Environmental Assessment

Transcription

1 Environmental Assessment United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service June 13, 2015 Georgia Aster and Shortleaf Pine Management Sumter National Forest Enoree Ranger District Chester, Newberry, and Union Counties South Carolina

2 Location of Action: Type of Document: Lead Agency: Responsible Official: Contact Person: Enoree Ranger District, Sumter National Forest Environmental Assessment USDA Forest Service Elizabeth LeMaster, District Ranger Jeffrey Magniez, Zone Wildlife Biologist 810 Buncombe Street Edgefield, SC Telephone: (803) FAX: (803) For More Information Contact: District Ranger Enoree Ranger District 20 Work Center Road Whitmire, SC Phone: USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. To file a complaint of discrimination, write: USDA, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, Office of Adjudication, 1400 Independence Ave., SW, Washington, DC or call (866) (Toll-free Customer Service), (800) (Local or Federal relay), (866) (Relay voice users).

3 Table of Contents Chapter 1. Purpose and Need for Action Introduction Purpose and Need Proposed Action Management Direction Relevant to This Project Decision Framework Public Involvement Issues... 5 Chapter 2. Alternatives, Including the Proposed Action Alternative 1: No Action Alternative 2: Proposed Action Alternative Connected Actions Common to All Action Alternatives Design Criteria Common to All Action Alternatives Comparison of Alternatives Chapter 3. Environmental Impacts of the No-action and Action Alternatives Physical Environment Water and Riparian Resources Soil Resources Air Quality Climate Change and Carbon Storage Biological Environment Forest Vegetation Non-native Invasive Plants Rare Communities Wildlife: Management Indicator Species Proposed, Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive Species Migratory Birds Aquatic Communities Social Environment Recreation and Visual Resources Cultural Resources Economics Environmental Justice and the Protection of Children Human Health and Safety Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources Chapter 4. Consultation and Coordination Forest Service Interdisciplinary Team Members Other Forest Service Personnel Consulted Other Agencies Consulted/Tribal Consultation References Appendix 1: Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation Appendix 2: Treatment Maps i

4

5 Chapter 1. Purpose and Need for Action 1.1 Introduction The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended, requires consideration of the environmental impacts for major federal actions. This environmental assessment (EA) has been prepared to ensure that the environmental consequences of the proposed project are fully considered and that the EA is provided to the public for their review and comment and has been prepared pursuant to NEPA in accordance with the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations as contained in 40 CFR Parts 1500 to 1508, which directs federal agencies on how to implement the provisions of NEPA. This EA documents two fundamental NEPA mandated requirements. One is a careful, complete, and analytic study of the impacts of any proposal that has the potential to affect the environment, and alternatives to that proposal, well before any decisions are made. The other involves the mandate that agencies be diligent in involving any interested or affected members of the public in the NEPA process. This EA discloses the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts that would result from the implementation of the proposed action, connected actions, and alternatives. The EA is organized into four parts: Chapter 1 Purpose and Need for Action: This section includes information on the purpose of and need for the project and the agency s proposed action. This section also details how the Forest Service informed the public of the proposal and the key issues developed. Chapter 2 Alternatives: This section provides a more detailed description of the agency s proposed action as well as alternative methods for achieving the stated purpose. The alternative was developed based on key issues. This discussion also includes design criteria and a comparison of the alternatives. Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences: This section describes the environmental effects of implementing the proposed action and other alternatives. The analysis is organized into three environmental topic areas: physical, biological, and social. Within each section, the affected environment is described first, followed by the comparison of the other alternatives that follow. Chapter 4 Consultation and Coordination: This section provides a list of people who worked on the interdisciplinary team and EA. It also lists those who responded during public scoping and required consultation with other federal and state agencies. 1

6 Sumter National Forest Additional documentation, including more detailed analyses of project-area resources may be found in the project planning record located at the Enoree Ranger District in Whitmire, South Carolina. 1.2 Purpose and Need The purpose of this project is to improve habitat conditions for existing Georgia aster (Symphyotrichum georgianum) populations and to expand the distribution of the species on national forest land. Georgia aster is a flowering perennial plant designated as a sensitive species by the US Forest Service since 1994, and by the US Fish and Wildlife Service as a candidate for federal listing in 1999 (Federal Register 1999). A relict species of the woodland plant community, Georgia aster requires full sun for successful flowering and sexual reproduction. Although a good competitor among early-successional species, Georgia aster tends to decline when shaded by woody plants. Individuals can persist for an undetermined length of time in the shade, but plants in this condition rarely flower and usually reproduce asexually by rhizomes. Based on 2013 monitoring data, nearly 6,000 plants from twelve populations are known to occur on the Sumter National Forest. On the Enoree Ranger District, there are seven populations with a total of approximately 3,200 plants. Currently, all known populations of Georgia aster on national forest land are located along roadsides and utility rights-ofway (ROWs) where current land management practices mimic natural disturbance regimes. At these locations the species is vulnerable to road shoulder grading, mowing during seed set, woody succession, competition by non-native invasive species, unauthorized herbicide application, and other incompatible vegetation management practices. By expanding the distribution of Georgia aster into forest-interior sites, threats associated with road and utility ROWs would be reduced. The purpose of this project is also to increase the amount of shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata) on national forest land. In the southeastern United States, shortleaf pine is the most prevalent of the southern pines (Lawson and Kitchens 1983). However, historical logging and land clearing reduced its range in the southeast. During the 1960s, loblolly pine (P. taeda) largely replaced native shortleaf pine in the piedmont because of the species susceptibility to littleleaf disease, which is prevalent on severely eroded clay soils. There are approximately 2,600 acres of shortleaf pine forest types on the Enoree Ranger District; this represents less than two percent of the Sumter National Forest. Restoring shortleaf pine would increase the occurrence of this uncommon species. Woodland management to benefit Georgia aster and the restoration of shortleaf pine would result in enhanced habitat conditions for many species of wildlife. Many wildlife species associated with woodlands such as northern bobwhite quail (Colinus virginianus), wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo), and prairie warbler (Dendroica discolor) are experiencing population declines across their range and on the Sumter National Forest. From 1992 to 2004, northern bobwhite quail and prairie warbler populations on the Francis Marion-Sumter National Forest experienced annual declines of 10.0% and 8.1%, respectively (La Sorte et al., 2007). Populations of wild turkey suffered dramatic declines in the early 1900s. Aggressive stocking programs successfully reintroduced this species to most of its eastern range where populations continue to increase. Because open habitats and early-successional conditions are one of the most limited habitat types on the 2

7 Enoree Ranger District, this project would improve habitat quantity and quality for wildlife species associated with woodlands. 1.3 Proposed Action The Sumter National Forest is proposing activities to (1) enhance existing Georgia aster populations, (2) expand Georgia aster at new sites, and (3) restore shortleaf pine communities on sites that are currently dominated by loblolly pine. Proposed activities would also improve habitat for wildlife species. Proposed activities include: Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing woodland conditions, natural openings, and canopy gaps; Planting Georgia aster and other native herbaceous plants to supplement existing understory; Controlling understory and midstory woody species such as pines, sweetgum, and maples using manual and mechanical methods; Controlling understory and midstory woody species such as pines, sweetgum, and maples using herbicides (imazapyr and triclopyr); and Shortleaf pine restoration. See Table in Chapter 2 for a list of proposed treatment stands. Prescribed burning would take place within treatment stands on a two to five year interval to maintain open woodland conditions. Prescribed burning is covered under a separate NEPA decision. 1.4 Management Direction Relevant to This Project This project provides an opportunity to work toward the forest management goals as described in the Revised Land and Resource Management Plan, Sumter National Forest (Forest Plan). Forest Plan guidelines relevant to this project are summarized below: Goal 8 Maintain and restore natural communities and habitats in amounts, arrangements and conditions capable of supporting viable populations of existing native and desired non-native plants, aquatic and wildlife species within the planning area. Objective 8.02 Provide 8,000 11,000 acres of woodlands in the piedmont and 4,000 5,000 acres of woodlands on the mountains on dryxeric sites in woodland, savanna, open grassland or shrubland conditions 3

8 Sumter National Forest with fire associated rare communities preferred over the 10-year planning period. Objective 8.04 Increase shortleaf pine and shortleaf pine/oak communities on 2,000 to 10,000 acres in the piedmont. This will be done on sites with low risk of littleleaf disease. Goal 10 Contribute to the conservation and recovery of federally-listed species and take necessary actions to maintain viable populations of all species thereby avoiding the need to list those species. Objective Maintain or restore at least 8 self-sustaining populations for Georgia aster (Symphyotrichum georgianum) and 1 population for Florida gooseberry on the piedmont districts, and the habitat that support them. Proposed activities occur in the following management prescriptions as identified in the Forest Plan: 4.G.1 Calhoun Experimental Forest 5.C Designated Utility Corridor 7.E.1 Dispersed Recreation Areas (Piedmont Only) 7.E.2 Dispersed Recreation Areas with Vegetation Management 8.B.2 Woodland and Grassland/Savanna Habitats 9.G.2 Restoration of Upland Oak-Hickory and Mixed Pine-Oak-Hickory Forests 10.B High Quality Forest Products (Piedmont Only) Georgia aster and shortleaf pine management is consistent with these management prescriptions. 1.5 Decision Framework The responsible official (District Ranger) will decide: 1. Whether to proceed with an action alternative or the no-action alternative, and 2. Whether the alternative that is selected would have a significant impact on the quality of the human environment. If the responsible official determines that the impact of the selected alternative is not significant then a finding of no significant impact (FONSI) will be prepared. Significant impacts on the quality of the human environment would require we prepare an environmental impact statement [NEPA, (c) and (e)]. The responsible official s decision will be documented in a decision notice (FSH, , 43.2). 4

9 1.6 Public Involvement The proposal is listed in the Planning, Appeals, and Litigation System (PALS) database as project number The proposal was sent in a letter to interested individuals and agencies for comment during the 30-day scoping notice and comment period that began August 24, 2013, and ended on September 23, One comment was received during the scoping/comment period. 1.7 Issues Issues are statements of cause and effect, linking environmental effects to actions. Key issues are unresolved conflicts that lead to the development of other action alternatives. Non-key issues are those that meet one or more of the following conditions: (1) they are outside the scope of the proposed action; (2) they are already decided by law, regulation, Forest Plan, or higher level decision; (3) they are irrelevant to the decision to be made; or (4) they are conjectural and not supported by scientific or factual evidence. The Forest Service interdisciplinary team identified nine key issues that were used to develop Alternative 3. No non-key issues were identified. One comment was received by the public during the scoping/comment period. The comment addressed site preparation techniques for shortleaf pine restoration. The comment does not raise any key issues and will be addressed in the effects analysis. Key Issues Issue 1 Commercial timber sales Issue: The proposed action includes the select removal of individual trees to enhance existing woodland conditions, natural openings, and canopy gaps. The proposed action states that this activity is not intended to result in commercial timber sales, but is rather a means to improve habitat conditions at sites where Georgia aster and other woodland plants would be planted. Concern was expressed that the option to commercially harvest timber in some of the proposed treatment stands should be included in an action alternative. Timber harvesting would generate income that would be invested in shortleaf pine restoration and the enhancement Georgia aster habitat. Response: Alternative 3 was developed in response to this issue. A list of proposed treatment stands was evaluated to determine suitability for timber harvest and the establishment of Georgia aster and other woodland plants. In Alternative 3, thinning of timber (60-70 BA) to create habitat for Georgia aster and other woodland species would occur in compartment 11, stand 3 (60 acres). Thinning may also occur within portions of shortleaf pine restoration stands where local soil conditions are not suitable for shortleaf pine restoration but would improve habitat conditions for northern bobwhite quail, wild turkey, and prairie warbler. 5

10 Sumter National Forest Issue 2 Broadcast seeding of Georgia aster Issue: The proposed action includes hand planting containerized Georgia aster plants. An issue was raised that broadcast seeding was also needed as an option to establish Georgia aster. Response: Alternative 3 was developed in response to this issue. Broadcast seeding (hand-sowing) would be included as an option to establish Georgia aster. Issue 3 Duration and type of herbicide treatments used to control understory and midstory woody species Issue: The proposed action states that up to three applications of herbicide would be done over a five-year period in order to control understory and midstory woody species. An issue was raised that to increase the effectiveness of control efforts, up to three applications of herbicides would be done over a ten-year period. The proposed action also states that pines would be controlled by herbicides and that triclopyr ester (Garlon 4 or equivalent) would be used as a directed foliar spray. An issue was raised that pine would be more effectively controlled using manual and mechanical methods and prescribed burning, and that triclopyr ester was not appropriate to be used as a directed foliar spray. Response: Alternative 3 was developed in response to this issue. Up to three applications of directed foliar spray or stem injection methods would be done over a ten-year period. Herbicides would not be used to control pines in Alternative 3. Instead, they would be controlled using manual and mechanical methods and prescribed burning. Triclopyr ester (Garlon 4 or equivalent) would not be used as a directed foliar spray. Issue 4 Planting density of shortleaf pine and the use of herbicides for site preparation and release of planted shortleaf pine Issue: In the proposed action, shortleaf pine seedlings would be hand-planted on a 12 foot by 12 foot spacing. An issue was raised that a more narrow spacing should be used to improve wood quality, to allow for an additional harvest (generating additional funding for projects), and to offset the loss of seedlings within the first and second growing seasons. The proposed action also specifies the use of imazapyr (such as Arsenal AC or equivalent) and triclopyr (Garlon 3A or equivalent) for site preparation and release of planted shortleaf pine. An issue was raised that additional herbicides (glyphosate and aminopyralid) would provide more effective establishment of shortleaf pine seedlings. Response: Alternative 3 was developed in response to this issue. Shortleaf pine seedlings would be hand-planted on a 7 foot by 10 foot spacing. Glyphosate (such as Accord XRT II or equivalent) and aminopyralid (such as Milestone or equivalent) would be used for site preparation and release of planted shortleaf pine seedlings. Issue 5 Coordination is needed to avoid conflict with Chester County Stream Restoration Project Issue: The Forest Service is concurrently developing the Chester County Stream and Riparian Restoration/Enhancement Project. There is overlap in proposed activities between treatment stands in the proposed action and treatment stands in the Chester County Stream and Riparian Restoration/Enhancement Project. An issue was raised that 6

11 coordination between the two project proposals was needed to avoid any management conflicts. Response: Coordination would take place between the two projects to ensure project purpose and needs are met. Mitigation measures and design criteria are included with both projects to minimize potential conflicts. Issue 6 Visual concerns of shortleaf pine restoration adjacent to the Woods Ferry Horse Trail Issue: Some of the proposed shortleaf pine restoration stands in compartment 9 overlay segments of the Woods Ferry Horse Trail. An issue was raised that coordination was needed to avoid visual impacts to existing and planned segments of the Woods Ferry Horse Trail. Response: In order to address visual impacts to the Woods Ferry Horse Trail, the following actions would take place in Alternative 3: (1) Shortleaf pine restoration would not take place in compartment 9, stand 1. Instead, select removal of individual trees would occur to enhance existing conditions; Georgia aster and other species would be planted to supplement the existing understory; manual and mechanical methods and herbicides would be used to control woody species; and prescribed burning would take place on a 3- to 5-year interval under an already approved NEPA decision; (2) Portions of compartment 9, stands 3, 5, and 7 that visually impact the Woods Ferry Horse Trail would be dropped from the project; and (3) A design criteria would be incorporated to further reduce visual impacts of proposed treatments to the Woods Ferry Horse Trail. Issue 7 Include compartment 68, stand 37 to the list of treatment stands Issue: Compartment 68, stand 37 includes a known occurrence of Georgia aster. This stand was inadvertently omitted from the proposed action during public scoping. In order to improve habitat conditions for existing Georgia aster, expand the distribution of the species, and restore shortleaf pine, this stand should be included in the project. Response: Alternative 3 was developed in response to this issue. The following activities would occur in compartment 68, stand 37: shortleaf pine restoration, including the use of herbicides for site preparation and release of crop trees. Other activities that would occur in this stand include: planting Georgia aster and other native herbaceous plants to supplement existing desirable understories; controlling understory and midstory species using manual/mechanical methods; and, applying herbicides to control woody species. In those portions of compartment 68, stand 37 that may not be suitable for shortleaf pine restoration, timber thinning (60-70 BA) could take place, or the select removal of individual trees may take place to enhance Georgia aster habitat. Prescribe burning on a 3- to 5-year interval would take place under an already approved NEPA decision. Issue 8 Additional stands for shortleaf pine restoration Issue: Additional stands have been identified during field review of the proposed action and should be included so that existing shortleaf pine is not lost from these sites over time. Additional stands were selected for shortleaf pine restoration based on the Campbell and Copeland (1954) numerical system for field rating sites for littleleaf disease hazard 7

12 Sumter National Forest based on soil characteristics. Forest management would improve site conditions and allow for regeneration of shortleaf pine for the long term. Response: Compartment 68, stands 7, 10, and 37 (161 acres total) were identified as being suitable for shortleaf pine restoration. In Alternative 3, these stands would be included for shortleaf pine restoration, including the use of herbicides for site preparation and release of crop trees. Other activities that would occur in these stands include: planting Georgia aster and other native herbaceous plants to supplement existing desirable understories and controlling understory and midstory species using manual/mechanical methods; and, applying herbicides to control woody species. In those portions of these compartments that may not be suitable for shortleaf pine restoration, timber thinning (60-70 BA) would take place, or the select removal of individual trees would be done to enhance Georgia aster habitat. Prescribed burning on a 3- to 5-year interval would take place in stands 7 and 10 (analyzed in alternative 3); prescribed burning in stand 37 would take place under a separate NEPA decision. Issue 9 Prescribed burning in compartment 68, stands 7 and 10 Issue: Prescribed burning in compartment 68, stands 7 and 10 is not covered under an existing NEPA decision. Controlled burning in these stands would enhance habitat for the existing Georgia aster occurrences. An issue was raised that a prescribed burning burn block was needed to be established that would cover these stands. Response: Alternative 3 was developed in response to this issue. A 362-acre burn block has been identified, which would be burned on a 3- to 5-year burn interval and incorporated with other prescribed burning in the area. 8

