflicts at Smith Lake should not
substantially change from the
existing condition.
Environmental Impact Statement
Page III -19
AIR QUALITY
INTRODUCTION
Air quality could be effected by
prescribed burning and road dust
created by project-related
activities. The methodologies used
to analyze effects to air quality
include estimating the location,
amount, and timing of smoke
generated from prescribed burns, and
road dust created by project-related
activities. The air quality
analysis area includes all of
Flathead County, which is a part of
Montana Airshed 2 as defined by the
Montana Airshed Group.
EXISTING CONDITION
The project area currently
contributes very low levels of air
pollution to the analysis area or
local population centers. Temporary
reductions to air quality from the
project area exist in the summer and
fall due smoke generated from
prescribed burns and dust produced
by vehicles driving on dirt and
gravel roads . None of the
reductions to air quality affect
local population centers beyond EPA
standards. All burning activities
comply with emission levels
authorized by the Montana Airshed
Group in the analysis area by all
major burners. The project area is
outside any of the local Impact
Zones where additional restrictions
may be imposed to protect air
quality.
Page III -20
Taylor South Timber Sale Project
AIR QUALITY
DIRECT EFFECTS
• Direct Effects of JXo-» fiction Alternative A
Effects would not be expected to
change from the existing
condition .
• Direct Effects Common to . let ion
Alternatives R and C
Postharvest burning would produce
smoke emissions; log hauling and
other proj ect -related traffic on
dirt roads would increase the
amount of road dust during dry
periods . Provided that burning
is completed within the
requirements imposed by the
Montana Airshed Group and dust-
abatement material is applied to
roads during dry periods, none of
the increases in emissions is
expected to exceed standards or
impact local population centers.
INDIRECT EFFECTS
• Indirect Effects Common to All Alternatives
Since emissions are expected to
remain within the standards for
air quality, no indirect effects
to human health at local
population centers are
anticipated .
CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
• Cumulative Effects of JXo-*Iction Alternative
A
Effects would not be expected to
change from the existing
condition .
• Cumulative Elffects Common to Action
Alternatives R and C
Additional smoke from prescribed
burning produced on adjacent
USFS, private industrial forest
lands, and State trust lands
would remain within the standards
for air quality, but the
cumulative effect during peak
burning periods could affect
individuals with respiratory
illnesses at local population
centers for short durations. All
known major burners operate under
the requirements of the Montana
Airshed Group, which regulates
the amount of emissions produced
cumulatively by major burners.
Environmental Impact Statement
Page III- 21
SOILS
INTRODUCTION
Soil productivity could be affected
by activities related to the
project. The methodologies used to
portray the existing condition and
determine impacts to the
productivity of the soil include
estimating the amount of soil
compacted and displaced from roads,
skid trails, and areas scarified to
prepare the sites for tree
regeneration. The analysis area for
soils includes the locations
proposed for timber harvesting.
EXISTING CONDITION
Most of the proposed harvest
locations have been harvested in the
past with ground-based machinery,
such as skidders and dozers . The
existing spacing of the trails is,
approximately, 200 feet. The
trails, which have grown vegetation
well since the original harvests,
are not eroding. Soils on the
midslope are generally well drained
and have an average-to-long season
of use with the soil productivity
minimally impacted. Less than 15
percent of the area is impacted by
the compaction or displacement of
soils. Up to 15 percent of an area
could be impacted by compaction or
displacement before productivity
would be negatively impacted.
Page III -22
Taylor South Timber Sale Project
SOILS
DIRECT EFFECTS
• Direct Effects of ,\o-Aclion Alternative A
Soils on inadequately drained
roads would continue to erode.
• Direct Effects of Action Alternative li
Approximately 80 acres, or 12.5
percent, of the acres within the
proposed harvest units may be
impacted. Project design
mitigations would comply with
BMPs to maintain long-term soil
productivity. In addition,
debris would be left on the
ground to decompose and provide
useful nutrients to the soil in
the future .
• Direct Effects to Action Alternative C
Approximately 72 acres, or 11.4
percent, of the acres within the
proposed harvest units would be
impacted. Project design
mitigations would comply with
BMPs to maintain long-term soil
productivity. In addition,
debris would be left on the
ground to decompose and provide
useful nutrients to the soil in
the future .