13 Chapter 2. Alternatives, Including the Proposed Action This chapter describes and compares the alternatives considered for the Georgia Aster and Shortleaf Pine Management Project. It includes a description of each alternative considered. This section also presents the alternatives in comparative form. 2.1 Alternative 1: No Action Under the No Action alternative, current management practices would continue within existing Georgia aster sites. Populations of Georgia aster on the Enoree Ranger District would remain vulnerable to management along road and utility ROWs. Under the No Action alternative, enhancement of existing populations of Georgia aster would not occur, expansion of Georgia aster at new sites would not take place, and shortleaf pine restoration would not occur. Existing shortleaf pine stands would continue to decline and be replaced by other species. 2.2 Alternative 2: Proposed Action The proposed action is designed to (1) enhance existing Georgia aster populations, (2) expand Georgia aster at new sites, and (3) restore shortleaf pine communities on sites that are currently dominated by loblolly pine. The proposed action would also improve habitat for wildlife species. Following is a detailed description of the proposed actions to meet the Purpose and Need. See Table for a summary of proposed treatment stands and Appendix 2 for maps of treatment stands. Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing woodland conditions, natural openings, and canopy gaps (1,253 acres) Individual trees would be felled or girdled with chainsaws or with hand tools. This activity is not intended to result in commercial timber sales, but rather is a means to improve habitat conditions at sites where Georgia aster and other woodland plants would be planted. Tree removal would be limited to patches no greater than one acre in size and would not exceed more than one patch per ten acres. Planting Georgia aster and other native herbaceous plants to supplement existing understory (1,348 acres) Containerized Georgia aster plants would be hand-planted within expansion areas. Planting would require hand-digging planting holes approximately 6 to one foot deep. Georgia aster would be planted in patches within project stands, as opposed to evenly distributing plants across an entire stand. Patches would vary in size from several dozen plants to hundreds of plants. All Georgia aster planted within the project area would come from local ecotypes. Native grasses (such as Andropogon gerardii, Schizachyrium scoparium, and Sorghastrum nutans) and forbs (such as Asclepias spp., Liatris spp., and Baptisia spp.) may also be established to enhance native plant diversity. Native grasses and forbs would 9

14 Sumter National Forest be hand-sown (seeds), no-till planted (seeds), or hand-planted (containerized plants). All native grasses and forbs planted within the project area would come from local ecotypes. Controlling understory and midstory woody species such as pines, sweetgum, and maples using manual and mechanical methods (1,563 acres) Manual methods (e.g., hand tools and chainsaws) and mechanical methods (e.g., mowing and masticating) would be used to control the sprouts, seedling, and saplings of woody species (such as pines, sweetgum, maples, elms) to restore and maintain open understories and midstories in project stands. Controlling understory and midstory woody species such as pines, sweetgum, and maples using herbicides (imazapyr and triclopyr) (1,563 acres) Imazapyr and triclopyr would be used to control woody species (such as pines, sweetgum, maples, elms) in the understory and midstory that compete with Georgia aster, shortleaf pine, and other desirable vegetation with project stands. Directed foliar spray or stem injection methods would be used. Up to three applications would be done over a five-year period. Directed foliar spray would be applied using backpack sprayers. The application would be a low volume direct spray where foliage of target species is sprayed to speckle the leaf surface. Per gallon of mix water, the herbicide mixture for this application is 0.5 ounce Arsenal AC or equivalent 1 (imazapyr), 2 ounces of Garlon 4 or equivalent (triclopyr ester), 0.5 ounce surfactant and spray pattern indicator. Stem injections would be applied with hatchets and squirt bottles, or similar application devices, using a mixture of 64 ounces water, 6 ounces Arsenal AC or equivalent (imazapyr) and 64 ounces Garlon 3A or equivalent (triclopyr amine). Stem injection would be applied to target vegetation too large to treat with a foliar spray. Shortleaf pine restoration Approximately 284 acres of loblolly pine stands (compartment 9, stands 1, 3, 5, 7 and 10) would be converted to shortleaf pine. The selection of these stands is based on the Campbell and Copeland (1954) numerical system for field rating sites for littleleaf disease hazard based on soil characteristics. Shortleaf pine would be restored within these stands using the clearcutting with reserves method. This is a silvicultural method in which a varying number of reserve trees are not harvested to attain goals other than regeneration. In this case, the long-term goal is to manage the area as a shortleaf pine woodland. All merchantable loblolly pine trees would be removed. Healthy shortleaf pine and desirable mast-producing hardwoods (such as oaks and hickories) would also be retained. Following the timber harvest, the shortleaf pine restoration stands would be treated with herbicides (chemical site preparation) during the growing season (June through September). After the chemical site preparation, burning (March-June) would be used to eliminate loblolly pine seedlings. Once the loblolly pine seedlings have been controlled 1 Commercial herbicides represent those formulations that are commonly used for proposed forestry treatments. However, other equivalent formulations may be used during project implementation treatments. Equivalent formulations would include any other brand name herbicides that have an equivalent proportion of the specified active ingredient. 10

15 (through burning and or manual treatments), shortleaf pine seedlings would be handplanted on a 12 foot by 12 foot spacing. Planting of shortleaf pine seedlings would take advantage of gaps created during timber harvest since desirable overstory trees would be left as reserves. This would result in a two-aged structure in most of the stands. Herbicides and manual treatments would be used after loblolly pine harvest to prepare the site for shortleaf pine regeneration. A second herbicide treatment known as a chemical release would be done about three to five years after trees are planted. The release treatment would be used to reduce competition to the desired understory trees so they could become dominant in the stands. Table Summary of Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Compartments and Stands Comp Stand Acres Comment 1 Proposed Action Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species Shortleaf Pine restoration; use herbicides for site preparation and release of crop trees; plant Georgia aster and other species; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Shortleaf Pine restoration; use herbicides for site preparation and release of crop trees; plant Georgia aster and other species; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Shortleaf Pine restoration; use herbicides for site preparation and release of crop trees; plant Georgia aster and other species; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision 11

16 Sumter National Forest Comp Stand Acres Comment 1 Proposed Action Shortleaf Pine restoration; use herbicides for site preparation and release of crop trees; plant Georgia aster and other species; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Shortleaf Pine restoration; use herbicides for site preparation and release of crop trees; plant Georgia aster and other species; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 2- to 3-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 2- to 3-year interval under separate NEPA decision 12

17 Comp Stand Acres Comment 1 Proposed Action Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision 13

18 Sumter National Forest Comp Stand Acres Comment 1 Proposed Action Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision , 3 Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 2- to 3-year interval under separate NEPA decision Plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 2- to 3-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 2- to 3-year interval under separate NEPA decision Total 1,563 1 Comment: 1 = Stand is suitable for Georgia aster management in current condition; 2 = Existing vegetation management project (under separate NEPA) will occur in this stand, making it suitable for Georgia aster management; 3 = Georgia aster currently occurs in this stand; 4 = soil conditions are suitable for shortleaf pine restoration 2.3 Alternative 3 Alternative 3 was developed to address key issues identified in Chapter 1. The proposed treatments for Alternative 3 are similar to the Proposed Action (Alternative 2), with the following exceptions: 1) Commercial thinning of timber to create habitat for Georgia aster and other woodland species would occur in portions of compartment 11, stand 3 (60 acres). 2) Broadcast seeding (hand-sowing) would be included as an option to establish Georgia aster. 3) In order to control understory and midstory woody species, up to three applications of directed foliar spray or stem injection methods would be done over a ten-year period; triclopyr ester (Garlon 4 or equivalent) would not be used as a directed foliar spray; 14

19 and pines would not be controlled using herbicides. Pine control in Alternative 3 would rely on manual and mechanical methods and prescribed burning. 4) Compartment 68, stand 37 would be included in Alternative 3 and would be restored to shortleaf pine. 5) Approximately 435 acres of loblolly pine stands (compartment 9, stands 3, 5, 7, and 10 and compartment 68, stands 7, 10, and 37) would be converted to shortleaf pine in areas where suitable soils exist. Spacing of planted shortleaf pine would be done on a 7 foot by 10 foot spacing. In addition to imazapyr and triclopyr (as stated in Alternative 2), glyphosate and aminopyralid would also be used for site preparation and release of planted shortleaf pine. Stands would be treated with herbicides for release approximately 1-2 years after initial restoration efforts. 6) The prescription for compartment 9, stand 1 would be changed to select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions, planting Georgia aster and other species to supplement existing understory, and using manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species in the understory. 7) A 364-acre burn block, which includes two treatment stands (compartment 68, stands 7 and 10), has been identified and would be burned on a 3- to 5-year burn interval. Following is a detailed description of Alternative 3. See Table for a summary of Alternative 3 treatment stands and Appendix 2 for maps of treatment stands. Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing woodland conditions, natural openings, and canopy gaps (1,160 acres) Individual trees would be felled or girdled with chainsaws or with hand tools. This activity is not intended to result in commercial timber sales, but is rather a means to improve habitat conditions at sites where Georgia aster and other woodland plants would be planted. Tree removal would be limited to patches no greater than one acre in size and would not exceed more than one patch per ten acres. Thinning of timber to create habitat for Georgia aster and other woodland species (60 acres) The residual basal area in those parts of the stands following thinning would range from BA. Dominant and co-dominant pines would be left as well as desirable hard mast species (e.g., oaks and hickories) and soft mast species (e.g., black cherry, persimmon, and dogwood). If thinning is not feasible, then select removal of individual trees may take place to enhance existing conditions. Other activities that could occur in these stands include planting Georgia aster and other native herbaceous plants to supplement existing understory and controlling understory/midstory woody species using manual/mechanical methods and herbicides. Planting Georgia aster and other native herbaceous plants to supplement existing understory (1,547 acres) Georgia aster plants would be hand-sown (seeds) or handplanted (containerized plants) within expansion areas. Planting would require hand- 15

20 Sumter National Forest digging planting holes approximately 6 to one foot deep. Georgia aster would be planted in patches within project stands, as opposed to evenly distributing plants across an entire stand. Patches would vary in size from several dozen plants to hundreds of plants. All Georgia aster planted within the project area would come from local ecotypes. Native grasses (such as Andropogon gerardii, Schizachyrium scoparium, and Sorghastrum nutans) and forbs (such as Asclepias spp., Liatris spp., and Baptisia spp.) may also be established to enhance native plant diversity. Native grasses and forbs would be hand-sown (seeds), no-till planted (seeds), or hand-planted (containerized plants). All native grasses and forbs planted within the project area would come from local ecotypes. Controlling understory and midstory woody species such as pines, sweetgum, and maples using manual and mechanical methods (1,681 acres) Manual methods (e.g., hand tools and chainsaws) and mechanical methods (e.g., mowing and masticating) would be used to control the sprouts, seedling, and saplings of woody species (such as pines, sweetgum, maples, elms) to restore and maintain open understories and midstories in project stands. Controlling understory and midstory woody species such as sweetgum, and maples using herbicides (imazapyr and triclopyr) (1,681 acres) Imazapyr and triclopyr would be used to control woody species (such as sweetgum, maples, elms) in the understory and midstory that compete with Georgia aster, shortleaf pine, and other desirable vegetation with project stands. Directed foliar spray or stem injection methods would be used. Up to three applications would be done over a ten-year period. Directed foliar spray would be applied using backpack sprayers. The application would be a low volume direct spray where foliage of target species is sprayed to speckle the leaf surface. Per gallon of mix water, the herbicide mixture for this application is 0.5 ounce Arsenal AC or equivalent (imazapyr), 0.5 ounce of Cidekick adjuvant or equivalent, and spray pattern indicator. Stem injections would be applied with hatchets and squirt bottles, or similar application devices, using a mixture of 64 ounces water, 6 ounces Arsenal AC or equivalent (imazapyr) and 64 ounces Garlon 3A or equivalent (triclopyr amine). Stem injection would be applied to target vegetation too large to treat with a foliar spray. Shortleaf pine restoration Approximately 386 acres of loblolly pine stands (compartment 9, stands 3, 5, 7, and 10 and compartment 68, stands 7, 10, and 37 would be converted to shortleaf pine. The selection of these stands is based on the Campbell and Copeland (1954) numerical system for field rating sites for littleleaf disease hazard based on soil characteristics. Shortleaf pine restoration would require the removal of all loblolly pine while retaining healthy shortleaf pine and desirable mast-producing hardwoods (such as oaks and hickories). It is anticipated that not enough shortleaf pine would be left to restock the stands, so planting shortleaf pine seedlings would be needed. Shortleaf pine seedlings 16

21 would be hand-planted on a 7 foot by 10 foot spacing after the unwanted competition has been controlled through burning, chemical treatment, and/or manual treatments. Prior to timber harvest, burning would be used to reduce loblolly pine seedlings. Following the timber harvest, the shortleaf pine restoration stands would be chemically site prepared during the growing season (May through September) to help control unwanted competition (sweetgum, yellow poplar, maple, loblolly pine). Herbicide site preparation consists of the use of herbicides containing the active ingredients Imazapyr (such as Arsenal AC or equivalent) and Triclopyr (Garlon 3A or Garlon 4 or equivalents). The herbicides would be applied at label rates to control sprouting of unwanted tree species. The objective of the herbicide treatment is to promote the growth of selected species by limiting competition from non-preferred species (i.e., early pioneering/soft mast species). Preferred species, including shortleaf pine, oak, and hickory, would be selectively released from competition from loblolly pine, sweetgum, yellow poplar, red maple, sourwood, winged elm, and blackgum. Herbicide treatments would occur between the months of May through September and 2-3 years after initial harvest. The herbicides would be applied using foliar spraying and hack-n-squirt methods. Foliar spray Herbicides would be applied using a backpack sprayer to spray the foliage of targeted plants using a mixture containing 0.5 ounce of Arsenal AC (active ingredient imazapyr), 0.5 ounce of Milestone (active ingredient aminopyralid), 5 ounces Accord XRT II (active ingredient glyphosate), ¼ ounces of Bullseye spray pattern indicator (water soluble dye), and ½ ounces of Cidekick adjuvant (limonene) per gallon of water 2. Herbicides would be applied to targeted vegetation by speckling the leaf surface during the period of mid-june through October of the second or third growing season. The anticipated application rate would be 10 gallons of mix, 5 ounces of Arsenal AC (0.16 pound of imazapyr) per acre, 5 ounces of Milestone, and 50 ounces of Accord per acre. Hack-n-squirt A hatchet is used to cut into the tree surface of larger (greater than 6 feet tall) targeted vegetation and imazapyr (Arsenal AC or equivalent) and triclopyr (Garlon 3A) herbicide is sprayed/injected into the cut area. A cutting tool, such as a hatchet, machete, or sandvik, would make the cuts. A mixture of 50 percent Garlon 3A and 50 percent water, plus 6 ounces of Arsenal AC per gallon of mixture would be used. All treated areas would be monitored for further follow-up treatments after the initial treatment. All downed vegetation would be left on-site to decompose Herbicides would be used to release shortleaf pines and desirable mast-producing hardwoods (such as oaks and hickories) from competing vegetation. An average of 450 seedlings of pine, oaks, and hickories per acre is the desired stocking level. Stands would 2 Commercial herbicides/adjuvant/dyes referenced in this document represent those formulations that are commonly used for the proposed forestry treatments. However, other equivalent formulations may be used for implementation of the proposed treatments. Equivalent formulations would include any other brand name herbicides that have an equivalent proportion of the specified active ingredient and inert ingredients. 17

22 Sumter National Forest be treated for release approximately 1-2 years after initial restoration efforts and when the survival and stocking checks indicate more than one hundred stems per acre of sweetgum, maple, and yellow poplar. The herbicides and the applications used would be similar to the herbicide site preparation treatments described above. There may be portions of compartment 9, stands 3, 5, 7, and 10 and compartment 68, stands 7, 10, and 37 where local soil conditions do not warrant shortleaf restoration. Where this is the case, thinning of timber to create habitat for Georgia aster and other woodland species may occur. The residual basal area in those parts of the stands following thinning would range from BA. Dominant and co-dominant pines would be left as well as desirable hard mast (e.g., oaks and hickories) and soft mast species (e.g., black cherry, persimmon, and dogwood). If thinning is not feasible, then select removal of individual trees may take place to enhance existing conditions. Other activities that could occur in these stands include planting Georgia aster and other native herbaceous plants to supplement existing understory and controlling understory/midstory species using manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species. Establishment of prescribed fire burn block A 362-acre burn block would be established in compartment 68, stands 7 and 10. The objectives of prescribed burning would be to manage the existing population of Georgia aster and to help establish planted Georgia aster and other native plant species. Burning would also provide and improve habitat for wildlife species and reduce the risk of destructive wildfire caused by excessive fuel loading. Burning could occur during the growing season (April-October) or during the dormant season (November-March). New control lines would include dozer and hand lines. A prescribed burn plan would be completed prior to implementation of any burning activity. Burn plans contain maps, a description of the burn unit, other resource coordination, contingency plans, firing patterns, smoke management guidelines, a complexity analysis, and any site-specific mitigation that may be necessary for that particular unit. Forest-wide direction and standards in the 2004 Revised Sumter Land and Resource Management Plan, Sumter National Forest and South Carolina Best Management Practices for Forestry (BMPs) would be followed. Table Summary of Alternative 3 Compartments and Stands Comp Stand Acres Comment 1 Proposed Action Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision 18

23 Comp Stand Acres Comment 1 Proposed Action Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 2- to 3-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 2- to 3-year interval under separate NEPA decision 19

24 Sumter National Forest Comp Stand Acres Comment 1 Proposed Action Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision 20

25 Comp Stand Acres Comment 1 Proposed Action , 3 Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 2- to 3-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 2- to 3-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species Shortleaf Pine restoration; use herbicides for site preparation and release of crop trees; plant Georgia aster and other species; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Shortleaf Pine restoration; use herbicides for site preparation and release of crop trees; plant Georgia aster and other species; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Shortleaf Pine restoration; use herbicides for site preparation and release of crop trees; plant Georgia aster and other species; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Shortleaf Pine restoration; use herbicides for site preparation and release of crop trees; plant Georgia aster and other species; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Shortleaf Pine restoration; use herbicides for site preparation and release of crop trees; plant Georgia aster and other species; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval (this area is included in the burn block that is analyzed in this EA) 21

26 Sumter National Forest Comp Stand Acres Comment 1 Proposed Action Shortleaf Pine restoration; use herbicides for site preparation and release of crop trees; plant Georgia aster and other species; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval (this area is included in the burn block that is analyzed in this EA) Shortleaf Pine restoration; use herbicides for site preparation and release of crop trees; plant Georgia aster and other species; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Thin stand to BA; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 2- to 3-year interval under separate NEPA decision 26 Total 1,681 1 Comment: 1 = Stand is suitable for Georgia aster management in current condition; 2 = Existing vegetation management project (under separate NEPA) will occur in this stand, making it suitable for Georgia aster management; 3 = Georgia aster currently occurs in this stand; 4 = soil conditions are suitable for shortleaf pine restoration 2.4 Connected Actions Common to All Action Alternatives Skidding, Decking and Hauling of Logs Commercial activities would include skidding logs with heavy equipment to landings where they would be stacked for later removal by log trucks. Existing and new skid trails and landings would be used during commercial operations. Site-specific design criteria along with Forest Plan standards would be used to limit exposure of soil and protect streams from sedimentation. Road Reconstruction, Recondition and Maintenance Approximately six miles of national forest system roads would be reconstructed or reconditioned and maintained during timber harvest operations. Approximately 1.1 and 1.4 miles of temporary roads would be needed to facilitate logging activities under alternative 2 and 3, respectively. System road maintenance and reconditioning may include but is not limited to activities such as grading, spot surfacing with crushed stone, replacement of damaged and nonfunctioning culverts, reshaping of the road surface and ditch lines, mowing and brush removal. These activities would ensure commercial haul and public safety, meet road 22

27 management objectives and would reduce adverse impacts to other resources during vegetation management activities. Erosion and Sediment Control Measures BMPs would be used during project activities to reduce or prevent erosion and sedimentation from skid trails, landings, temporary roads and system roads. Surface drainage structures such as dips and water lead-outs, water-bars, fertilizer, lime, seed and other methods would be utilized as needed to reduce erosion and sediment delivery to stream channels. 2.5 Design Criteria Common to All Action Alternatives Design criteria are resource protection measures intended to avoid, reduce, or minimize adverse effects of project activities on various resources or uses. The following design criteria that apply to the action alternatives are incorporated from the following documents: Revised Land and Resource Management Plan Sumter National Forest; South Carolina s Best Management Practices for Forestry (South Carolina Forestry Commission 2003) and National Best Management Practices for Water Quality Management on National Forest System Lands[(2012)collectively referred to as BMPs]; and Soil and Water Conservation Practices Guide, Southern Region, (McLaughlin et al. 2002). The interdisciplinary team developed the following design criteria to address site-specific resource concerns: 1. Project activities associated with logging and follow-up cultural treatments would avoid known historic properties, unevaluated heritage sites, and historic cemeteries. 2. Known Georgia aster occurrences would be avoided during all tree felling activities, thinning of timber, planting of Georgia aster and other native herbaceous plants, using manual/mechanical methods and herbicide applications to control understory and midstory woody species, all shortleaf pine restoration activities, construction of dozer and hand firelines for prescribed burning, and all other ground-disturbing activities. 3. Temporary roads and skid trails would be located in such a manner to roll with the terrain to avoid unnecessary water concentrations. Drainage dips and lead-outs would be incorporated in construction of temporary roads and skid trails to ensure erosion from concentrated flow is minimized and does not reach streams. Disturbed areas would be disked, limed, fertilized, and seeded as needed to reduce erosion and sedimentation. 23

28 Sumter National Forest 4. Gully crossings would be avoided and surface drainage would be designed to avoid discharging directly into gullies. 5. Areas of exposed soil, such as skid trails and log decks, would be seeded, fertilized, and mulched after operations are completed. Where practical, seed mixtures would include native grasses and legumes or other desired nonnative species beneficial to wildlife. 6. Trees would not be harvested within gullies or on steep slopes directly adjacent to gullies unless needed to promote stabilization or recovery efforts. 7. Perennial and intermittent streams that could be affected by logging operations would be identified on sale area maps and boundaries marked on the ground. Protective measures would be specified in the timber sale contract. 8. Hardwood inclusions to be protected within and adjacent to harvest units would be identified on the ground and on the sale area map of the timber sale contract. 9. No logging would occur during wet soil conditions. 10. Shortleaf restoration would not occur within 50 feet of the Woods Ferry Horse Trail. Thinning of timber (60-70 BA), select removal of individual trees, planting Georgia aster and other species in the understory, and the use of manual/mechanical and chemical methods to control woody species in the understory would be permitted. 11. Hardwoods or flowering trees within the immediate foreground 3 of the viewshed would not be cut along State Road 574 (S ), along the Tyger and Broad Rivers and areas inventoried as high scenic integrity objective (SIO). 12. A 75 foot buffer would be established from the Woods Ferry Horse Trail system to any canopy gaps created for shortleaf restoration and areas thinned for Georgia Aster. The buffer would be thinned up to basal area, leaving all hardwood sawtimber within the buffer. Existing trail corridor, character trees, and hardwood trees would be preserved where possible to promote shade, improve visual and fall color diversity. 13. All trees selected for removal that could fall within the WFHT corridor would be felled by manual/mechanical methods to avoid creating hazard trees for trail users. 14. Trail sections would be closed while work is going on in the area for safety of workers and trail users. 15. If temporary roads, skid trails and landings are necessary, they would be located outside the immediate foreground viewshed of roads, trails, river corridors, or other recreation facilities, when possible. If these features must be located in the 3 Foreground distances are determined based on how far an observer standing on a road or along the river can look into the stand and not see evidence of these trees being cut. 24

29 immediate foreground viewshed of roads, trails or other recreation facilities, bare mineral soil would be re-vegetated or covered with woody material as soon as possible following restoration. 16. Coordinate with other project work to reduce the direct impacts to recreational users. Most importantly, coordination would need to occur in determining what areas of the forest would be opened or closed simultaneously for recreational use. 17. Following restoration, block temporary roads and skid trails crossing trail corridors with down trees and brush so they are not visible to recreation users. 18. Trails would not be used as a skid trail or haul road when possible. Project equipment and machinery would cross trails at designated areas. 19. Project activity or vehicle traffic would not be allowed within the Woods Ferry Recreation area including use of Forest Service system roads 309, 309A and 309B. 20. If possible, post prescribe burning notice at trailhead and website in advance to notify users if an area will be closed. 21. All tree marking paint would face away from the trail corridor or road right-ofways. 22. Herbicide mix water would be carried to the site by contractors or workers. 23. Trucks containing herbicide or tank mixed herbicide would not be allowed to park within 200 feet of a stream or pond. 25

30 Sumter National Forest 2.6 Comparison of Alternatives This section compares aspects of the alternatives to one another. A more precise analysis of the effects can be found in the next section, Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action and Alternatives. Table Comparison of Each Alternative s Predicted Effect on the Environment Alternative 1: No Action Alternative 2: Proposed Action Alternative 3 Soil Resources Cumulative impacts from other projects within the same watersheds on private and National Forest lands Water Resources Air Quality Climate Change and Carbon Storage Cumulative impacts from other projects within the same watersheds on private and National Forest lands Temporary impacts from prescribed burning No change to the current trend for carbon storage or release in the project area Temporary impacts from increased erosion in shortleaf restoration units Temporary impacts on log landings, skid trails and temporary roads from soil compaction, rutting, displacement, erosion and nutrient reduction Short-term minimal impacts from increased water yields Short-term minimal impacts from increased sediment Impacts from logging equipment and other related management activities occurring on National Forest and private land would be negligible. Air quality is monitored yearly to determine compliance with Clean Air Act Maintaining forested conditions and restoring native vegetation would increase ability to withstand climate change scenarios Temporary impacts from increased erosion in shortleaf restoration and thinning units Temporary impacts on log landings, skid trails and temporary roads from soil compaction, rutting, displacement, erosion and nutrient reduction Short-term minimal impacts from increased water yields Short-term minimal impact from increased sediment Temporary impacts from prescribed burning Impacts from logging equipment and other related management activities occurring on National Forest and private land would be negligible. Air quality is monitored yearly to determine compliance with Clean Air Act Maintaining forested conditions and restoring native vegetation would increase ability to withstand climate change scenarios 26

31 Alternative 1: No Action Alternative 2: Proposed Action Alternative 3 Forest Vegetation Cumulative impacts from other management activities Highly susceptible to southern pine beetle No impact to height growth Decrease in diameter growth Slight increase in biodiversity over time Less light availability Increased chance of stagnation Temporary impacts from tree removal Less susceptible to southern pine beetle Greater increase in biodiversity than no action alternative No impact to height growth Increase growth on overstory trees Increase in live crown ratio Greater light and moisture availability in understory Some residual tree damage from logging equipment increased understory growth Temporary impacts from tree removal Less susceptible to southern pine beetle Greater increase in biodiversity than proposed action (more shortleaf pine restoration) No impact to height growth Increase growth on overstory trees Increase in live crown ratio Greater light an moisture availability in understory Some residual tree damage from logging equipment increased understory growth Non-native Invasive Plants No activities would take place to increase spread of non-native invasive species Ground-disturbing activities and increased sunlight availability could increase spread of non-native invasive species Ground-disturbing activities and increased sunlight availability could increase spread of non-native invasive species Rare Plant Communities No effects to rare plant communities No effects to rare plant communities (none known to occur within project area) No effects to rare plant communities (none known to occur within project area) Proposed, Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive Species No effects to PETS species or their habitats Benefits species requiring open habitats No impacts to all other species Biological Evaluation/Biological Assessment completed and included as Appendix 1 to the EA Benefits species requiring open habitats No impacts to all other species Biological Evaluation/Biological Assessment completed and included as Appendix 1 to the EA 27

32 Sumter National Forest Alternative 1: No Action Alternative 2: Proposed Action Alternative 3 Management Indicator Species Does not create early-successional habitat Benefits species requiring older, dense forests Creates early successional habitat Could have temporary impacts to nesting birds Reduces habitat for species that use mature forested habitats Creates early successional habitat Could have temporary impacts to nesting birds Reduces habitat for species that use mature forested habitats Alters patterns of animal use Alters patterns of animal use Migratory Birds Does not create early-successional habitat Benefits species requiring older, dense forests Creates early successional habitat Could have temporary impacts to nesting birds Reduces habitat for species that use mature forested habitats Creates early successional habitat Could have temporary impacts to nesting birds Reduces habitat for species that use mature forested habitats Alters patterns of animal use Alters patterns of animal use Aquatic Communities Cumulative impacts from other management activities Temporary increase in runoff, sedimentation, and water yield Temporary increase in runoff, sedimentation, and water yield Visuals and Recreation Area is accessible to hikers, hunters, and other Forest visitors Temporary impact to trail users, hunters, and other Forest visitors during logging Temporary impact to trail users, hunters, and other Forest visitors during logging Less viewshed Increases vegetation variety in viewshed in the long term Increases vegetation variety in viewshed in the long term Increase in viewshed Increase in viewshed Increase in open area Increase in open area Cultural Resources Economics (Benefit/Cost) No impact Field surveys completed; no impact State Historic Preservation Office concurrence before decision notice signed Field surveys completed; no impact State Historic Preservation Office concurrence before decision notice signed. 28

33 Environmental Justice Human Health & Safety Irreversible Commitment of Resources Alternative 1: No Action Alternative 2: Proposed Action Alternative 3 No impact No impact No impact Temporary impact from other management actions Temporary potential for adverse impacts from heavy equipment use No impact No impact No impact Temporary potential for adverse impacts from heavy equipment use 29

34 Chapter 3. Environmental Impacts of the No-action and Action Alternatives This chapter discloses the present condition of the environmental resource components in the project area and expected changes relative to the No-Action Alternative, Proposed Action, and Alternative 3 that were presented in the preceding alternatives section. This chapter provides the scientific and analytical basis to compare the alternatives (40 CFR (b)). The components disclosed comprise the physical, biological, and social environments. 3.1 Physical Environment Water and Riparian Resources Affected Environment The project area is contained within eleven 6th level HUCs (refer to the project record analysis for more detailed descriptions of these areas) located across the Enoree Ranger District. These watersheds individually and collectively are mostly forested. They are predominantly located in a rural environment with small towns, farms and ranchland. National Forest System (NFS) lands occupy large portions of the watersheds which are usually interspersed with private lands. Land use was compiled using Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics analysis for the various size hydrologic units and the results presented in Table The Enoree Ranger District is within the Broad River basin. Project stands fall within the Browns Creek-Broad River, Tyger River, Middle Enoree River, Indian Creek, and Lower Enoree River Watersheds (HUC 10). The major sources of non-point source water pollution are agricultural use and land development (South Carolina Land Resources Commission 1988). These subwatersheds are listed in fair condition (functioning at risk) in the Forest s Watershed Condition Assessment that was completed in Indicators of poor condition include: aquatic; physical habitat; road density and maintenance; soil productivity/erosion; and, fire condition class. These lands were intensively farmed in the 18 th and 19 th century and experienced severe gully and rill erosion and widespread formation of numerous large and small gullies. Restoration emphasis, since acquisition by the federal government in the 1930s and management by the national forest system, has focused on soil stabilization, gully stabilization and reforestation of abandoned farmlands to reduce erosion and restore land productivity. The objective of this project is to establish and expand shortleaf pine, Georgia aster and other native species. 4 The Forest s Watershed Condition Assessment for these watersheds took into account a number of indicators such as fire regime condition class, soil productivity, water quality, NNIS, roads and riparian areas to determine watershed health and conditions. 30

35 Nonpoint source pollution problems are dispersed across the landscape on private and public lands and would likely continue to cause a substantial portion of the pollution problems for the primarily rural areas. Forestry effects tend to be less intensive than most other types of land management, because activities are infrequent over the life of a timber stand. However, prescribed burning in some instances can be more frequent, but except for the fire lines, it generally exposes a limited amount of soil and produces limited erosion and sediment. Table Land Use in the Eleven 6 th level Watersheds Land Use NFS Lands Private Total Background 2,592 3,759 6,351 Barren 137 1,855 1,992 Forest 101, , ,525 Grass/scrub 2,973 35,612 38,585 Urban 21 1,311 1,332 Water 233 1,658 1,891 Roads (private only) - 1,585 1,485 Cropland Utility ROWs - 1,142 1,142 Total 107, , ,449 Streams and Riparian Areas Streams in the watersheds are typically entrenched and mostly disconnected from their floodplain. Entrenched streams during storm events typically erode more since water velocity cannot easily be dissipated onto the adjacent floodplains. This results in chronic down-cutting of the channels, sloughing of banks, and subsequent sedimentation. Most streams also show current or past signs of active gully heads which also contribute to sedimentation. Some of the valley stream channels were channelized and riparian and floodplain areas were drained by ditches for farming. Many of these constructed features remain and many are still functional. Legacy sediment and erosion is still present within most of these stream systems. Stream channels are also impacted from past and ongoing land management practices associated with farming and ranching. System roads under federal, county, state and private jurisdiction also have chronic and continual sedimentation impacts on streams. Some entrenched access roads also caused long term erosion, sedimentation and direct water flow and pollutants directly into streams. Many of these roads have been closed, stabilized and/or decommissioned on NFS lands. Loss in trees and other vegetation in sufficient amounts can increase water yield for about 5 to 15 years (Swank et al, 1988). Increased water yields can affect channel stability and increase erosion rates and sediment concentrations. The riparian areas along with perennial and intermittent drainages managed by the US Forest Service are included in Management Prescription 11- Riparian Corridors as 31

36 Sumter National Forest described in the Revised Land and Resource Management Plan Sumter National Forest (Forest Plan). The riparian corridor includes floodplain, wetlands, springs, seeps, perennial and intermittent streams. Forest Plan standards FW-1 and FW-2 indicate that South Carolina s Best Management Practices for Forestry (BMPs) including streamside management zones would be utilized during forest management activities to limit impacts from management to these areas. In addition, National Best Management Practices for Water Quality Management on National Forest System Lands, April 2012, would also be followed. Collectively these two documents are referred to in this assessment as BMPs. BMPs are effective at protecting water quality and associated resources when properly implemented (Adams and Hook, 1993, Adams, 1994, 1996, Jones, 2000). The widths of riparian corridors vary based on the actual terrain surrounding the stream. The general default boundaries are defined as: Corridor widths for perennial streams would be 100 feet, 125 feet and 150 feet corresponding to slope breaks 0-30%, 31-45%, and 46% plus, respectively. Corridor widths for intermittent streams would be 50 feet, 75 feet, and 100 feet corresponding to slope breaks 0-30%, 31-45%, and 46% plus, respectively. Channeled Ephemeral Streams Zones are 50 feet wide (25 feet on either side of the channel) and have separated standards as defined in the Plan. Any channeled or scoured ephemeral streams will be identified and managed to meet both the forest standards in the plan (FW-6 to FW-16) (Forest Plan, 2004). Hydrologic Analysis The Forest Service has used various methods to map and inventory stream location and type (ephemeral, intermittent, or perennial). GIS modeling was completed for each of the 6 th level HUCs described above to determine baseline erosion and sedimentation rates for the No-Action alternative and for each of the action alternatives. This information is used to compared alternatives to one another and to quantify soil erosion, sediment delivery and suspended sediment concentrations in streams. The modelling utilized erosion coefficients for various types of activities and sediment delivery rates that were developed during revision of the Sumter Forest Plan. Soil loss and sediment yields were calculated using the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) (Wischmeier and Smith, 1978, Dissmeyer and Foster, 1984) for use in forested conditions. Dissmeyer and Stump (1978) found varying degrees of soil loss during field measurements while developing the RUSLE. A sediment delivery ratio of 0.34 was used to calculate the percentage of soil loss that reaches headwater perennial streams. This sediment delivery ratio value is based on the size of typical 3 rd and 4 th order perennial streams. The length of time for site recovery from various management activities as well as from the action alternatives was accounted for in the analysis. Detailed erosion, sediment delivery to streams and sediment concentrations in water calculations are located in the project record. 32