INDIRECT EFFECTS
• Indirect Effects of JXo-,Ection Alternative A
Effects would not change from the
existing condition in the short
term. In the long term, soil
compaction would decrease as
vegetation root mass helps break
up the soils.
• Indirect Effects of Action Alternative B
The growth rates of trees in skid
trails and landings would be
reduced. Runoff infiltration in
compacted areas would be reduced.
• Indirect Effects of Action Alternative C
The growth rates of trees in
skid trails and landings would
be reduced. Runoff infiltration
in compacted areas would be
reduced.
CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
• Cumulative Effects of JVo-Action
Alternative A
In the short term, effects would
not change from the existing
condition. In the long term,
soil compaction would decrease
as vegetation root mass helps
break up the soils. Currently,
no other projects are proposed
inside the proposed harvest
units that would additionally
compact or displace soils.
• Cumulative Effects of Action Alternatives
B and C
Less than 15 percent of the
harvested areas would be
impacted from soil compaction
and/or soil displacement from
both past activities and the
proposed project. Currently, no
other projects are proposed
inside the proposed harvest
units that would additionally
compact or displace soils.
Environmental Impact Statement
Page III -23
IRRETRIEVABLE AND IRREVERSIBLE
COMMITMENTS OF NATURAL RESOURCES
IRRETRIEVABLE
According to Shipley (1995) ,
irretrievable commitments of
resources are lost for a period of
time. Some stands in the project
area are mature, with individual
trees more than 150 years old. Any
of the timber-harvesting
alternatives would cause some of
these large, old, live trees to be
irretrievably lost; they would no
longer contribute to future snag
recruitment, stand structure and
compositional diversity, aesthetics,
wildlife habitat, nutrient-recycling
processes, or any other important
ecosystem functions.
Areas that will be converted from
timber production to permanent roads
would be lost from timber production
and would not function as forested
lands for a period of time.
IRREVERSIBLE
According to Shipley (1995),
irreversible commitments of
resources are commitments that
cannot be reversed or replaced. The
initial loss of trees due to timber
harvesting would not be
irreversible. Natural regeneration
combined with site preparation and
artificial regeneration would
promote the establishment of new
trees. If management decisions
allow for the continued growth of
established trees, they would
ultimately become equivalent in
size to the irretrievably harvested
trees .
Areas that are initially lost to
timber production through road
construction could, over time, be
reclaimed and once again produce
timber and function as forested
land .
SUMMARY OF RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
SHORT-TERM AND LONG-TERM
PRODUCTIVITY
Generally, short-term uses are
those that occur annually. Long-
term productivity refers to the
ability of the land to produce a
continuous supply of a resource.
All harvest alternatives are
designed to protect the long-term
productivity of the sites. The
stocking reduction that would occur
under each action alternative would
be anticipated to increase the
health and growth of new stands, as
well as residual stands, resulting
in increased long-term
productivity. The postharvest
stands would more closely resemble
stands that existed historically
and provide a variety of
opportunities for use in the long
term .
Page III-24
Taylor South Timber Sale Project
PREPARERS
AND
CONTRIBUTERS
ID TEAM MEMBERS:
Manning, Brian
McMahon, Michael
Shepherd, Jay
Vessar, Marc
Wood, Will
Forest Management Specialist, DNRC , Stillwater State
Forest, P.0. Box 164, Olney, MT 59927
Management Forester/Project Leader, DNRC, Stillwater
State Forest, P.0. Box 164, Olney, MT 59927