37 Analysis of the data indicates that most of the activities proposed have no measureable impacts on sedimentation at the 6 th level HUC scale since many of the treatments proposed involve minimal non-mechanized disturbance or exposure of soil. The Hughes Creek-Broad River watershed had the most activities and therefore will be included in action alternative analysis. Even for this watershed, project impacts are very minor and hardly register at the 6 th level subwatershed scale. Direct and indirect effects on water will be evaluated at the project scale and cumulative effects will be evaluated at the 6 th level HUC for the Hughes Creek-Broad River watershed only. However, the detailed analysis of all the watershed for all three alternatives is contained in the project record and accounts for ongoing management activities as well as those proposed under the action alternatives. Effects Analysis Direct and Indirect Effects of Alternative 1 Legacy erosion and sedimentation associated with land clearing, farming, and abandoning the land are still evident in the project area today. Stream channels are still adjusting to watershed changes that occurred over a 100 years ago. Natural response to storms, floods, disease and beetle activity suggest that the landscape has a degree of resilience. Upland vegetation is slowly reverting to many native species as a result of management actions particularly on NFS lands. Many native species and seedbanks were depleted or lost with widespread erosion and can only be restore by planting and seeding and other land management practices. Fertilization of low site lands, gully and gully head stabilization and restoration activities, forest thinnings, woodland restoration, prescribed burning and reseeding with native grasses have helped to maintain soil cover and improve water quality. Water yields are stable based on current conditions. Adherence to BMPs and Forest Plan standards have protected riparian areas and reduced adverse effects from land management activities. Cumulative Effects of Alternative 1 Past, present and future activities in the Hughes Creek-Broad River 6 th level HUC that result in sedimentation include the use of prescribed fire and manual and mechanical treatments to reduce fuel loadings and to enhance wildlife habitat. Past commercial timber harvest (regeneration and intermediate stand treatments, thinnings) have taken place periodically in project area compartments over the last five year period. Utility line and road rights-of-way maintenance (mostly manual, mechanical and some herbicide use) are also done on a periodic basis. One project of particular note is the Chester County Stream and Riparian Restoration/Enhancement project. This project is located in Clarks Creek and an unnamed tributary to Clarks Creek. The Chester County project would reduce sediment and improve flows in this drainage. Cumulative sediment and suspended concentrated sediment would be reduced in both the short and long term in these two drainages based on the analysis presented in the Chester County Stream an Riparian Restoration/Enhancement Project Final Environmental Impact Statement (2015). Activities on adjacent private lands include timber harvesting, grazing and farming 33

38 Sumter National Forest activities, homesites, utility line and road rights-of-way maintenance. Herbicide is used on NFS lands to control non-native invasive plant species, during reforestation and to treat undesirable woody vegetation in stands managed for timber and/or wildlife. Other connected actions associated with forest and wildlife management activities include drum chopping, masticating and biomass removal in some stands. Calculated sediment delivered to streams under current conditions for Hughes Creek- Broad River 6 th level HUC is about 33,083 tons per decade and suspended sediment concentration is 80.6 parts per million (ppm). Adherence to Forest Plan standards (including following riparian area management prescriptions) and BMPs would continue to protect water quality. Water yields would continue to be stable based on current conditions. Direct and Indirect Effects of Alternative 2 Commercial Timber Harvesting (284 acres) Harvesting methods under this prescription would be similar to a clearcut with reserves. All loblolly would be cut leaving desirable hardwoods and healthy shortleaf pine. Connected actions include the construction or reuse of temporary roads, skid trails and log landings. The activities proposed here are on moderate slopes tending for the most part to be located on ridgetops. There is a potential for elevated sediments and increased water yields especially since the five units are clustered in the headwaters of the Clarks Creek drainage. However, the activities produce only a small change in the overall erosion and sediment rates at the 6 th level HUC scale. The alternative would leave riparian buffers along intermittent and perennial streams as specified in the Forest Plan. Scoured ephemeral streams also receive a level of protection. Riparian corridors serve both as filter zones and areas where evapotranspiration would be maintained at normal or increased capacities. The intent of the project is to restore and maintain forest and grass/forb understories in upland areas. None of the treatments would result in permanent loss to ground cover and the area would remain in mixed hardwood/pine forest. Under most circumstances, there is little potential for reactivating healed ephemeral gullies with adherence to site-specific design criteria #3 - #9 Forest Plan standards and BMPs. The Forest Service has harvested trees in ephemeral drainage areas before and has not experienced reactivation of gullies when the area remains forested. The changes to erosion and sediment from the activities are temporary. The recovery process is relatively rapid over 95 percent of the treatment area. Water yield changes would be minimal occurring for the first 2-3 years after harvesting. Newly harvested stands followed by planting and prescribed burning would develop dense grass and forb cover and evapotranspiration would increase. This would reduce the duration and intensity of water yield increases. Some areas such as logging roads and skid trails would take longer to recover. Implementation of BMPs that water-bar, rip (break up compacted 34

39 areas to increase water infiltration into the soil), disk, reforest and plant grass and forbs would accelerate recovery of skid trails, temporary roads and landings. Dense plant cover with deep roots would help rebuild soil organic matter. Organic matter improves water infiltration into the soil and subsurface flow networks. This leads to stable ephemeral, intermittent and perennial channels that produce high quality water with lower peak water flows and extended base flows. The riparian areas along with perennial and intermittent drainages are included in Management Prescription 11- Riparian Corridors. Forest Plan standards FW-1 and FW-2 indicate that BMPs including streamside management zones (SMZs) would be employed for forest management activities (Forest Plan 2004). The widths of the corridors would vary based on the actual terrain surrounding the stream and site specific layout of units. BMPs are designed primarily for water quality protection during management activities. When properly implemented, BMPs have been effective at protecting water quality and associated resources (Adams and Hook, 1993, Adams, 1994, 1996, Jones, 2000). Roads (estimated 6 miles of system road reconstruction and maintenance, up to 1.1 miles of temporary roads) System road maintenance and reconditioning may include but is not limited to activities such as grading, spot surfacing with crushed stone, replacement of damaged and nonfunctioning culverts, reshaping of the road surface and ditch lines, mowing and brush removal. Road surfaces are impervious to water infiltration for the most part and add to permanent water yield increases unless rehabilitated with a vegetative cover of trees, grasses and forbs. Water yield increases from roads are not expected to change with this alternative since only existing system roads would be used and temporary roads would be closed and revegetated after use. Adding surface aggregate, armoring fill slopes and directing water off road surfaces by use of dips, reverse-grades, outslopes, lead-off ditches and culverts would reduce erosion and sedimentation to streams. Closed system roads would be reseeded with grasses and forbs to reduce erosion and drainage dips and water-bars installed to reduce impacts of concentrated flow increases in sensitive areas. Frequent drainage structures reduce the amount of concentrated flow that is diverted into forest filter strips at any one point. This traps soil particles before it can make its way into stream channels as sediment. Design criteria would avoid directing water from road directly into stable or restored gullies. This would reduce the chance of re-activating the gully and adding additional sediment to the stream. Temporary roads for this project are located mainly on ridge top areas in harvest units. Temporary roads used for harvest operations would contribute to erosion and sediment in the short term (up to three years), but the effects to soil and water would be reduced with erosion control measures such as constructing water-bars, disking, seeding, mulching and fertilizing erosion hazard areas. Forest Plan standards and BMPs would be used to minimize adverse effects of temporary roads on water when needed to cross ephemeral channels. Temporary roads would be closed after timber removal and associated sale 35

40 Sumter National Forest activities are completed. Closures would include blocking with earthen barriers or equivalent. This would help to establish desired temporary and permanent vegetative cover. Temporary vegetative cover is often provided by annual species such as brown top millet and winter wheat. Permanent cover would consist of prefer native and desired nonnative types of cover such as grasses like bluestem spp. and Indian grass, or legumes like partridge pea. The effects of system road reconstruction, reconditioning, and maintenance and temporary road construction on water quality and yield would be minor and short term. Herbicides (used to: control understory undesirable woody vegetation, site preparation prior to planting shortleaf pine and as a release treatment for shortleaf pine seedlings within three to five years from planting) A herbicide risk assessment was completed for the herbicides proposed for use in this alternative and is available in the project record. Imazapyr would be applied as a foliar spray from a backpack and as a cut surface treatment. Triclopyr amine would be applied as a cut surface treatment. The application methods target site-specific vegetation and thus limit soil exposure to chemical residue or the creation of large areas devoid of vegetation that would be susceptible to erosion and sedimentation. Targeting woody vegetation would leave most grasses and forbs unaffected providing for evapotranspiration and water infiltration. Herbicide treatment would leave the forest litter, duff and humus layers intact. This would allow for water infiltration into the soil. Imazapyr Also refer to: Imazapyr Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment Final Report, Syracuse Environmental Research Associates, Inc. for USDA Forest Service, Imazapyr has a low potential for leaching into ground-water and may move from treated areas in streams. Most movement of imazapyr was found in runoff from storms. Streamside management zones and riparian buffers would reduce the amount of offsite movement of imazapyr in stormflow. The half-life of imazapyr in water is about 4 days. Triclopyr Also refer to: Triclopyr Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment Final Report, Syracuse Environmental Research Associates, Inc. for USDA Forest Service, Triclopyr would not be a leaching problem under normal conditions since it binds to clay and organic matter in soil. Triclopyr may leach from light soils if rainfall is very heavy. Sunlight rapidly breaks down triclopyr in water and the half-life in water is less than 24 hours. Herbicide treatments include a limited potential for water quality (surface and ground water) contamination from low volume foliar spray from backpack. The hack and 36

41 squirt method is a more target application and has very low potential for drift or nontarget application. A design criteria and forest plan standard prohibits mixing herbicide on site and requires vehicles containing herbicide to park away from streams and bodies of water. This reduces the potential risk of herbicide entering the water from an accidental spill. Forest Plan standards limit use on windy days for foliar applications and for all applications before or during rain storms. This would help to reduce adverse effects to water from herbicides. Applications would focus on target plants, but still may offer minimal potential for chemical drift or wash-off. Careful attention to weather including temperature, wind speed and humidity measurements, and adhering to BMPs would help to limit effects. Herbicide applications would follow label requirements and Forest Plan standards and site-specific design criteria. The dispersed nature of herbicide application directed at individual plants or groups of plants in combination with low volume application rates present a low risk of pollution to surface or ground water. The application of herbicide to treat individual plants would not create any discernible ground disturbance or erosion that could result in increased water yields or sediment to streams. Additional effects of herbicides are contained in Vegetation Management in the Coastal Plain/Piedmont Final Environmental Impact Statement (VMEIS IV-111). Spill plans would be included with any herbicide application. Riparian buffers and SMZs would absorb the limited movement without noticeable effect on land or aquatic vegetation. Placement of an untreated SMZ of 40 feet beside the channel would be used in most instances to reduce the potential for direct contamination of water resources. Based on the low stream concentrations measured in previous studies, along with dilution and flow of stream, soil absorption and biological breakdown rates, chemical contamination of water quality should be difficult to detect and temporary in nature (Brown and Binkley, 1994). Manual Vegetation Control (used to: create canopy gaps and to control undesirable understory woody vegetation ) Activities associated with this type of treatment include cutting trees with hand tools and chainsaws. These activities would have no measureable effect on the water resource because of the limited amount of area impacted and the low level of disturbance from manual methods. Mechanical Understory Vegetation Control (used to: create canopy gaps(no greater than one acre in size covering approximately 10% of the treatment area) Undesirable woody material in the understory of treatment stands would either be cut down by masticating or bush-hogging. Only a small portion of the area would be covered by wheeled or tracked based equipment. These types of treatments expose very little soil to erosion and would have unmeasurable impacts on sediment and water yield given the 37

42 Sumter National Forest dispersed nature and limited intensity of treatments. Implementation of BMPs, Forest Plan standards, and design criteria in the EA would result in minor impacts to water. Planting shortleaf pine, Georgia aster, grasses and forbs These activities would have no measureable effect on the water resource because of the limited amount of area impacted and the type of manual equipment used. Effects of Design Criteria Design criteria as described in section 2.5 of the EA are included to reduce adverse effects to streams, riparian areas and minimize risk of water contamination from herbicide use. Proper design of skid trails and temporary roads would reduce concentrated water flow that could cause erosion and sedimentation to streams. Avoiding discharging water directly into gullies would prevent further erosion and reactivation of old gullies that are currently stable. This would prevent potential sediment increase to streams from this source. Not harvesting trees in or near gullies would keep soils stable and prevent erosion and sedimentation. Identifying streams to be protected on sale area maps would ensure that banks and stream channels are not disturbed by timber sale or management activities. Protection of hardwood inclusions would add diversity to vegetation in units and protect sensitive areas that could easily become eroded, rutted or compacted causing increased erosion and sedimentation. Water-bars would direct water off skid trails in small amounts and away from streams to reduce the potential for sedimentation. Seeding areas of soil disturbance would reduce erosion and sedimentation and when done in conjunction with water-bars and other erosion control activities would substantially reduce erosion and sedimentation into streams. Directing water from road ditch lines into vegetative areas away from streams reduces the potential for sedimentation of streams. Applying BMPs, Forest Plan standards for skid trails and landings would reduce sedimentation. Reuse of existing skid trails and landings would occur only if they are properly located on the land and have grades that reduce potential for long term erosion. For instance, skid trails within riparian areas would not be reused if they did not meet Forest Plan direction or BMPs. Direct and Indirect Effects of Alternative 3 This alternative is slightly different from alternative 2 as described below: Commercial thinning of and additional 60 acres; Broadcast seeding of Georgia aster; Up to three applications of herbicide over a ten-year period; Triclopyr ester would not be used as a foliar spray to control understory and midstory woody species; Two additional herbicides (glyphosate and aminopyralid) would be used; 38

43 Loblolly pine would not be controlled with herbicide rather they would be controlled by manual, mechanical and prescribed burning methods; Shortleaf pine restoration would be increased from 284 acres to 435 acres; Compartment 9 stand 1 would be changed to a non-commercial treatment; and A 364 acre burn block would be added. Commercial Timber Harvesting (435 acres including commercial thinning) Additional harvesting would occur mainly in an unnamed stream that flows into the Enoree River in compartment 68, a commercial thinning unit would be added in the Clarks Creek drainage in compartment 11 and one less unit in Clarks Creek drainage would be harvested commercially in compartment 9. The effects described for clearcut with reserves for alternative 2 for commercial timber harvesting apply here as well. Thinning is a less intensive forest management activity that normally would create less direct and indirect effects relative to erosion and sediment than regeneration harvest. Residual vegetation (including trees) is left intact across thinning treatment areas resulting in less ground disturbance than with the clearcut with reserves method. Areas thinned with less soil disturbance would develop native grass/forb understories and the remaining trees would continue growing and expand their root growth adding stability to the soil. This results in water being absorbed into the ground and utilized in evapotranspiration by plants making less available as increased water yield to streams or as overland flow. Most adverse effects are associated with skid trails and landings that disturb the soil by causing compaction and displacement. These effects have been described in alternative 2. Leaving limbs, needles and other residual organic materials from logging operations on skid trails and landings helps to reduce overland water flow and increase infiltration immediately after logging activities are completed. Implementation of BMPs, Forest Plan standards and design criteria in the EA would result in minor impacts to water. Roads (estimated 6 miles of system road reconstruction and maintenance, up to 1.4 miles of temporary roads) Effects to soils from road reconstruction, reconditioning and maintenance operations would be exactly the same as alternative 2. With only a slight increase in temporary roads (0.3 miles), effects to soils from temporary roads would not be measurably different from those described for alternative 2. Herbicides (used to: control understory undesirable woody vegetation, site preparation prior to planting shortleaf pine and as a release treatment for shortleaf pine seedlings in three to five years from planting) The effects described in alternative 2 for imazapyr and triclopyr amine apply to this alternative as well. In addition, two additional herbicides are proposed for use: Glyphosate (accord XRT II or equivalent) and aminopyralid (Milestone or equivalent). 39

44 Sumter National Forest A herbicide risk assessment was completed for the herbicides proposed for use in this alternative and is available in the project record. Aminopyralid and glyphosate would be applied as a foliar spray from a backpack. The application method targets site-specific vegetation and thus limits streams, springs and seeps in the project area to chemical residue or the creation of large areas devoid of vegetation that would be susceptible to erosion and sedimentation. Targeting woody vegetation would leave most grasses and forbs unaffected. In addition, riparian buffers would not be treated an this would reduce direct runoff into streams or the potential for over-spray from foliar applications that could drift into water. Aminopyralid Also refer to: Aminopyralid Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment Final Report, Syracuse Environmental Research Associates, Inc. for USDA Forest Service and National Park Service, Aminopyralid persists in soils with a half-life ranging from 32 to 533 days, with a typical time of 103 days. It is soluble in water and has moderate to high mobility with the ability to leach through soils and possibly contaminate groundwater. Aminopyralid is stable in water but in sunlight breaks down quickly with an estimated half-life of 0.6 days. This is therefore an important route of degradation for shallow water bodies with little to no suspended sediment. Aminopyralid is only moderately broken down in soil. The main mode of degradation in the environment is expected to be microbial metabolism in soils however microbial metabolism can be slow in some soils, especially at lower soil depths and appears generally to be very slow (half-lives well above a year) in aquatic systems. Glyphosate Also refer to: Glyphosate Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment Final Report, Syracuse Environmental Research Associates, Inc. for USDA Forest Service, Glyphosate biodegrades in soil even under low temperature conditions. Its average halflife in soil is about 60 days. Biodegradation in foliage and litter is somewhat faster. In field studies, residues are often found the following year. Glyphosate may enter aquatic systems through accidental spraying, spray drift, or surface runoff. It dissipates rapidly from the water column as a result of adsorption and possibly biodegradation. The half-life in water is a few days. Sediment is the primary sink for glyphosate. After spraying, glyphosate levels in sediment rise and then decline to low levels in a few months. Due to its ionic state in water, glyphosate would not be expected to volatilize from water or soil. Glyphosate is strongly adsorbed by organic matter and does not move readily through the soil profile. It is also absorbed by plant material it is applied to, also limiting its movement into water sources. Broadcast seeding of Georgia Aster This activity would have no effects on water. 40

45 Manual Vegetation Control (used to: create canopy gaps and to control undesirable understory woody vegetation ) The effects described for alternative 2 apply here as well. Mechanical Understory Vegetation Control [used to: create canopy gaps(no greater than one acre in size covering approximately 10% of the treatment area)] The effects described for alternative 2 apply here as well. Planting shortleaf pine, Georgia aster, grasses and forbs These activities would have no measureable effect on water quality because of the limited amount of area impacted and the type of manual equipment used. Prescribe Burn Block Addition (364 Acres) The effects of prescribe burning on water is covered under Prescribed Burning on the Piedmont of the Sumter National Forest, South Carolina Environmental Assessment and Decision Notice signed on February 4, 2008 and in the Vegetation Management in the Coastal Plain/Piedmont EIS (VMFEIS, USDA, 1989b). This prescribed burn block is located in compartment 68 and incorporates all or portions of two stands proposed for treatment. This would be a light to moderate intensity prescription burn (common to dormant and most growing season burns) that typically cause minor sediment impacts. The intent of the burn is to consume portions of the litter layer and coarse woody fuels on the surface and inhibit regeneration of loblolly pine. In addition, it would help manage the existing population of Georgia aster and facilitate additional plantings of Georgia aster and other native species. Control of ignition and burning conditions insure that the flame heights or severity of the burn is within acceptable limits and meets the intent of the prescribed burn plan. By doing so, the loss in surface organic matter, changes in the pore space and infiltration rates are typically too small to be detected, except for local fuel concentration areas. The humus and much of the duff layer would remain intact. There would be some tree charring and crown scorch. Fuel concentration areas such as log landings or limb piling areas are more likely to produce more severe or intense burns and soil exposure. Fire and heat from these areas can damage soils, resulting in less vegetation regrowth which in term can lead to overland water flow with subsequent erosion and sedimentation to the riparian area and adjacent streams. However, this would most likely occur at log landing site which comprise a small portion of the area and would be likely located near ridgetops on access roads. Landings would not be located within riparian areas where water could flow directly into streams. A majority of the burn unit would not be commercially harvested, so the potential impact of this is minor since noncommercial treatments would 41

46 Sumter National Forest not need landings or skid trails. In addition, a riparian buffer strip would be located adjacent to the stream on the north flank. These areas would most likely be wetter given its north facing aspect and would most likely have a lower intensity burn. Most of the burn block is surrounded by roads or a stream/riparian area that can be used as a fireline. Only about a quarter of mile of dozer fireline is needed on the western boundary. A small portion of hand fireline may be needed in the riparian area. Hand fireline construction would have minor impacts on soils and water flow into the stream. The riparian area may be wet enough at the time of burning that only the litter layer would need to be removed at the time of the burn. The fireline would be rehabilitated after use by the construction of water-bars and seeded to reduce erosion and sedimentation effects following Forest Plan standards and BMPs. The minimal amount of dozer and more importantly the hand fireline needed in the riparian area would limit the potential for erosion and sedimentation into the stream. Adherence to BMPs, Forest Plan standards and design criteria would limit water quality impacts. Water yield would not be changed. Effects of low severity fires on eroded areas of the piedmont have been monitored with little adverse effects found (White, Trettin, Hansen, Law unpublished study). Cumulative Effects of the Action Alternatives Past, present and future activities on NFS that contribute to water yield increases and sedimentation include the use of prescribed fire, manual and mechanical treatments to reduce fuel loadings and to enhance wildlife habitat. Past commercial timber harvest (regeneration and intermediate stand treatments, thinnings) have taken place periodically in project area compartments over the last five-year period. Utility line and road rightsof-way maintenance (mostly manual, mechanical and some herbicide use) are also done on a periodic basis. One project of particular note is the Chester County Stream and Riparian Restoration/Enhancement project. This project is located in Clarks Creek and an unnamed tributary to Clarks Creek and overlaps with this project. The Chester County project would reduce sediment and improve flows in this drainage. Cumulative sediment and suspended concentrated sediment would be reduced in both the short and long term in these two drainages based on the analysis in that project (detailed information is contained in the Chester County Stream and Riparian Restoration/Enhancement Project Final Environmental Impact Statement). Activities on adjacent private lands include timber harvesting, grazing and farming activities, homesites and utility line and road rights-of-way maintenance. Herbicide is used on NFS lands to control non-native invasive plant species, during reforestation and to treat undesirable woody vegetation in stands managed for timber and/or wildlife. Other connected actions associated with forest and wildlife management activities include drum chopping, masticating and biomass removal in some stands. Detailed analysis of all ground disturbing activities is located in the project record and includes analysis of erosion and sediment generated by the action alternatives for each of the eleven 6 th level watersheds that encompass the project. Activities on NFS lands would adhere to standards in the Forest Plan including BMPs to reduce cumulative sediment and water yield impacts. Most actions are related directly to 42

47 controlling soil erosion which in turn reduces sediment being transported to streams. This includes such practices as limiting management activities when soils are saturated and limiting the amount of bare soil exposed from prescribed burning. Planned layout of skid trails and landings are used to limit the amount of soil exposed to compaction and erosion. Soil amelioration practices typically include liming, fertilizing, mulching, ripping and disking before planting in areas that are compacted or heavily disturbed (landings, primary skid trails and temporary roads). Areas that are repeatedly used for logging decks and skid trails in stands that have frequent entries, have the potential to suffer more continuous periods of decreased soil productivity and decreased water infiltration and result in more overland flows. These areas represent a small fraction of the project area. Following Forest Plan standards and BMPs and site-specific design criteria would reduce the potential for long term adverse effects. Calculated sediment delivered to streams under current conditions for Hughes Creek- Broad River 6 th level HUC is about 33,181 tons per decade for alternative 2 and 33,177 tons per decade for alternative 3. Suspended sediment concentrations for alternative 2 and 3 are 80.9 and 80.8 ppm, respectively and represent a less than one percent increase over baseline levels. Adherence to Forest Plan standards (including following riparian area management prescriptions), BMPs and design criteria would result in minor short term impacts to water quality and imperceptible changes in water yield Soil Resources Affected Environment The project area is characterized by small rolling hills, narrow to flat ridge tops with moderately steep hillsides of varying slope and bottomland floodplains located in the Southern Piedmont area of South Carolina, specifically the Carolina Zone of the Piedmont Physiographic province, a major geologic zone situated east of the southern Appalachians (Griffith et al Hibbard et al. 2001). Soil information is based on surveys conducted by the Forest Service and the Natural Resources Conservation Service in Chester, Newberry and Union Counties, South Carolina. The following soil series are found in the project area: The Appling series consists of very deep, well-drained, moderately permeable soils on broad, nearly level to gently sloping ridges and on sloping to moderately steep sides of ridges between intermittent and permanent streams. The soils are moderately permeable and have moderate capacity to store water. The soils contain little organic matter and are strongly to very strongly acidic. The soils are well suited for loblolly pine and yellow-poplar. Erosion is a slight hazard. The Cartecay series consists of somewhat poorly drained, moderately permeable soil that formed in thick, loamy alluvial sediments. This soil has a dark brown 43

48 Sumter National Forest loamy surface layer about 9 inches thick and brownish loamy stratified C horizons that are mottled with gray. The soil contains a moderate to small amount of organic matter. It is slightly acid to strongly acidic. The soil is good for yellow poplar, cottonwood, loblolly pine, and sweetgum. Erosion hazard is low. The Cataula series consists of deep, well-drained, slowly permeable, clayey soil on ridge tops and short side slopes at the head of and adjacent to shallow drainages. The soil has a dense, brittle layer that restricts root penetration and water movement. The soil contains little organic matter. It is moderately to very strongly acidic. The soil is fairly suitable for loblolly pine and yellow poplar. Erosion hazard is severe. The Cecil series consists of deep, well-drained, sloping soil on medium and broad, irregularly shaped ridgetops. In cultivated areas, the surface layer is a mixture of topsoil and subsoil. Slopes are smooth and convex, and the unit contains some small areas with cobblestones and boulders on the surface. The permeability is moderate. The soil contains little organic matter and is strongly acidic or very strongly acidic. The suitability is good to fair for loblolly pine and yellow poplar. Erosion hazard is moderate. The Chenneby series consists of very deep, somewhat poorly drained, moderately permeable soil that formed in loamy and silty sediments on flood plains. Plant roots penetrate the very deep soil easily. The soil contains a moderate to small amount of organic matter and is strongly acidic or very strongly acidic. The suitability is good to fair for loblolly pine and yellow poplar. Erosion hazard is slight. The Durham series consists of deep, well drained moderately permeable soils formed in loamy residuum from acid crystalline rock. They are nearly level to sloping soils on broad ridges of the Piedmont. Durham soils are on nearly level to sloping Piedmont uplands. Slopes are commonly 2 to 5 percent and range from 0 to 10 percent. Durham soils formed in residuum weathered from acid crystalline rocks, chiefly granite and gneiss. Well drained; medium runoff; moderate permeability in upper subsoil and moderately slow permeability in lower subsoil. The Enon series consists of very deep, well drained, slowly permeable soils on ridgetops and side slopes in the Piedmont. They have formed in residuum weathered from mafic or intermediate igneous and high-grade metamorphic rocks such as diorite, gabbro, diabase, or hornblende gneiss or schist. Slope ranges from 2 to 45 percent. Enon soils are gently sloping on ridgetops and sloping to steep on the side slopes in the Southern Piedmont uplands. Slopes are generally between 4 to 10 percent but range from 2 to 45 percent. The soil formed in clayey residuum weathered from mafic or intermediate, igneous or high-grade metamorphic rocks such as diorite, diabase, gabbro, or hornblende gneiss or schist. Well drained; medium to rapid runoff; slow internal drainage; slow permeability. Forested areas have varying association of shortleaf, loblolly, and Virginia pine, eastern red 44

49 cedar, white oak, northern and southern red oak, hickory, yellow-poplar, sweetgum, blackgum, dogwood, and holly. The Hiwassee series consists of very deep, well drained soils on high stream terraces in the Southern Piedmont. They formed in old alluvium derived from felsic and mafic rocks. Slopes range from 0 to 25 percent. Hiwassee soils are on nearly level to moderately sloping high terraces in the Southern Piedmont. Slopes range from 0 to 25 percent. The soil formed in old alluvium from felsic and mafic rock, and is underlain with felsic or mafic residuum in some pedons. The Madison series consists of deep, well-drained soils found on ridges and broad side slopes. Slopes range from gently sloping to moderately steep. Permeability is moderate, and the available capacity to store water is medium. The soils contain little organic matter and are strongly acidic or very strongly acidic. The soils are good to fair for loblolly pine and yellow poplar. Erosion is a severe hazard. The Mecklenburg series consists of deep, well-drained, soil on narrow to broad ridges and their associated side slopes which are adjacent to drainage-ways. Slopes are smooth and convex. The clayey soils are slowly permeable. Mottling is common is deeper soil horizon and the soil is mildly acidic or strongly acidic. The soil is moderately suited for loblolly pine and yellow poplar production. Erosion hazard is moderate. Native tree species include loblolly pine, short leaf pine, Virginia pine, sweetgum, white oak, red oak, post oak, hickory, and yellowpoplar. Understory species include flowering dogwood, persimmon, sourwood, red maple, eastern redbud, eastern red cedar, and common sassafras The Pacolet series consists of deep, well-drained, strongly sloping to moderately steep soils found on convex slopes adjacent to drainages. Permeability is moderately rapid to rapid, and available water capacity is high. The soils contain little organic matter and are moderately acidic to very strongly acidic. The soils are moderately suited for loblolly pine and well suited for yellow poplar. Erosion is a severe hazard. The Rion series consists of very deep, well-drained, moderately permeable soil that formed on narrow ridges and side slopes adjacent to drainage-ways. Slopes are generally smooth and convex and range from gently sloping to very steep. Permeability is moderately rapid. The soil contains a small to moderate amount of organic matter and is moderately acidic to very strongly acidic. The soil is well suited for loblolly pine and yellow poplar. Erosion is a severe hazard. The Santuc series consists of very deep, moderately well-drained soil that formed on narrow ridges and side slopes adjacent to drainage-ways. The soil has medium to rapid runoff and moderately slow permeability. The soil contains a small to moderate amount of organic matter and is strongly acidic to extremely acidic. The 45

50 Sumter National Forest soil is well suited for loblolly pine and yellow poplar. Erosion is a moderate hazard. The Shellbluff series consists of very deep, moderately well-drained soils found in nearly level areas on first bottoms along streams. The soils have moderate permeability. The soils contain a small to moderate amount of organic matter and are strongly acidic to extremely acidic. The soils are well suited for loblolly pine and yellow poplar. Erosion is a slight hazard. The Toccoa series consists of very deep, moderately well-drained soils found in nearly level areas on first bottoms along streams. The soils can be flooded for brief periods. Soil permeability is moderately rapid. The soils contain a small to moderate amount of organic matter and are strongly acidic. The soils are well suited for loblolly pine and yellow poplar. Erosion is a slight hazard. The Udorthents are well-drained, gently sloping to steeply sloping soil in areas that were formally gullied and that have been reclaimed by extensive grading. The graded material ranges in thickness from approximately 6 inches to several feet. This map unit is comprised of several soil soils, with dominant series consisting of Cecil and Pacolet soils. Because of variations in the depth of the cuts and fills during gully restoration, and the different soil types, all interpretations must be done on-site. The soil is moderately suited for loblolly pine and poorly suited for yellow poplar production. Erosion hazard is severe. The Wateree Rion complex series consists of an intricate mix of small areas of Wateree sandy loam (45 percent), Rion loamy sand (35 percent), and other soil units, including Winnsboro. Wilkes and Pacolet soils make up the remainder of the complex. The complex is found on narrow to broad, long, moderately steep to steep, convex side slopes. Permeability is moderate to moderately rapid, and available water capacity is low to medium. The soils contain little organic matter. The Wateree sandy loam soil is very strongly acidic to moderately acidic in the surface layer, and extremely acidic to moderately acidic in the subsoil and underlying material. The Rion sandy loam is moderately acidic to very strongly acidic. The series is fairly suitable for loblolly pine and yellow poplar. Erosion hazard is severe. The Wilkes series consists of moderately deep, well-drained, sloping to steep soil on narrow ridges and broad, long, convex side slopes. Permeability is moderately slow, and available water capacity is low. The soil contains little organic matter. The soil is strongly acidic to slightly acidic in the surface layer and slightly acidic to mildly alkaline in the subsoil and underlying material. The soil has fair suitability for loblolly pine, post oak, southern red oak, and sweetgum. Erosion hazard is severe. The Winnsboro series consists of deep, well drained, slowly permeable fine soil on gently sloping to moderately steep uplands. Soil permeability is slow, and the 46

51 soil has a little capacity to store water. The soil contains a small to moderate amount of organic matter and is strongly acidic. The soil is moderately suited for loblolly pine and yellow poplar. Erosion is a slight hazard. Table displays the soil series by alternative. Table Soil Series Summary for each Action Alternative Soil Series Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Acres Acres Appling loamy sand Appling sandy clay loam Cartecay-Toccoa complex <1 <1 Cataula sandy clay loam <1 <1 Cataula sandy clay loam, 2 to 6% slopes, eroded <1 <1 Cataula sandy clay loam, 6 to 10% slopes, eroded 1 1 Cataula sandy clay loam, 2 to 6% slopes 8 8 Cataula sandy loam, 6 to 10% slopes, eroded <1 <1 Cecil sandy clay loam Chenneby silt loam 2 2 Durham sandy loam, 2 to 6% slopes <1 <1 Durham sandy loam, 6 to 10% slopes <1 <1 Enon sandy loam, 15 to 25% slopes <1 <1 Enon sandy loam, 6 to 10% slopes <1 <1 Hiwassee sandy clay loam 2 2 Madison sandy clay loam, 6 to 10% slopes, eroded 3 3 Madison sandy loam, 10 to 15% slopes 2 2 Madison sandy loam, 2 to 6% slopes 7 7 Mecklenburg sandy clay loam 2 2 Pacolet sandy clay loam Rion sandy clay loam 8 8 Rion sandy loam Santuc loamy coarse sand Shellbluff silty clay loam 8 8 Toccoa sandy loam Udorthents 6 6 Wateree-Rion complex, 15 to 40% slopes 4 4 Wilkes sandy loam Wilkes sandy loam, 15 to 40% slopes <1 <1 Wilkes soils, 15 to 40% slopes <1 <1 Winnsboro sandy clay loam Winnsboro sandy loam Winnsboro sandy loam, 6 to 10% slopes 6 6 Total 1, ,628 5 The acres displayed in this table are based on GIS analysis. The acreage is slightly different than the acreage listed in Chapter 2 of the EA for Alternative 2. There were no changes to the proposed action, only 47

52 Sumter National Forest Analysis Methods GIS modelling was used to estimate existing baseline erosion and sediment levels in the eleven 6 th level HUCs that comprise the landscape for this project (information is contained in the project file). This information was then compared to erosion level changes from both action alternatives. The analysis indicates that minimal changes in erosion would occur at the 6 th level HUC from project activities regardless of the action alternative chosen. The largest impacts occurred in the Hughes Creek-Broad River HUC. Increase erosion levels for this 6 th level HUC were barely measureable given the limited impacts of project activities. Therefore, analysis will focus on direct and indirect effects at the more localized project scale and then summarized in the cumulative effects analysis. Effects Direct and Indirect Effects of Alternative 1 There would be no new ground disturbing activities occurring in the analysis area. Current rates of soil building and erosion would continue. Cumulative Effects of Alternative 1 Alternative 1 does not propose any new ground disturbance. Effects to soils generally occur because of ground disturbing activities. Cumulative effects from past and present activities generally results in a localized loss in soil productivity due to compaction, rutting, and/or soil displacement. Activities, on national forest system lands, that are reasonably foreseeable would be implemented under the standards for protecting soils listed in the Forest Plan; therefore, cumulative effects from these actions are minimal. Activities on private lands will be site-specific to those lands and no cumulative effects would occur to the soil resource from those actions. Direct and Indirect Effects of Alternative 2 Commercial Timber Harvesting (284 acres) Timber harvesting involves various types and intensities of ground disturbing activities that can potentially affect the soil resource. Most of the soil impacts occur from skid trails, landings and temporary roads. Erosion hazard and steepness of slope are the primary soil concerns that could limit management activities. Impacts associated with logging and connected actions, e.g., construction, re-use of skid trails and landings center around rutting, soil compaction, displacement, erosion and nutrient reduction. Soil displacement and compaction during timber harvest varies depending upon both the type of soil and harvest method (Swank and others 1989). Timber harvesting can directly a correction of acres used in analysis. The acreages for alternative 3 were derived from GIS and corresponds with those presented in Chapter 2 of the EA. 48