Biologist, DNRC, Northwestern Land Office, 2250 Highway
93 N., Kalispell , MT 59904-0098
Hydrologist, DNRC, Northwestern Land Office, 2250 Highway
93 N., Kalispell, MT 59904-0098
Forest Economist, DNRC, Forest Management Bureau, 2705
Spurgin Road, Missoula, MT 59801
TECHNICAL SUPPORT AND ASSISTANCE:
Bailey, Steve
Beck, Margaret
Copple, Don
Gnauck, Pete
Hadlock, Gary
Kohler, Steve
Leeper, Donna
O'Connor, Kathryn
Sandman, Robert
Schultz, Bill
Traina, Bob
Technician, DNRC, Northwestern Land Office, 2250 Highway
93 N., Kalispell, MT 59904-0098
Graphics/Publications Technician, DNRC, Stillwater State
Forest, P.O. Box 164, Olney, MT 59927
Unit Fire Supervisor, DNRC, Stillwater State Forest,
P.O. Box 164, Olney, MT 59927
Lead Technician, DNRC, Northwestern Land Office, 2250
Highway 93 N. , Kalispell, MT 59904-0098
Forest Engineering Specialist, DNRC, Northwestern Land
Office, 2250 Highway 93 N. , Kalispell, MT 59904-0098
Forest Pest Management Specialist, DNRC, Forest
Management Bureau, 2705 Spurgin Road, Missoula, MT 59801
GIS Information System Support, DNRC, Forest Management
Bureau, 2705 Spurgin Road, Missoula, MT 59801
Forest Planner, DNRC, Forest Management Bureau, 2705
Spurgin Road, Missoula, MT 59801
Unit Manager, DNRC, Stillwater State Forest,
P.O. Box 164, Olney, MT 59927
State Land Management Supervisor, DNRC, Forest Management
Bureau, 2705 Spurgin Road, Missoula, MT 59801
Forester, DNRC, Stillwater State Forest,
P.O. Box 164, Olney, MT 59927
REFERENCES
Ake, K. 1995. Protocol Paper:
moving window motorized access
density analysis and security core
analysis for grizzly bear. USDA
Forest Service. Flathead National
Forest, Kalispell, MT. 9 p.
Aubry, K.B., G.M. Koehler, and John
R. Squires. 2000. Ecology of Canada
lynx in southern boreal forests.
Pages 373-396 in Ruggerio, L. F., K.
B.. Aubry, S.W. Buskirk [and
others] . 2000. Ecology and
Conservation of Lynx in the United
States. University Press of
Colorado, Boulder, CO. 480 p.
Beckley, Paul. 1994. The Role of
the Wood Products Industry in the
Economy of Flathead County, Montana,
An Estimate of the Effects on total
Employment Using Input -Output
Analysis. FNF , USFS.
[and others. 2000. Ecology and
Conservation of Lynx in the United
States. University Press of
Colorado, Boulder, CO. 480 p .
Cassirer, E.F., J.D. Reichel, R.L.
Wallen, and E.C. Atkinson. 1996.
DRAFT Harlequin Duck (Histrionicus
histrionicus) Conservation Strategy
for the U.S. Rocky Mountains. 53 p.
Dooling, O.J. and R.G. Eder. 1981.
An Asessment of Dwarf Mistletoes in
Montana. U SDA, Forest Service. 11
P-
Filip, Gregory, et al . 1983.
Indian Paint Fungus : A Method for
Recognizing and Reducing Hazard in
Advanced Grand and White Fir
Regeneration in Eastern Oregon and
Washington. USDA, Forest Service.
18 p.
Bruner, H. 1999. Research update.
Oregon State University, Department
of Fisheries and Wildlife,
Corvallis, Oregon.
Fisher, W.C., A . F . Bradley. 1987
Fire Ecology of Western Montana
Forest Habitat Types. USFS Gen.
Tech. Rept. INT-223
Bull, E.L. 1987. Ecology of the
pileated woodpecker in northeastern
Oregon. J. Wildl. Manage. 51:472-
481 .
Bull, E.L, R.C. Beckwith, and R.S.
Holthausen. 1992. Arthropod diet
of pileated woodpeckers in
northeastern Oregon. N orthwestern
Naturalist 73:42-45.
Buskirk S.W., Ruggiero L.F., and K.
B. Aubry [and others] . 2000.
Comparative ecology of lynx in North
America. Pages 397-418 in Ruggerio,
L. F., K.B.. Aubry, S.W. Buskirk
Flathead Basin Commission. 1991.
Flathead Basin forest Practices
Water Quality and Fisheries
Cooperative Program, Final Report.
Kalispell, MT.
Godfrey, Bruce and Beutler, Martin,
K. , 1993, Economic Multipliers: A
Comment. Range, 15(3), June 1993.
Haupt, H.F., et al . 1974. Forest
Hydrology Part II Hydrologic Effects
of Vegetation Manipulation. USDA
Foerst Service, Region 1. Missoula,
MT.
TAYLOR SOUTH TIMBER SALE PROJECT
Page 1
Hayward, G.D. and J. Verner, tech.