53 affect the physical, chemical, and biological properties of soils (Swank and others 1989). Displacement of organic matter can result in disruption to nutrient recycling in the soil and reduced nutrient availability for trees and other plants. Nutrient removal varies with the intensity of the activities and the degree that organic materials are removed and not available for nutrient recycling. Nutrients are also removed through harvested wood. The degree in which nutrients are removed greatly depends on the harvesting method and type of material removed. Impacts on soil productivity from nutrient removal is site-specific and is complex in nature due to a wide range of soil-vegetation types and rates of nutrient replacement from the atmosphere and from soil weathering (Swank and others 1989). In general, since most nutrients in trees are held in the leaves, twigs, and branches a loss in soil productivity is usually not a concern unless there is complete utilization of wood fiber and rotations are short. A study in the piedmont of South Carolina has shown that even conventional harvesting had an adverse impact on P, K and Ca status of the ecosystem (Van Lear and others 1983). Commercial harvest under the action alternatives would remove mostly loblolly pine. Limbs, tops and un-merchantable material would be left on-site to decompose and would contribute to the nutrient cycle. The effects of nutrient depletion from forest management activities under the action alternatives would be minor. Compaction can limit root growth and development in the soil, decreasing tree growth (Swank and others 1989) and increase risk for blow down or tree stress. Water infiltration rates may be reduced due to compacted soils. Soil rutting and erosion can reduce soil productivity and result in permanent loss of soil. Where soil compaction is severe and unmitigated, soil productivity would be reduced due to loss of soil structure. Compaction is most likely to occur on those areas where heavy equipment operates repeatedly, especially when soils are wet. Areas subject to compaction include skid trails, temporary roads and log landings. While subject to many variables, it is estimated that about 10% of a given area harvested by conventional logging equipment (rubber-tired skidders/forwarder) is impacted by skid trails, temporary roads and log landings. The potential effects of soil erosion, sediment yield and compaction have a spatial and temporal context. The degree of effects depends upon the topographic, soil, and climatic characteristics of the affected area along with the intensity of management practices being implemented. Erosion that results from timber harvest would be greatly modified through time in that disturbance would be temporary and generally a single pulse over a long period of time. Indirect effects occur as accelerated weathering of the soil, increased erosion, accumulation of soil in depression areas, nutrient leaching and alteration of organic matter formation. Adherence to design criteria and Forest Plan standards and BMPs would reduce the potential for indirect effects to soils. Effects of Design Criteria Soil and water design criteria as described in section 2.4 of the EA would reduce soil erosion, compaction, rutting and protect existing stabilized gullies and prevent reactivation of gully heads in and adjacent to proposed harvest units. Dispersing water in 49

54 Sumter National Forest small amounts on temporary roads and skid trails along with road design techniques that include rolling-dips and out-slopping reduce soil erosion and the formation of head-cuts. Effects of timber harvest on soil loss and compaction would return to precutting conditions within two to five years with adherence to design criteria, Forest Plan standards and BMPs. Preplanning of skid trails both old and new is the key to limiting soil disturbance and the amount of area impacted. Since timber harvesting in this area is expected to be periodic and long term, well designed skid trails and landings can be used again without adding additional soil compaction. Skid trails are closed, water-barred and seeded to prevent erosion and sedimentation during periods of non-use. If any areas suffer severe compaction, however, the effects of the compaction could last much longer and would require sub-soiling ripping (using a dozer with winged ripper bar to break up the compacted layer followed by disking and planting). Special consideration to rutting and compaction should be given in stands where the dominant soil series is Mecklenburg and Winnsboro. Restricted water movement occurs in the Winnsboro and Mecklenburg map units due to high clay percentages. They are highly susceptible to compaction once they have become saturated. The high clay content lengthens the amount of time needed for the soils to dry out before mechanized operations can commence again. Each of these soils support harvesting equipment well during dry periods, however, during wet years or during and after rain events, these areas should be visited more regularly than normal by the sale administrator. Design criteria include no logging during wet soil conditions. This should reduce adverse effects to these soils. Toccoa, Udorthents and Cartecay soil series are associated with floodplains. Less than an acre is associated with potential commercial treatments under this alternative. Therefore, potential impacts would be minor with adherence to Forest Plan standards and BMPs. Approximately eight acres are associated with the Madison soil series which is characterized by being moderately erosive. Design criteria proposed for the action alternatives, adherence to Forest Plan standards and BMPs would reduce effects to this soil type. Roads (estimated 6 miles of system road reconstruction and maintenance, up to 1.1 miles of temporary roads) Road reconstruction, reconditioning and maintenance operations would include but not be limited to surfacing existing aggregate roads, blading and reshaping road surfaces and ditch-lines, cleaning and replacing culverts as needed, seeding, brushing and mowing. This work disturbs soils and can cause short term erosion until areas stabilize. However, this work would reduce soil erosion and sediment production from roads over the long term. The detachment and distance soil particles move would be reduced by limiting water concentration and movement on disturbed surfaces and/or fill materials. Maintenance would occur more frequently during harvest activities and would help to maintain conditions on roads and help to reduce adverse effects to soils. 50

55 Temporary roads for this project are located mainly on less sensitive ridge top areas in harvest units. Temporary roads used for harvest operations would contribute to erosion and sediment in the short term (up to three years), but the effects to soil and water can be reduced with erosion control measures such as constructing water-bars, seeding, mulching and fertilizing erosion hazard areas. Closing temporary roads after use would stabilize the road surface and creates conditions for trees and understory grasses, shrubs and forbs to grow and become established. This would reduce erosion and alleviate compaction. Implementing design criteria, Forest Plan standards and BMPs would accelerate the recovery process and reduce risks for soil erosion. Herbicides (used to: control understory undesirable woody vegetation, site preparation prior to planting shortleaf pine and as a release treatment for shortleaf pine seedlings in three to five years from planting) A herbicide risk assessment was completed for the herbicides proposed for use in this alternative and is available in the project record. Imazapyr would be applied as a foliar spray from a backpack and as a cut surface treatment. Triclopyr amine would be applied as a cut surface treatment. The application methods target site-specific vegetation and thus limit soil exposure to chemical residue or the creation of large areas devoid of vegetation that would be susceptible to erosion. Targeting woody vegetation would leave most grasses and forbs unaffected. Herbicide site preparation and release treatments would have minimal effects on the soil resources due, in part, to the application methods. Herbicide would be manually applied as foliar spray from backpack sprayers, by stem injection, or from squirt bottles applied directly to cut surfaces. Minimal amounts of herbicide would come in contact with the soil as most of it is targeted for application on the leaf surface or directed at the stem. These application methods do not require disturbance to the soil litter or duff layer and therefore, erosion is not a concern. Triclopyr would be applied by direct foliar application, stem injection or cut-surface treatments. Only the individual plant requiring treatment would be targeted. The herbicide is absorbed through foliage or the bark and is readily moved throughout the plant. Triclopyr is not highly mobile in the soil, and is not a leaching problem under normal conditions since it binds to clay and organic matter in the soil. It may leach from sandy soils if rainfall is heavy after application. The herbicide is broken down by soil microorganisms and ultraviolet light, and persists for 30 to 90 days (46 day average) in the soil depending on soil type and weather (Extoxnet Fact Sheet, 1996). The risk characterization for aquatic organisms differs for triclopyr TEA (Garlon 3A or equivalent) and triclopyr BEE (Garlon 4 or equivalent). For triclopyr TEA (triethylamine salt), risks to aquatic species are low over the entire range of application rates that may be used in Forest Service programs (SERA, 2011). Although triclopyr BEE is much more toxic to aquatic species than triclopyr TEA, or triclopyr acid, the projected levels of exposure are much less even for acute scenarios because of the rapid hydrolysis of triclopyr BEE to triclopyr acid, as well as, the lesser runoff of triclopyr BEE because of its lower water solubility and higher affinity for soils (SERA, 2011). Nonetheless, triclopyr BEE is 51

56 Sumter National Forest projected to be somewhat more hazardous when used near bodies of water where runoff to open water may occur (SERA, 2011). For triclopyr TEA, at an application rate of one pound per acre acute and chronic risks to aquatic animals, fish or invertebrates, as well as risk to aquatic plants are low (SERA, 2011). The risk of chronic exposure of triclopyr BEE to aquatic species is essentially the same as triclopyr TEA since it rapidly hydrolyzes to triclopyr acid. Specific formulations of triclopyr are registered and labeled for aquatic use and these could be used on selective sites where non-native invasive plants need to be controlled close to water. The binding of Imazapyr to soil is very complex depending on soil texture, ph, and presence of iron oxides, organic carbon, aeration, soil depth, and soil moisture. In general Imazapyr does not bind strongly with soil particles and can be persistent in soils. The most influential factor in the persistence of imazapyr in soil, however, appears to be microbial activity. Imazapyr is chemically stable in soil, and microbial breakdown along with dispersal by mechanisms such as percolation and runoff, will be the primary ways that Imazapyr decreases in soil over time. The half-life of imazapyr in soils usually ranges between one to seven months (American Cyanamid 1986). There does not appear to be any basis for asserting that imazapyr is likely to adversely affect microorganisms in soil (SERA, 201 pages 4-26). In stands with channeled ephemeral streams, Cide-Kick or equivalent would be used as an adjuvant with triclopyr ester formulations (Garlon 4 or equivalent). The main ingredient is d-limonene which is a derivative of plant oils, particularly lemon, orange, caraway, dill and bergamot. It is insoluble in water; hence these surfactants add a water soluble compound (nonylphenol ethoxylate) to allow for dispersion in water-based mixtures (Bakke). The US EPA is responsible for the regulation of inerts and adjuvants in pesticide formulations. As implemented, these regulations affect only pesticide labeling and testing requirements (SERA 2011). According to the Code of Federal Regulations d-limonene is exempt from the requirement of a tolerance when used in accordance with good agricultural practice. This means that the EPA has examined the possible environmental and health impacts of using d-limonene as a carrier in pesticides and found that no risks exist for this usage. This allows d-limonene to be used in pesticide formulations at any level without having to meet any residue tolerances requirements. Manual Vegetation Control (used to: create canopy gaps and to control undesirable understory woody vegetation ) Activities associated with this type of treatment include cutting trees with hand tools and chainsaws. These activities would have no measureable effect on the soil resource because of the limited amount of area impacted. Cut vegetation would decay on the soil surface over time and nutrients would be released back into the soil. Soil organic matter would increase from these treatments. Overall, the percent increase is expected to be minimal give the minimal level of treatments planned. 52

57 Mechanical Understory Vegetation Control (used to: create canopy gaps(no greater than one acre in size covering approximately 10% of the treatment area) Undesirable woody material in the understory of treatment stands would either be cut down by masticating or bush-hogging. Only a small portion of the area would be covered by wheeled or tracked based equipment. There would be minimal impacts to soil since no heavy loads would be skidded that could disturb soils. However, there is a potential to impact soils through rutting and compaction anytime heavy equipment is used. Limiting the mechanical treatments to only periods of dry soil conditions would greatly reduce the potential impacts to soils. Effects to soils would be mainly from the equipment itself. Impacts to soils would be minor with adherence to Forest Plan standards, BMPs and sitespecific design criterial. Planting shortleaf pine, Georgia aster, grasses and forbs These activities would have no measureable effect on the soil resource because of the limited amount of area impacted and the type of manual equipment used. Direct and Indirect Effects of Alternative 3 This alternative is slightly different from alternative 2 as described below: Commercial thinning of and additional 60 acres; Broadcast seeding of Georgia aster; Up to three applications of herbicide over a ten-year period; Triclopyr ester would not be used as a foliar spray to control understory and midstory woody species; Two additional herbicides (glyphosate and aminopyralid) would be used; Loblolly pine would not be controlled with herbicide rather they would be controlled by manual, mechanical and prescribed burning methods; Shortleaf pine restoration would be increased from 284 acres to 435 acres; Compartment 9 stand 1 would be changed to a non-commercial treatment; and A 364 acre burn block would be added. Commercial Timber Harvesting (435 acres including commercial thinning) The effects described for alternative 2 for commercial timber harvesting apply here as well. Additional harvesting would occur on Cecil, Pacolet and Rion soil series therefore the potential for impacts to soils are increased in this alternative. However, additional adverse effects to these soils from the added harvesting would be reduced with adherence to Forest Plan standards, BMPs and following site-specific design criteria. Additional effects to these soils would be minor. Soil disturbance would be lower and more dispersed in stands proposed for intermediate thinning. Thinning activities would result in some soil compaction from heavy machinery 53

58 Sumter National Forest particularly on skid trails and in landing locations. Woody debris on the ground during thinning would help to reduce soil disturbance. Roads (estimated 6 miles of system road reconstruction and maintenance, up to 1.4 miles of temporary roads) Effects to soils from road reconstruction, reconditioning and maintenance operations would be exactly the same as alternative 2. With only a slight increase in temporary roads (0.3 miles), effects to soils from temporary roads would not be measurably different from those described for alternative 2. Herbicides (used to: control understory undesirable woody vegetation, site preparation prior to planting shortleaf pine and as a release treatment for shortleaf pine seedlings in three to five years from planting) The effects described in alternative 2 for imazapyr and triclopyr amine apply to this alternative as well. In addition, two additional herbicides are proposed for use: Glyphosate (accord XRT II or equivalent) and aminopyralid (Milestone or equivalent). A herbicide risk assessment was completed for the herbicides proposed for use in this alternative and is available in the project record. Aminopyralid and glyphosate would be applied as a foliar spray from a backpack. The application method targets site-specific vegetation and thus limits soil exposure to chemical residue or the creation of large areas devoid of vegetation that would be susceptible to erosion. Targeting woody vegetation would leave most grasses and forbs unaffected. Aminopyralid Information presented here on soil effects comes from Aminopyralid Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment Final Report, Syracuse Environmental Research Associates, Inc. for USDA Forest Service and National Park Service, Aminopyralid does not appear to be very toxic to soil microorganisms. Except in areas that are highly susceptible to runoff such as hard packed and predominantly clay soils, offsite losses associated with runoff do not appear to pose a substantial risk. Runoff of about 1% to 5% of the applied aminopyralid from predominantly clay soils might be expected depending on rainfall rates. Much less runoff is expected from loam soils and virtually no runoff is expected from predominantly sandy soils. The amount of pesticide not washed off in runoff or sediment will penetrate into the soil column, and the depth of penetration depends on the properties of the chemical, the soil and the rainfall amounts. The deepest penetration of aminopyralid in clay is about 60 inches in all soil types at annual rainfall rates of 15 inches per year or more. This is consistent with the assessment given in the EPA ecological risk assessment of aminopyralid. Given its high mobility, and moderate persistence in soil, aminopyralid is likely to leach to ground water, irrespective of soil type. Roberts and Schelle (2004a) conducted studies on the degradation and 54

59 transport of aminopyralid in soil at two sites in the United States: Greenville, Mississippi and Fresno, California. At both of these sites, very little soil penetration was noted: a maximum soil penetration to 15 inches in Mississippi over a 183 day observation period and a maximum soil penetration to about 30 inches over a 182 day observation period in California. The results indicate that aminopyralid is likely to be non-persistent and relatively immobile in the field. Half-lives of 32 and 20 days were determined, with minimal leaching below the 15 to 30 cm soil depth. Glyphosate Information presented here on soil effects comes from Glyphosate Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment Final Report, Syracuse Environmental Research Associates, Inc. for USDA Forest Service, Glyphosate is moderately persistent in soil with a half-life of 47 days. It is: resistant to chemical degradation; stable in sunlight; non-leachable, does not volatilize; and, has a low affinity to runoff. There is very little information suggesting that glyphosate is harmful to soil microorganisms under field conditions and a substantial body of information indicating that glyphosate is likely to enhance or have no effect on soil microorganisms (Busse et al. 2001; Wardle and Parkinson 1990a,b; Wardle and Parkinson 1991). The results of these studies are sufficient evidence that direct toxic effects on soil microorganism are not likely to occur due to glyphosate exposure. Glyphosate applications may cause changes in microbial populations due to effects on and changes in terrestrial vegetation. In general, glyphosate binds tightly to soil and its leaching capacity is extremely low i.e., glyphosate is relatively immobile 39 in soil (e.g., Alex et al. 2008; Landry et al. 2005; Mamy and Burriuso et al. 2005). Because glyphosate is strongly adsorbed to soil, relatively little, if any, absorption occurs through the roots (Smith and Oehme 1992). Broadcast seeding of Georgia Aster This activity would have no effects on soils. Manual Vegetation Control (used to: create canopy gaps and to control undesirable understory woody vegetation ) The effects described for alternative 2 apply here as well. Mechanical Understory Vegetation Control (used to: create canopy gaps(no greater than one acre in size covering approximately 10% of the treatment area) The effects described for alternative 2 apply here as well. 55

60 Sumter National Forest Planting shortleaf pine, Georgia aster, grasses and forbs These activities would have no measureable effect on the soil resource because of the limited amount of area impacted and the type of manual equipment used. Prescribe Burn Block Addition (364 Acres) This prescribed burn block is located in compartment 68 and incorporates all or portions of two stands proposed for treatment. The intent of the burn is to consume portions of the litter layer and coarse woody fuels on the surface and inhibit regeneration of loblolly pine. In addition, it would help manage the existing population of Georgia aster and facilitate additional plantings of Georgia aster and other native species. Control of ignition and burning conditions insure that the flame heights or severity of the burn is within acceptable limits. By doing so, the loss in surface organic matter, changes in the pore space and infiltration rates are typically too small to be detected, except for local fuel concentration areas. The humus and much of the duff layer would remain intact. There would be some tree charring. Soil biota is temporarily reduced but the recovery rate is rather quick as long as soil heating is not severe. There is usually no effect on soil structure and organic matter. Fuel concentration areas such as log loading or limb piling areas are more likely to produce more severe or intense burns and soil exposure. Fire and heat from these areas can damage soils, making recovery difficult. However, this would occur at log landing site which comprise a small portion of the area. Woody fuel accumulations can be dispersed by the logging operation to avoid creating large concentrations of fuels at log landings. Most of the burn block is surrounded by roads or a stream/riparian area that can be used as a fireline. Only about a quarter of mile of dozer fireline is needed on the western boundary. A small portion of hand fireline may be needed in the riparian area to reduce adverse soil effects. The riparian area may be wet enough at the time of burning that only the litter layer would need to be removed at the time of the burn. The fireline would be rehabilitate after use by the construction of water-bars and seeded to reduce erosion effects following Forest Plan standards and BMPs. Effects from firelines on soils would be minimal. Burning enhances nutrients such as phosphorus and reduces soil acidity though there may be some loss of nitrogen. The use of lime and fertilizer helps in returning nutrients to the soil including nitrogen that could be lost from prescribed burning. Soil microorganisms are minimally affected as heating does not go deep into the soil with these light intensity fires. Fuel loadings would normally be light consisting mostly of grasses, forbs, woody shrubs, dead woody fuels (ranging from leaves to small twigs and branches up to large logs. Additional impacts associated with prescribed burning on soils can be found in the Vegetation Management in the Coastal Plain/Piedmont EIS (VMFEIS, USDA, 1989b). 56