Editors. 1994. Flammulated,
boreal, and great gray owls in the
United States: A technical
conservation assessment. Gen. Tech.
Rep. RM-253. Fort Collins, CO:
USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain
Forest and Range Experimental
Station. 214 p., 3 maps.
Heinemeyer. K.S. 1993. Temporal
dynamics in the movements, habitat
use, activity, and spacing of
reintroduced fishers in northwestern
Montana. Missoula, MT: University
of Montana. M. S. Thesis. 104 p.
Hodges, K.E. 2000. The ecology of
snowshoe hares in southern boreal
and montane forests. Pages 163-206
in Ruggerio, L. F., K.B.. Aubry, S.
W. Buskirk [and others. 2000.
Ecology and Conservation of Lynx in
the United States. University Press
of Colorado, Boulder, CO. 480 p .
Jones, J.L. 1991. Habitat use of
fisher in northcentral Idaho.
Moscow, ID: University of Idaho.
M.S. Thesis. 147 p.
Keegan, Chuck, and Daniel Wichman,
1996, Bureau of Business and
Economic Research, University of
Montana, Missoula, MT. Letter on
Income and Employment to Will Wood,
DNRC .
Keegan, et al . 1995. Montana' s
Forest Products Industry "A
Descriptive Analysis: 1969-1994.
Bureau of Business and Economic
Research, University of Montana,
Missoula, MT.
Koehler, G.M. 1990. Population and
habitat characteristics of lynx and
snowshoe hares in north central
Washington. Can. J. Zool . 68: 845-
851 .
Koehler, G.M., M.G. Hornocker, and
H.S. Hash. 1979. Lynx movements
and habitat use in Montana.
Canadian Field-Naturalist 93:441-
442 .
Koehler, G.M. and J.D. Brittell.
1990. Managing spruce-fir habitat
for lynx and snowshoe hares .
Journal of Forestry 88:10-14.
Krahmer, R.W. 1989. Seasonal
Habitat Relationships of White-
tailed Deer in Northwestern Montana.
Missoula, MT: University of
Montana. M.S. Thesis. 104 p.
Losensky, B.J. 1997. Historical
Vegetation in Region One by Climatic
Section— Draft Report, Revision
Three . USDA Forest Service,
Northern Region, Missoula, MT
Losensky, B.J. 1997. Historical
Vegetation of Montana. Unpublished
report done under contract for
Montana Department of Natural
Resources and Conservation,
Missoula, MT
McClelland, B.R. and P.T.
McClelland. 1999. Pileated
woodpecker nest and roost trees in
Montana: links with old-growth and
forest "health" . Wildlife Society
Bulletin 27:846-857.
MBEWG (Montana Bald Eagle working
Group). 1991. Habitat Management
Guide for Bald Eagles in
Northwestern Montana. USDA Forest
Service Northern Region. 29 p.
MBEWG (Montana Bald Eagle working
Group) . 1994. Montana Bald Eagle
Management Plan. Bureau of
Reclamation, Billings, MT. 104 p.
Montana Department of Natural
Resources and Conservation. 1995.
Interim Guidance .
Montana Department of Natural
Resources and Conservation. Lazy
Swift Environmental Assessment.
1995 .
Page 2 REFERENCES
Montana Department of Natural
Resources and Conservation. 1996.
State Forest Land Management Plan.
Montana Natural Heritage Program.
2000. 1515 East Sixth Avenue,
Helena, MT 59620.
Mosconi, S. L., and R. L. Hutto.
1982 . The effect of grazing on the
land birds of a western Montana
riparian habitat. Pp . 221-233 in L.
Nelson and J. M. Peek (co-chairmen)
Proceedings of the Wildlife-
Livestock Relationships Symposium.
Forest, Wildlife and Range
Experiment Station, University of
Idaho, Moscow, Idaho.
Niccolucci, Mike, USFS Rocky
Mountain Research Station, Missoula,
MT personal communication with Will
Wood, 1996.
Paige, C. 1991. Report on
Whitefish Lake Bald Eagle Territory.
Tally Lake Ranger District, Flathead
National Forest. 10 p. with
appendices .
Pearson, D. E. 1999. Small Mammals
of the Bitterroot National Forest:
A literature review and annotated
bibliography. Gen. Tech. Rep. R
MRS-GTR-25 . Ogden, UT : USDA Forest
Service, Rocky Mountain Research
Station. 63 p.
Pfister, R.D., B.L. Kovalchik, S.F.
Arno, and R.C. Presby. 1977.
Forest Habiatat Types of Montana.
USDA, Forest Service Gen. Tech.
Rept. INT-34
Powell, R.A., and W.J. Zielinski.
1994. Fisher. pp 38-73 in L.F.
Ruggiero, K.B. Aubry, S.W. Buskirk,
L. J. Lyon, and W.J. Zielinski eds . ,
The scientific basis for conserving
forest carnivores (American marten,
fisher, lynx, and wolverine) in the
western United States. U.S. For.
Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-254. 184
P-
Roy, K.D. 1991. Ecology of
reintroduced fishers in the Cabinet
Mountains of Northwestern Montana.
Missoula, MT: University of Montana.
M. S. Thesis. 94 p.
Shipley Environmental. 1995. How
to write quality EISs and EAs :
Guidelines for NEPA documents.
Bountiful, UT: Franklin Quest Co.
WATSED— Water and Sediment Yields .
1991. USDA Forest Service, Region
1. Missoula, MT
Wicker, Ed and C.D. Leaphart . 1974.
Fire and Dwarf Mistletoe
Relationships in the Northern Rocky
Mountains . USDA - FS . Proceeding
Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference
and Fire and Land Management
Symposium. Pp . 279-297.
TAYLOR SOUTH TIMBER SALE PROJECT
Page 3
GLOSSARY
Administrative road use
Road use that is restricted to DNRC
personnel and contractors or for
purposes such as monitoring, forest
improvement, fire control, hazard
reduction, etc.
Airshed
An area defined by a certain set of
air conditions; typically a mountain
valley in which air movement is
constrained by natural conditions
such as topography.
differences among them, and the
communities and ecosystems in which
they occur.
Board foot
144 cubic inches of wood that is
equivalent to a piece of lumber 1-
inch thick by 1-foot wide by 1-foot
long .
Canopy
The upper level of a forest,
consisting of branches and leaves of
taller trees.
Appropriate conditions
Describes the set of forest
conditions determined by DNRC to
best meet the State Forest Land
Management Plan (SFLMP) objectives.
The four main components useful for
describing an appropriate mix of
conditions are cover type
proportions, age class
distributions, stand structural
characteristics, and the spatial
relationships of stands (size,
shape, location, etc.), all assessed
across the landscape.
Basal area
A measure of the number of square
feet of space occupied by the stem
of a tree .
Best Management Practices
(BMPs)
Guidelines to direct forest
activities, such as logging and road
construction, for the protection of
soils and water quality.
Canopy closure
The percentage of a given area
covered by the crowns, or canopies,
of trees .
Cavity
A hollow excavated in trees by birds
or other animals. Cavities are used
for roosting and reproduction by
many birds and mammals.
Compaction
Increase in soil density caused by
force exerted at the soil surface,
modifying aeration and nutrient
availability .
Connectivity
The quality, extent, or state of
being joined; unity; the opposite of
fragmentation .
Core area
See Security Habitat (grizzly
bears) .
Biodiversity
The variety of life and its
processes, including the variety of
living organisms, the genetic
Cover
See HIDING COVER and/or THERMAL
COVER .
TAYLOR SOUTH TIMBER SALE PROJECT
Page 1
Co -dominant tree
A tree which extends its crown into
the canopy, receiving direct
sunlight from above and limited
sunlight on its sides. One or more
sides are crowded by the crowns of
other trees .
Coarse down woody material
Dead trees within a forest stand
that have fallen and begun
decomposing on the forest floor.
Crown cover or crown closure
The percentage of a given area
covered by the crowns of trees .
Cull
A tree of such poor quality that it
has no merchantable value in terms
of the product being cut.
Cutting units
Areas of timber proposed for
harvest .
Cumulative effect
The impact on the environment that
results from the incremental impact
of the action when added to other
actions. Cumulative impacts can
also result from individually minor
actions, but collectively they may
compound the effect of the actions.
Direct effect
Effects on the environment that
occur at the same time and place as
the initial cause or action.