61 All prescribed burning would adhere to Forest Plan standards and BMPs. The effects of burning would result in minimal impacts to soils. Cumulative Effects of the Action Alternatives Past, present and future activities on NFS lands that disturb soils include the use of prescribed fire and manual and mechanical treatments to reduce fuel loadings and to enhance wildlife habitat. Past commercial timber harvest (regeneration and intermediate stand treatments, thinning) have taken place periodically in project area compartments over the last five year period. Utility line and road rights-of-way maintenance (mostly manual, mechanical and some herbicide use) are also done on a periodic basis. Activities on adjacent private lands include timber harvesting, grazing and farming activities, homesites and utility line and road rights-of-way maintenance. Herbicide is used on NFS lands to control non-native invasive plant species, during reforestation and to treat undesirable woody vegetation in stands managed for timber and/or wildlife. Other connected actions associated with forest and wildlife management activities include drum chopping, masticating and biomass removal in some stands. Detailed analysis of all ground disturbing activities is located in the project record and includes analysis of erosion, sediment and suspended sediment concentrations for each of the eleven 6 th level watersheds that encompass the project. Cumulative effects to soil in harvest units result in localized loss in soil productivity due to compaction, rutting, erosion and soil displacement. Soil erosion also contributes to sedimentation in streams (this is evaluated in the project record and in the water section of this EA). Activities on NFS lands would adhere to standards in the Revised Land and Resource Management Plan for the Sumter National Forest (Forest Plan) including South Carolina s Best Management Practices for Forestry and National Best Management Practices for Water Quality Management on National Forest System Lands (commonly referred to as BMPs) to reduce cumulative soil impacts. This includes such practices as grass-seeding and water-barring to reduce soil erosion, limiting management activities when soils are saturated and limiting the amount of bare soil exposed from prescribed burning. Designated skid trails and landings are used to limit the amount of soil exposed to compaction and erosion. Soil amelioration practices typically include liming, fertilizing, mulching and disking before planting. Cumulative effects relative to soil impacts described above from past, present and futures actions are expected to be minor. Areas that are repeatedly used for logging decks and skid trails in stands that have frequent entries, have the potential to suffer more continuous periods of decreased soil productivity and decreased water infiltration. Although rehabilitation of these sites decreases the duration of the recovery period for soils and lessens the potential for cumulative degradation of soil conditions, the re-opening and use of these areas during successive harvest operations generally results in some decreased soil quality on these sites. These areas are a small fraction of the project area. Cumulative impacts on soil conditions from past prescribed burning is considered minimal for the majority of areas burned, as soil recovery takes less than a year for the majority of burned areas (VEGEIS; Renschin et al., 2002). Severely burned areas require 57

62 Sumter National Forest a longer recovery time as soil productivity is decreased and erosion potential is increased. Generally, prescribed burning when done under the proper conditions promote nutrient cycling and increase growth of vegetative cover (VEGEIS). Calculated baseline erosion levels for the sum of the eleven 6 th level HUCs is 471,037 tons for the decade and alternative 2 would increase this by 98 tons per decade and alternative 3 would increase this by 218 tons per decade. Both of these increases are very small and not measureable at the landscape scale. Implementation of Alternative 3 considered together with past and reasonably foreseeable future activities is not expected to have a measureable cumulative adverse effect on the soil resource Air Quality Affected Environment Air pollutants of most concern include ozone, particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and mercury. Ozone is a pollutant formed by emissions of nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds in the presence of sunlight. Nitrogen oxides (NOx) are released when any fuel is combusted at very high temperatures; major sources of NOx include automobiles, power plants and industrial boilers. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are emitted from both human and natural sources, including chemical manufacturing, gasoline-powered vehicles, trees and vegetation. Research has shown that in the southern US there is an overabundance of naturally-occurring VOCs, and thus ozone formation is "NOx-limited. This means that the concentration of ambient ozone is primarily dependent on the amount of nitrogen oxide emitted into the air. When ozone is formed, it causes human health concerns as well as negative impacts to vegetation. Specifically, elevated ozone concentrations can reduce the health and vigor of sensitive vegetation and reduce plant growth. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), as directed by Congress, has set a national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) of parts per million (ppm) to protect both human health and the environment. The Enoree Ranger District is meeting NAAQS for ozone [Fiscal Year 2013 Monitoring and Evaluation Annual Report, Sumter National Forest (2013 Monitoring Report)]. Particulate matter is a mixture of extremely small particles made up of soil, dust, organic chemicals, metals, and sulfate and nitrate acids. The size of the particles is directly linked to health effects, with smaller particles causing the worst impacts to human health. Additionally, particulate matter is the main cause of visibility impairment. These tiny particles absorb and reflect light which diminishes scenery views. Regional haze usually covers large geographical areas, and many local and regional sources of pollution contribute to the degraded visibility conditions. EPA has set NAAQS for ultra-small (less than 2.5 microns in diameter) particulate matter on both a short-term (24-hour) and annual basis to protect human health and visibility. The 24-hour fine particulate matter (PM2.5) NAAQS to protect both humans and the environment is currently set at 35µg/m3, while the annual PM2.5 NAAQS for human health is 12µg/m3. The Enoree 58

63 Ranger District conducts activities, particularly prescribed fire, that contribute to air pollution. With the increasing prescribed fire program, it is important to assess whether there is any indication that local and regional PM2.5 levels are mirroring that trend. Based on the 2013 Monitoring Report, PM2.5 concentrations do not appear to be correlated with PM2.5 emissions from prescribed fires. The Enoree Ranger District is meeting NAAQS for fine particulate matter (2013 Monitoring Report). Sulfur and nitrogen deposition can cause stream acidification and leaching of important soil nutrients needed for healthy terrestrial and aquatic biota. Nitrogen deposition can also cause eutrophication or nutrient enrichment that negatively impacts water quality, aquatic biota, and may increase invasive plant growth. Sulfur comes primarily from the combustion of coal at electrical generating units. Nitrogen compounds are derived from both the combustion of fuel at very high temperatures (such as in power plants, industrial boilers, and automobiles) as well as from various agricultural processes. Although EPA has considered setting a multi-pollutant NAAQS to address deposition-related affects, they have decided there currently is not enough scientific information to set one standard that would adequately protect the diverse ecosystems across the country. This proposal does not have the potential to affect sulfur or nitrogen deposition and will not be evaluated further. Mercury is another important environmental contaminant that reaches the forest primarily through atmospheric deposition. The primary source of anthropogenic (manmade) mercury is the combustion of coal. Mercury is fairly stable and accumulates in the environment until conditions are right for dispersal. This can occur by wildland fires ejecting the mercury back into the atmosphere, or when associated with wetlands where it can be converted via sulfate reduction to its most toxic form, methyl mercury (MeHg). The MeHg is ingested by aquatic organisms and bioaccumulates as it makes its way through the food web, and can affect humans when too many fish are consumed in one week. Unhealthy levels of MeHg have led to fish consumption advisories in almost every state. Methyl mercury has also been found in numerous species of wildlife. EPA regulates the amount of mercury that is emitted into the air from many different sources, including power plants, municipal waste combustors and medical waste incinerators. Frequent low intensity fires may actually help in the sequestration of mercury by leaching mercury deep into the soil where it would be less available for runoff (Waldrop 2009). This proposal does not have the potential to affect mercury release into the atmosphere and will not be evaluated further. Emission reductions over the past decade have been achieved as a result of new regulations, voluntary measures taken by industry, and the development of public-private partnerships. It is expected that air quality would continue to improve as recently adopted regulations are fully implemented, and as a result, it is anticipated that emissions of air pollution released within the air shed of the Sumter National Forest would continue to decline. 59

64 Sumter National Forest Effects Analysis Direct and Indirect Effects of Alternative 1: No Action This alternative has no direct effects on air quality since no additional management actions would be implemented. Prescribed burning is conducted under an existing forestwide decision and the existing condition indicates that air quality standards are being met. Air quality will continue to be monitored and reported in the yearly monitoring report. Cumulative Effects of Alternative 1: No Action Past, present and reasonably foreseeable projects on federal and private lands that result in impacts to air quality will continue to be monitored via the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) monitoring stations across the state. Air quality is currently meeting standards for ozone and fine particulate matter (PM2.5). Direct and Indirect Effects of Alternative 2: Proposed Action Approximately 364 more acres would be prescribed burned on a periodic basis with this alternative. That includes two stands (compartment 68/stands 7 and 10) that are planned for restoration treatments. A minimal number of trees would be cut and herbicides would be used to control the growth of woody species in these two units. The remainder of the 364 acre burn block would also be burned on a periodic basis. Prescribed fires, while they generally produce lower total emissions than wildfires, are also lower in intensity than wildfires, with lower total heat production and lower plume rise. This difference can often lead to higher smoke concentrations at locations far from the source than from a wildland fire of the same size. The first burn of this area would initially produce higher levels of emissions than subsequent burns. The effects, even with the additional 364 acres, would still be within the effects described in the Environmental Assessment, Prescribed Burning on the Piedmont of the Sumter National Forest, South Carolina (Prescribed Burn EA). Once prescribed fire is reintroduced into these stands on a periodic base, most of the fuel to be consumed would be needles and woody shrubs and grasses. These areas have a tendency to burn rapidly with minimal long term burning potential. Periodic prescribed fire would create minor temporary impacts to localized air quality. The changes are dependent on weather conditions, timing, characteristics of the area (fuel loadings and time period since last burning) and the size of the area being burned. In general, impacts are most frequent in the local area of the burn where large quantities of smoke can be produced over a short period of time. Prescribed burning would only take place when conditions are favorable for smoke dispersal and is done following a smoke management plan. In addition to prescribed fire, dust and emissions from heavy equipment and trucks would occur during restoration operations. The amount of dust generated would depend upon local soil and road conditions and would be limited to high 60

65 vehicle traffic and activities. Emissions in the area would be minimal and of short duration. Additional detailed discussion and analysis of the potential impacts from prescribed fire on air quality are discussed in the Guide to Prescribed Fire in the Southern Forests (U.S. Department of Agriculture 1989b) and Vegetation Management in the Coastal Plain/Piedmont Environmental Impact Statement (refer to pages IV-106 through IV-113). Cumulative Effects of Alternative 2: Proposed Action The additional burning would not be measureable when placed in context with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable ongoing burning conducted on an annual basis on the Enoree Ranger District (up to 30,000 acres annually) and private land is within the range of effects anticipated in the Prescribed Burn EA. The additional burning would not measurably impact local and regional air quality. Annual monitoring reports would continue to monitor air quality for increasing pollution trends or non-attainment areas as a result of project activities. Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects of Alternative 3 The effects of alternative 3 on air quality would be the same as alternative Climate Change and Carbon Storage Affected Environment On January 16, 2009, the Chief of the US Forest Service directed the national forests to consider climate change during project planning. National forests were directed to consider the impacts that climate change would have on meeting goals and objectives stated in Forest Plans and the effects that the project contributes to climate change. The US Global Changes Research Program published a 2009 report (USGCRP 2009) on climate changes on different regions. Predictions for the Southeast include: air temperature increases; sea level rise; changes in the timing, location and quantity of precipitation; and increased frequency of extreme weather events such as hurricanes, heat waves, droughts and floods. These predicted changes would affect renewable resources, aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems and agriculture, with implications for human health. Human greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, primarily carbon dioxide emissions (CO 2 ), are the main source of accelerated climate change on a global scale. The Template for Assessing Climate Change Impacts and Management Options (TACCIMO) was used to assess differences among three general circulation models for the Sumter National Forest. TACCIMO (USFS 2014) was used to create a report that summarizes the resulting climate change impacts and includes a literature report. Climate change, especially climate change variability (droughts and floods), may alter hydrologic characteristics of watersheds with implications for wildlife, forest productivity and human use. This climate change variability may result in long-term and seasonal changes 61

66 Sumter National Forest in temperature that could influence ecosystem health and function. These impacts result from both long-term warming and from shorter term fluctuations in seasonal temperature that may interrupt or alter temperature dependent ecosystem processes. Climate change scenarios predict that increases in temperatures and drought occurrence in the Southeast could result in increased losses of carbon, possibly exacerbated by increased wildfire disturbance. The consequences of drought depend on annual and seasonal climate changes and whether the current drought adaptations of trees offer resistance and resilience to changing conditions. The seasonal severity of fire hazard is projected to increase about 10 percent over the next century over much of the US with a 30 percent increase in fire hazard for the southeast predicted. The affected environment for climate change is two-fold. First, climate change may affect the natural resources on the Enoree RD and the objectives for the project area. Secondly, project activities may affect carbon storage ability and influence global climate. Only impacts from climate change on meeting project objectives will be considered as the scale of the project is too small to have global climate change impacts that are measureable. The restoration project is located in a forested environment and would provide a source for uptake and storage of carbon. Effects Analysis Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects of Alternative 1: No Action Alternative 1 would not result in any change to the current trend for carbon storage or release in the project area. If climate change occurs, studies on longleaf pine (Pederson, Varner, and Palik 2007) indicate that drought exacerbates mortality because increased evaporative demand reduces vigor, which predisposes trees to insect and disease. Peaks in wildlife fire activity would also add to this mortality. Extensive forests of loblolly pine now exist in areas once dominated by mixtures of hardwoods, shortleaf pine, and less abundant loblolly pine forests. Declines in agriculture as a result of loss of soil productivity, led to the establishment of more loblolly pine across the piedmont. Past and present projects including periodic prescribed burning, woodland creation and thinning (pulpwood, and intermediate) have reduced hazardous fuels, improved growing conditions for trees, and increased diversity of habitat conditions including development of understory grasses, forbs and shrubs on portions of national forest system lands. The project area and the Enoree Ranger District is currently a mosaic of diverse stands and habitat conditions. Continued forest management activities on federal and private lands would provide for healthy diverse forests that would be more capable of adjusting to changes in climate. 62

67 Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects of Alternative 2: Proposed Action The project proposes maintaining forested conditions and restoring more native vegetation mainly focusing on increasing Georgia aster and shortleaf pine. Adding diversity to the stands and decreasing the amount of loblolly pine would make these stands better able to withstand climate change scenarios predicted for the Southeast. Past, present and reasonably foreseeable projects/ongoing activities on federal and private lands include forest management, agriculture and grazing. It is unlikely that global climate change scenarios would impact these activities to any great degree since a majority of the Piedmont Region is devoted to keeping forested stands in a healthy productive state by thinning, regeneration harvests and prescribed burning. Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects of Alternative 3 Effects of alternative 3 on climate change and carbon storage would be the same as alternative 2. Adding diversity to the stands and decreasing the amount of loblolly pine would make these stands better able to withstand climate change scenarios predicted for the Southeast. 3.2 Biological Environment Forest Vegetation Affected Environment The majority of USFS land in the Georgia Aster Shortleaf Restoration Project Area is dominated by even-aged stands of loblolly and shortleaf pine of varying age classes. Hardwoods can also be found as small inclusions within predominately pine stands and in mixed stands which contain a relatively even mix of pine and hardwood species. Major hardwood species include sweetgum, red maple, and a variety of oaks. Forest types and age class of treatment stands in the Georgia Aster Shortleaf Restoration Project Area are summarized in Table Plant communities found in the Georgia Aster Shortleaf Restoration Project are common to managed loblolly pine forests. Species composition has been influenced in the past by timber harvest, prescribed fires, and altered soil conditions. Common shrub-subcanopy vegetation in these areas includes dogwood, blackberry, sumac, hornbeam, sourwood, and blackgum, as well as seedlings and saplings of overstory species, including red maple, sweetgum, oak, and loblolly pine. Understory vegetation varies from location to location depending on soil conditions, frequency of disturbance, and the level of available moisture. In general, the level of ground cover is most affected by the amount of light reaching the forest floor, with those sites having the least canopy cover capable of supporting larger woody plant communities. These conditions are common in areas that once served as old log landings in past harvests, as well as near roadsides. Understory 63

68 Sumter National Forest vegetation in these areas may include greenbriar, poison ivy, honeysuckle, blackberry, and beautyberry, as well as a variety of grasses and legumes. Forest stands in the Georgia Aster Shortleaf Restoration Project Area are of varying size classes, and most stands fall into the age classes. Table provides a breakdown of major age classes by forest type. Environmental Consequences Timber harvesting activities proposed for the Georgia Aster Shortleaf Restoration Project Area would have a variety of effects on forest vegetation. These effects are described below, with reference to the type of activity. Individual Tree Removal The stands treated with the individual tree removal method have moderate stand densities (basal areas of square feet) of mature (40+ years old) loblolly pine. The treatment of removing individual trees for the purpose of creating daylight for Georgia Aster would affect ten percent of the total area. The total area for individual tree selection is 1253 acres; therefore, the affected area is 125 acres. The 125 acres treated with individual tree removal would allow light penetration to the forest floor, and as a result, encourages both woody and herbaceous understory growth. Vegetation diversity on the forest floor would increase immediately following timber harvest, with the greatest diversity and abundance likely to occur within the first six to eight years (Miller et al., 1995). The abundance of grasses and forbs would slowly diminish as the tree canopy closed. Individual tree removal would help meet Objective Maintain or restore at least 8 self-sustaining populations for Georgia aster (Symphyotrichum georgianum) on the piedmont districts, and the habitat to support them. Individual trees removal would daylight the forest floor and if followed up with herbicide would help provide Georgia aster needed sunlight to grow. Planting Georgia Aster and Native Herbaceous Plants Planting containerized Georgia aster plants and hand-sowing native grasses would take advantage of areas created by herbaceous and mechanical treatments. The planting of Georgia aster and sowing of native herbaceous plants would take advantages of the area of space created by mid-story treatments. Herbicide Herbicide use would focus on eliminating competing species in the direct vicinity of Georgia Aster (Georgia Aster Management areas) and planted shortleaf pine seedlings (shortleaf restoration area). These treatments are commonly employed in the Southeast to reduce competition from early pioneering species, such as sweetgum, poplar, and invasive weeds to improve the growth, health, and success rate of the regenerating stand 64