Discounting
In economics, a method of accounting
for the value of money over time,
its ability to earn interest, so
that costs and benefits occurring at
different points in time are brought
to a common date for comparison.
Ditch relief
A method of draining water from
roads using ditches and a corrugated
metal pipe. The pipe is placed just
under the road surface.
Dominant tree
Those trees within a forest stand
that extend their crowns above
surrounding trees and capture
sunlight from above and around the
crown .
Drain dip
A graded depression built into a
road to divert water and prevent
soil erosion.
Ecosystem
An interacting system of living
organisms and the land and water
that make up their environment; the
home place of all living things,
including humans.
Environmental effects
The impacts or effects of a project
on the natural and human
environment .
Equivalent clearcut area (ECA)
The total area within a watershed
where timber has been harvested,
including clearcuts, partial cuts,
roads, and burns.
Allowable ECA - The estimated
number of acres that can be
clearcut before stream channel
stability is affected.
Existing ECA - The number of
acres that have been
previously harvested taking
into account the degree of
hydrologic recovery that has
occurred due to revegetation.
Remaining ECA -The calculated
amount of harvest that may
occur without substantially
increasing the risk of causing
detrimental effects to stream-
channel stability.
Excavator piling
The piling of logging residue using
an excavator.
Page 2 GLOSSARY
Fire regimes
Describes the frequency, type, and
severity of wildfires. Examples
include: frequent, nonlethal
underburns; mixed-severity fires;
and stand-replacement or lethal
burns .
Forage
All browse and nonwoody plants
available to wildlife for grazing.
Forest improvement
The establishment and growing of
trees after a site has been
harvested. Associated activities
include site preparation, planting,
survival checks, regeneration
surveys, and stand thinnings; road
maintenance; resource monitoring;
noxious weed management; and right
of way acquisition on a State
Forest .
Fragmentation (forest)
A reduction of connectivity and
increase in sharp stand edges
resulting when large contiguous
areas of forest with similar age and
structural character are interrupted
through disturbance (e.g., stand-
replacement fire, timber
harvesting) .
Habitat
The place where a plant or animal
naturally or normally lives and
grows .
Habitat type
The place or type of site where a
plant or animal naturally or
normally lives and grows.
Hazard reduction
The abatement of a fire hazard by
processing logging residue with
methods such as separation, removal,
scattering, lopping, crushing,
piling and burning, broadcast
burning, burying, and chipping.
Hiding cover
Vegetation capable of hiding some
specified portion of a standing
adult mammal from human view at a
distance of 200 feet.
Historical forest condition
The condition of the forest prior to
settlement by Europeans.
Indirect effects
Secondary effects that occur in
locations other than the initial
action or significantly later in
time .
Intermediate trees
A characteristics of certain tree
species which allows them to survive
in relatively low light conditions,
although they may not thrive.
Interdisciplinary team
A team of resource specialists
brought together to analyze the
effects of a project on the
environment .
Landscape
An area of land with interacting
ecosystems .
Mitigation measure
An action or policy designed to
reduce or prevent detrimental
effects .
Moving-window analysis
A computer-based method that, in
this EIS , is used to quantify the
area influenced by roads in a study
area. Starting with the pixel in
the upper left corner of the
computerized subunit map, the
computer calculates how many miles
of road exist within a 1-square-mile
"window" around that pixel. It
moves to the next pixel and repeats
the process until the road density
is calculated in a 1 -square-mile
area around every pixel in the study
area. The number and percentage of
pixels in the study area that fall
into different road density classes
are then calculated by the computer.
TAYLOR SOUTH TIMBER SALE PROJECT Page 3
Based on research studying the
effects of roads on grizzly bears,
the effects of open roads are
measured by the percentage of the
pixels in the study area that have
at least 1.0 mile of open road in
the surrounding 1-square-mile
window. The effects of total roads
(open, gated, barricaded, bermed,
but not brushed, etc.) are measured
by the percentage of pixels in the
study area that have at least 2
miles of open or restricted roads in
the surrounding 1-square-mile
window .
Multistoried stands
Timber stands with two or more
distinct stories .
Nest site area (bald eagle)
The area in which human activity or
development may stimulate
abandonment of the breeding area,
affect successful completion of the
nesting cycle, or reduce
productivity. It is either mapped
for a specific nest, based on field
data, or, if that is impossible, is
defined as the area within a %-mile
radius of all nest sites in the
breeding area that have been active
within 5 years.
No-action alternative
The option of maintaining the status
quo and continuing present
management activities and/or not
implementing the proposed project.
Nonforested area
A naturally occurring area where
trees do not establish over the long
term, such as a bog, natural meadow,
avalanche chute, and alpine areas.
Old growth
Working definition - Old growth is
defined by DNRC as stands that are
150 years and older (140 for
lodgepole pine) and that exhibit a
range of structural attributes
associated with old age.
Conceptual definition - The term old
growth is sometimes used to describe
the later, or older, stages of
natural development of forest
stands. Characteristics associated
with old-growth generally include
relatively large old trees,
containing a wide variation in tree
sizes, exhibiting some degree of a
multi -storied structure, having
signs of decadence, such as rot and
spike-topped structure, and
containing standing large snags and
large down logs.
Old-growth network
A collection of timber stands that
are selected to meet a management
strategy that would retain and
recruit old growth over the long
term. Elements that are considered
in the selection of stands include
biodiversity, wildlife, the spatial
arrangement of stands and their
relationship to landscape patterns
and processes.
Overstory
The level of the forest canopy
including the crowns of dominant,
codominant and intermediate trees .
Patch
A discrete area of forest connected
to other discrete forest areas by
relatively narrow corridors; an
ecosystem element (such as
vegetation) that is relatively
homogeneous internally, but differs
from what surrounds it.
Potential nesting habitat
(bald eagle)
Sometimes referred to as 'suitable
nesting habitat', areas that have no
history of occupancy by breeding
bald eagles, but contain potential
to do so.
Project file
A public record of the analysis
process, including all documents
that form the basis for the project
analysis. The project file for the
Beaver Lake Timber Sale Project EIS
Page 4
GLOSSARY
is located at the Stillwater State
Forest office near Olney, Montana.
Redds
The spawning ground or nest of
various fish species.
Regeneration
The replacement of one forest stand
by another as a result of natural
seeding, sprouting, planting, or
other methods .
Residual stand
Trees that remain standing following
any cutting operation.
Road construction activities
In general, "road construction
activities" refers to all the
activities conducted while building
new roads, reconstructing existing
roads, and obliterating roads.
These activities may include any or
all of the following:
- road construction
- right-of-way clearing
- excavation of cut/fill material
- installation of road surface and
ditch drainage features
- installation of culverts at stream
crossings
- burning right-of-way slash
- hauling and installation of borrow
material
- blading and shaping road surfaces
Road improvements
Construction projects on an existing
road to improve ease of travel,
safety, drainage, and water quality.
Saplings
Trees 1.0 inches to 4.0 inches in
diameter at breast height.
Sawtimber trees
Trees with a minimum dbh of 9
inches .
Scarification
The mechanized gouging and ripping
of surface vegetation and litter to
expose mineral soil and enhance the
establishment of natural
regeneration .
Scoping
The process of determining the
extent of the environmental
assessment task. Scoping includes
public involvement to learn which
issues and concerns should be
addressed, and the depth of
assessment that will be required.
It also includes a review of other
factors such as laws, policies,
actions by other landowners, and
jurisdictions of other agencies that
may affect the extent of assessment
needed .
Security
For wild animals, the freedom from
the likelihood of displacement or
mortality due to human disturbance
or confrontation.
Security habitat (grizzly
bears)
An area of a minimum of 2,500 acres
that is at least 0.3 miles from
trails or roads with motorized
travel and high- intensity ,
nonmotorized use during the
nondenning period.
Seedlings
Live trees less than 1.0 inch dbh.
Sediment
In bodies of water, solid material,
mineral or organic, that is
suspended and transported or
deposited .
Sediment yield
The amount of sediment that is
carried to streams.
Serai
Refers to a biotic community that is
in a developmental, transitional
stage in ecological succession.
Shade intolerant
Describes tree species that
generally can only reproduce and
grow in the open or where the
overstory is broken and allows
TAYLOR SOUTH TIMBER SALE PROJECT Page 5
sufficient sunlight to penetrate.
Often these are serai species that
get replaced by more shade-tolerant
species during succession. In
Stillwater State State Forest,
shade-intolerant species generally
include ponderosa pine, western
larch, Douglas-fir, western white
pine, and lodgepole pine.
Shade tolerant
Describes tree species that can
reproduce and grow under the canopy
in poor sunlight conditions. These
species replace less shade- tolerant
species during succession. In
Stillwater State Forest, shade-
tolerant species generally include
subalpine fir, grand fir, Douglas-
fir, Engelmann spruce, and western
red cedar.
Silviculture
The art and science of managing the
establishment, composition, and
growth of forests to accomplish
specific objectives.
Site Preparation
A hand or mechanized manipulation of
a harvested site to enhance the
success of regeneration. Treatments
are intended to modify the soil,
litter, and vegetation to create
microclimate conditions conducive to
the establishment and growth of
desired species.
Slash
Branches, tops, and cull trees left
on the ground following a harvest.
Snag
A standing dead tree or the portion
of a broken off tree. Snags may
provide feeding and/or nesting sites
for wildlife.
Snow intercept
The action of trees and other plants
in catching falling snow and
preventing it from reaching the
ground .
Spur roads
Low standard roads, constructed to
meet minimum requirements for
harvest-related traffic.
Stand
An aggregation of trees occupying a
specific area and sufficiently
uniform in composition, age
arrangement, and condition so to be
distinguishable from the adjoining
forest .
Stand density
Number of trees per acre.
Stocking
The degree of occupancy of land by
trees as measured by basal area or
number of trees and as compared to a
stocking standard, which is an
estimate of either the basal area or
number of trees per acre required to
fully use the growth potential of
the land.
Stream gradient
The slope of a stream along its
course, usually expressed in
percentage indicating the amount of
drop per 100 feet.
Stumpage
The value of standing trees in the
forest. Sometimes used to mean the
commercial value of standing trees.
Substrate scoring
Rating of streambed particle sizes.
Succession
The natural series of replacement of
one plant (and animal) community by
another over time in the absence of
disturbance .
Suppressed
The condition of a tree
characterized by a low-growth rate
and low vigor due to competition
with overtopping trees.
Page 6 GLOSSARY
Texture
A term used in visual assessments
indicating distinctive or
identifying features of the
landscape depending on distance.
Thermal cover
For white-tailed deer, thermal cover
has 70% or more coniferous canopy
closure at least 20 feet above the
ground, generally requiring trees to
be 40 feet or taller.
For elk and mule deer, thermal cover
has 50% or more coniferous canopy
closure at least 20 feet above the
ground, generally requiring trees to
be 40 feet or taller.
Timber-harvesting activities
In general, timber-harvesting
activities refers to all the
activities conducted to facilitate
timber removal before, during, and
after the timber is removed. These
activities may include any or all of
the following:
felling standing trees and
bucking into logs
skidding logs to a landing
processing, sorting, and loading
logs at the landing
hauling logs to a mill
slashing and sanitizing residual
vegetation damaged during logging
machine piling logging slash
burning logging slash
scarification, site preparation
planting trees
Transaction Evidence Equation
Multivariant regression based on
past sales and market variables.
Under story
The trees and other woody species
growing under a, more-or-less ,
continuous cover of branches and
foliage formed collectively by the
overstory of adjacent trees and
other woody growth.
Uneven -aged stand
Various ages and sizes of trees
growing together on a uniform site.
Ungulates
Hoofed mammals, such as mule deer,
white-tailed deer, elk, moose, which
are mostly herbivorous and many are
horned or antlered.
Vigor
The degree of health and growth of a
tree or stand.
Watershed
The region or area drained by a
river or other body of water.
Water yield
The average annual runoff for a
particular watershed expressed in
acre-feet .
Water yield increase
An increase in average annual runoff
over natural conditions due to
forest canopy removal.
Windthrow
A tree pushed over by wind.
Windthrows (blowdowns) are common
among shallow rooted species and in
areas where cutting or natural
disturbances have reduced the
density of a stand so individual
trees remain unprotected from the
force of the wind.
TAYLOR SOUTH TIMBER SALE PROJECT
Page 7
Copies of this document with its appendices were published at an approximate
cost of $13.00 per copy for printing and $3.20 for mailing.
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND CONSERVATION
STILLWATER UNIT OFFICE - STILLWATER STATE FOREST
P.O. BOX 164
OLNE Y , 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.
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11