69 (Muir, et al., 1998). Pine seedling growth is inversely related to the amount of competition from pioneer species (Schultz, 1997; Kormanik, et al., 1995). As a result of the proposed treatments, planted shortleaf pine, and hardmast hardwood stands would have greater seedling success and growth, resulting in a long-term, moderate, beneficial impact on vegetation within the treatment sites. Due to the selective and directed application of herbicides, collateral losses of preferred species from accidental herbicide exposure are anticipated to be minimal. No collateral losses would be anticipated from hack-and-squirt treatments. Some terrestrial plants may be affected by applications of triclopyr and imazapyr used to control undesirable vegetation. There are three pathways of exposure for plants that are potentially important in herbicide applications: direct deposition, volatilization, and soil transport. For triclopyr, the potential effects of volatilization and soil contamination are likely to be marginal. Triclopyr have a very low volatility and will bind tightly to and degrade in soil. Direct deposition, through unintentional direct spray or spray drift does pose a potential hazard to non-target plants. Arsenal is soil active, but its mobility is relatively low. Soil activity expresses itself during the spring leaf expansion, so applications made from late June to mid-september should produce little or no evidence of soil activity. Arsenal is rainfast within one hour and washing is a concern before the herbicide becomes rain fast. The directed foliar and cut-surface methods allow application to specific targeted plants and would reduce impacts to sensitive plant species. The sensitive plant non-target species include shortleaf pine, Georgia aster, oak, and hickory. In addition, following label requirement and forest plan standards related to herbicide application would ensure that any spray droplets are not carried offsite. These factors and precautions would ensure that no other non-target species are affected directly and also greatly reduce any likelihood that the herbicide would reach the soil surface and potentially run-off to areas where additional non-target species are located. Herbicides would be used to create habitat favorable for Georgia aster. Georgia aster is a plant that requires full sunlight to survive and prosper. Herbicide would be used to remove woody competitors. Given adequate stocking (shortleaf restoration stands), selected trees would be release from non-desired woody species. The proposed action would use herbicide to release selected trees. Because herbicides were used in the site preparation, the areas needing herbicide release would be greatly reduced and only used in stands where there are more than 100 stems per acre of sweetgum, yellow poplar, American elm, and maple. Manual and Mechanical Manual and or mechanical treatments would reduce competition from mid-story woody vegetation (sweet gum, maple, poplar, elm, and etc.) for one growing season following treatment and then the woody vegetation would re-sprout. The treatments would be used 65

70 Sumter National Forest on dense sites and additional treatments of prescribed fire and or herbicide treatments would be used to control sprouting. Thinning Trees with thinning crowns, poor form, and insect damage or disease are generally the trees removed during thinnings. Thinning activities in Georgia Aster Shortleaf Restoration Project Area would provide more growing space for individual trees and improve the health of the forests in the area. Evidence suggests that the increase in tree growth vigor and selective culling of diseased and stressed trees would substantially reduce the risk of loss from fusiform rust and southern pine beetle attacks (Belanger et al., 2000). Thinning generally results in greater light penetration to the forest floor, and as a result, induces both woody and herbaceous understory growth. Vegetation diversity on the forest floor would increase immediately following timber harvest, with the greatest diversity and abundance likely to occur within the first six to eight years (Miller et al., 1995). The abundance of grasses and forbs would slowly diminish as the tree canopy closes. Thinning activities do come with some biological risks, including potential for physical damage that can occur: to residual trees as a result of the harvesting process, to soils on which future plant growth and/or biomass production may be reduced (i.e., on highly eroded or compacted areas), and to existing shrub and herbaceous vegetation damaged as a result of the harvesting process. Physical damage to residual trees as a result of harvesting activities is normally minor. Sites would be reviewed and approved prior to harvest to ensure that log landing and skid trail locations are appropriately planned to minimize soil impacts and damage to residual trees. In addition, log landings and skid trails roads would be reseeded with grass and/or legumes following harvesting activities. This would increase the proportion of the stand covered by grasses and legumes, provide forage for wildlife, and decrease the amount of time required to rehabilitate compacted or disturbed soils. Damage to existing shrub and herbaceous vegetation during the harvesting process would be temporary, and plants in the understory would quickly regain their vigor due to increased light availability to the forest floor. Some species, such as sweetgum would increase in the understory and midstory due to the increased sunlight. Thinning in the dense pine forest provide an opportunity to address Forest Plan goals and objectives. Specifically thinning reduces the risk of insect and disease outbreaks by improving tree vigor, which addresses LRMP Goal 17. The thinnings address Objective 17.01, Improve forest health on 10,000 to 50,000 acres of pine forest by reducing stand density. Thinning would also reduce stand basal area in dense pine stands. In the desired conditions section of 10B and 7E2 the LRMP states Pine stands are maintained at moderate to low densities (less than 100 square feet/acre basal area) to reduce susceptibility to southern pine beetle attack and promote understory development. Thinning addresses concerns with basal area conditions over 100 square feet/acre by reducing the basal areas to square feet/acre in these heaver stocked pine stands. 66

71 Shortleaf Pine Restoration All of the sites proposed for shortleaf restoration consist of loblolly pine stands that are greater than 40 years old. This treatment would address Objective 8.04 of the Sumter LMRP, which calls for increases in shortleaf pine and shortleaf pine/oak on 10,000 acres in the piedmont. Little leaf disease has severely degraded shortleaf pine in the Piedmont region of the United States and based on soil conditions in the restoration stands, it was determined that these site would be at low risk for little leaf disease. As a result of shortleaf restoration, these sites would be returned to an early successional stage, which would provide habitat for pioneer species of plants and animals requiring open canopy habitat for their development. The shortleaf restoration would also help in balancing age class distribution by regenerating late successional age classes (60+ years) into early successional age classes (0-10). Shortleaf pine restoration would require the removal of all loblolly pine while retaining healthy shortleaf pine on site. It is anticipated that not enough shortleaf pine would be left to restock the stand, so planting shortleaf pine seedlings would be needed. Hard-mast producing hardwoods greater than 8 inches in diameter at breast height (dbh) would also remain on site for wildlife benefit. Immediately following the regeneration harvests, grasses and legumes and early pioneering hardwood species would begin to grow in response to the newly opened canopy, as well as in those areas reseeded after construction of log landings and skid trails. In the summer (June-September) immediately following the shortleaf restoration harvest, the regeneration areas would be prepared through the use of herbicides (see above Herbicide for effects). Following the herbicide treatment during the winter months (January-March) shortleaf pine would be planted on 7 x10 spacing. Overtime the shortleaf pine would take over site and shade out grasses and legumes and early pioneering hardwood species. Prescribed Burning Prescribed burning would promote more open conditions in the understory and would tend to favor pine, oak, and hickory species over less desirable species of maple, sweetgum, poplar, and, elm. Georgia aster (in select areas), native grasses and forbs would dominate cover in the understory. There are risks to surrounding vegetation associated with prescribed burning. These risks include needle scorch in pine trees, tree mortality, loss of timber grade in hardwoods, etc. The risks involved with prescribed burning would be minimal. Connected actions Road construction Road construction operations result in the clearing of vegetation along the road right-ofway (ROW) and disturbance and compaction of soils along the road travel way. Thus, 67

72 Sumter National Forest road construction results in both the direct removal of vegetation and a reduction in the ability of soils along the road way to support plant growth. The extent of the vegetation clearing and reduction of future plant production is dependent on the type of road constructed and its intended duration of use. Impacts from temporary roads are generally temporary, as they are rehabilitated following harvest through grading and reseeding the roadbed with grasses and legumes. Soil compaction on these sites is generally long term, and as a result, soil productivity along temporary roads can be reduced for decades. In contrast, system road construction results in the removal of vegetation and reduced soil productivity in the road right-of-way over the duration of the use of the road. Erosion control Erosion control activities would be used to mitigate soil compaction on log decks, skid trails, and temporary roads. Wherever possible, native grasses would be used. Some non-native, non-invasive plants species may be seeded also. The species mix would consist of plants that are beneficial to wildlife. These erosion control activities would create areas of grasses and forbs within harvested stands, but would eventually be shaded out as the tree canopy closed. Timber Type Loblolly Pine Shortleaf Pine White oaknorthern red oakhickory Current Total Table Forest Type and Age Class Distribution in the Georgia Aster Shortleaf Restoration Treatment Stands Total % % % % % Percent 0% 2% 3% 5% 31% 10% 20% 20% 2% 6% 1% 100% After Treatment Percent 28% 2% 3% 5% 15% 7% 20% 11% 2% 6% 1% 100% Effects Analysis Direct and Indirect Effects of Alternative 1: No Action Under the No Action alternative, no Georgia aster populations and shortleaf pine restoration would occur. Individual tree removal and harvesting activities help create habitat needed for the establishment of Georgia aster and shortleaf pine. 68

73 Without the increased light and nutrient availability provided by prescribed burning activities, herbaceous species and understory pine seedling development would be limited. Only small increases in grasses and legumes would occur, most often near roadsides. No reductions in plant productivity would occur as a result of log landing construction and skid trail use. Shortleaf pine restoration would not occur in the 7 stands (385 acres) and Objective 8.04 of the Sumter LMRP would, therefore, not be addressed. Non-native invasive plant species would continue to be treated under the no action, but populations are less likely to increase and spread under the no action compared to action alternatives. Direct and Indirect Effects of Alternative 2: Proposed Action In general, implementation of the activities proposed under Alternative 2 would result in an increase in Georgia aster and shortleaf pine populations as well as the health and diversity of vegetation in the Georgia Aster Shortleaf Restoration Project Area. The Shortleaf restoration sites would progress through successional changes as described above. Restoration sites would be site prepared using herbicides. A selective treatment would be used with Aminopyralid (Milestone or equivalent), Triclopyr (Garlon 3A or equivalent) and Imazapyr (Arsenal AC or equivalent) in the first years after regeneration harvest. This chemical site prep would favor the development of planted shortleaf pine and hardmast-producing hardwoods. Sweetgum, red maple, and yellow poplar and American elm would be the focus of the herbicide treatments and would be prescribed when these species total 100 stems or more per acre. Impacts on non-target vegetation would be minor, due to the use of direct foliar spray herbicide delivery methods (VEGEIS). The species to be treated that are over 6 feet tall would be controlled using the hack and squirt method. This method involves using a hatchet to cut into the tree surface of larger (greater than 6 feet tall) targeted vegetation and Imazapyr (Arsenal AC or equivalent) and triclopyr (Garlon 3A) herbicide is sprayed/injected into the cut area. A cutting tool, such as a hatchet, machete, or sandvik, would make the cuts. All downed vegetation would be left on-site to decompose. Chemical site prep in most situations greatly reduces the need for a chemical release in regeneration areas; however, the treatment may be needed is some situations. These situations would include seeding of undesirable species from adjoining stands, undesirable species missed during chemical site prep treatment, or chemical failure caused by unforeseen weather conditions just after application (such as a prolonged drought). If needed, the second application (chemical release) would use the same herbicides and follow the use the same guidelines as the chemical site prep. The chemical release, if needed, would be applied after the third year survival check. Following chemical site-prep, tree planting shortleaf pine between January and March would take place. Tree planting spacing would be 12 X12 (303 seedlings per acre). 69

74 Sumter National Forest Individual tree selection is used to reduce mid-story density and allow daylight to the forest floor. The total area treated would not exceed 10 percent of the total area. The purpose of the daylight is to encourage Georgia aster establishment and growth. These areas elected would be relatively open and the individual tree removal would be used to enhance the area for Georgia aster. After Individual tree selection is completed remaining vegetation would respond in both diameter and height growth. Native grasses and legumes would also respond to the added daylight and remain until crown closer. Planting Georgia aster, native grasses and forbs is used to establish and or add to current populations. Herbicides and mechanical treatments would be used to create habitat for Georgia aster, native grasses and forbs. Herbicides used in the Georgia aster areas would be used to control competing min and understory vegetation. The effects and methods used would be similar to the chemical site prep used in shortleaf restoration sites. The biggest difference from the shortleaf restoration sites is the herbicide treatment would be used only in 10 percent of the proposed Georgia aster stands. Direct and Indirect Effects of Alternative 3 Impacts associated with this alternative would be similar for those described for Alternative 2 above. There are some changes minor changes in alternative 3. These changes include a commercial timber thin, broad cast seeding of Georgia aster, change to herbicide prescription, additional areas of shortleaf restoration, and an added burn area in compartment 68 (this area was not covered in the Prescribed Burn EA 2008). These changes would not change the overall effects, but would accomplish project goal more effectively. The commercial thin was added, because it was in the area of a Georgia aster population and the stand was heavily stocked not allowing sunlight to the forest floor shading out Georgia aster. Broad cast seeding of Georgia aster also allows for more opportunity to increase Georgia aster populations. The change to the herbicide prescription was the removal of Triclopyr from the broadcast treatment. The herbicide Triclopyr interferes with the effectiveness of Imazapyr so Triclopyr was removed from the herbicide prescription. After alternative 2 was written, stands (compartment 68) with good soil types for shortleaf pine were discovered and are proposed for shortleaf restoration. Prescribed burning is critical for both Georgia aster and shortleaf pine; therefore, an area previously not covered under a prescribed burn EA (2008) was added to Georgia Aster Shortleaf Restoration Project Area. Cumulative Effects Cumulative effects associated with the proposed vegetation management relative to expected future condition in enhancing and expanding Georgia aster management areas as well as restoring shortleaf pine communities are generally described above under each 70

75 alternative. However, in those sites that also undergo proposed vegetation management operations in addition to prescribed burning operations, additional largely beneficial cumulative effects may be observed. The combined use of thinning, restoration, and prescribed burns is considered optimal for maintaining an abundant source of understory vegetation for wildlife browse (Cain, 1995; Haywood et al., 1998; Schultz, 1997; VEGEIS). In general, cumulative impacts concerning the overall structure and condition of vegetation public lands in the Georgia Aster Shortleaf Restoration Project Area would vary depending on the alternative chosen. Vegetation management operations under Alternatives 2 and 3 would result in an increase in populations of both Georgia aster and shortleaf pine which address Objective 8.04 Increase shortleaf pine and shortleaf pine/oak communities on 2,000 to 10,000 acres in the piedmont. This would be done on sites with low risk of littleleaf disease. Proposed shortleaf restoration operations would also increase age class diversity across the district, and promote the development of early successional species and habitats. Past timber sales and prescribed burning in the area have opened up stands encouraging the growth of grasses in the understory. As the sunlight reaches the forest floor, grasses and forbs would respond. Using single tree selection would help encourage and enhance Georgia aster populations by removing the mid-story (in select areas) to increasing daylight. These areas would be maintained through herbicides and prescribe fire. Cumulative effects associated with Alternative 1 (No Action alternative) would not allow for an increase in Georgia aster or shortleaf pine. Furthermore Alternative 1 would decrease the productivity of forest stands as a result of competition for light, water, and nutrients. These effects would increase the potential for southern pine beetle outbreaks, and the potential for outbreaks to spread to other NF areas and private lands. Although biodiversity would increase in the understory as a result of periodic prescribed burn treatments in some stands, diversity in the canopy and sub-canopy would likely remain at current levels. Herbicide use is either proposed or planned for various projects within Georgia Aster Shortleaf Restoration Project. A recent decision to treat exotic, invasive plants has been signed. Areas planned for herbicide treatments would target kudzu, privet, trifoliate orange, autumn olive, and bamboo. These herbicide treatments would slow the spread of these non-natives and would allow native plants to reclaim the site. Past thinning and regeneration has been accounted for in this analysis. Since 2003, there have been 144 acres of regeneration harvest implemented or planned 9G2 management area. Thinning (first thinning and intermediate thinning) acreages planned and implemented would be approaching 443 acres for 9G2 management area. There is an additional 1800 acres of regeneration to be implemented in LT in the next 3-5 years in management area 10B. 71

76 Sumter National Forest In , the outbreak of Southern Pine Beetle (SPB) was severe. There were multiple spots scattered across the western side of the district. The majority of the spots were under an acre. The outbreak lasted over a year. Because of the overstocked conditions and over-mature pine forest, outbreaks of SPB are expected to continue. Salvage of SPB spots would occur as needed. Private Lands Several private timber stands have either been cleared or harvested in the last 5-7 years in Georgia Aster Shortleaf Restoration Project. Private timber lots are often managed on short rotation cycles in the Piedmont for pulpwood production. Thus, it is highly likely that these areas and other privately owned timber areas would be regularly harvested in the future on a short rotation cycle (20-30 years). National Forest lands are managed on a longer rotation cycle (60+ years). This longer rotation cycle allows for the management of a larger variety of age classes, and more diverse forest communities through intermediate thinning and prescribed burning operations. The maintenance of a more diverse forest community helps to offset the lack of species and age class diversity that often occurs on private lands in short rotation timber use Non-native Invasive Plants Affected Environment Non-native invasive plant infestations are increasing on the Enoree Ranger District. On the Sumter National Forest, non-native invasive species (NNIS) threaten biological resources, forest and watershed health, rare communities, and habitat for rare, threatened, and endangered species. Sites most heavily infested by NNIS plants are found along forest edges and openings, old home sites, open and closed roads, wildlife openings and floodplains. Oswalt (2004) found that 40% of forest inventory and analysis (FIA) plots sampled in South Carolina contained at least one NNIS plant species, and that sites of high infestation were most often correlated with high moisture and/or high light. Table lists non-native invasive plant species within or adjacent to the stands proposed for thinning within the proposed action. Table Non-native Invasive Species Found in the Project Area Common Name Scientific Name Autumn olive Eleagnus umbellate Chinaberry Chinese Privet Japanese honeysuckle Trifoliate Orange Chinese Lespedeza Melia azedarach Ligustrum sinsense Lonicera japonica Citrus trifoliate Lespedeza cuneata Sericea lespedeza was included in seed mixes historically and is found along most forest service roads and log decks. Bicolor lespedeza was planted in wildlife food plant to 72

77 improve habitat quality for bobwhite quail. Tannins and other allelopathic chemicals are produced from lespedeza roots which can further inhibit growth of native plant species. Both Japanese honeysuckle and Chinese privet are well known for their abundance in the southeast, and on the forest are often found in association with old home sites, where they can form dense infestations outcompeting native vegetation. Chinese privet is commonly used as an ornamental shrub and for hedgerows on private lands, but can invade a variety of habitats, spreading quickly once established. Due to their evergreen tendencies Chinese privet compete successfully, particularly in disturbed areas. Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects of Alternative 1: No Action Under the no action alternative, no additional ground-disturbing activities would take place, or activities which increase availability of light for rapidly growing opportunistic non-native invasive plant species. Alternative 1 is expected to have no direct or indirect effects on the spread of non-native invasive plants since no additional activities would occur. No cumulative effects of Alternative 1 on the introduction and spread of non-native invasive plants are anticipated as no direct or indirect effects are anticipated. Ongoing projects associated with other decisions, include timber harvesting, prescribed burning for hazard fuel reduction and wildlife habitat improvement, fire line reconstruction, road, trail, utility line and wildlife opening maintenance and herbicide use, but there would be no additional cumulative effects associated with the no action alternative. Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects of Alternative 2: Proposed Action Harvest activities, tree planting, prescribe burning and road construction can each improve conditions for the spread of non-native invasive plant species, by increasing light to the forest floor, creating bare soil providing a micro-site for establishment, and by introducing equipment from other areas on site, which can bring in invasive plant species propagules increasing the chances of establishment (Evans et.al., 2006). Project design criteria, such as equipment cleaning provisions, and the treatment of non-native species prior to harvest, are designed to minimize or eliminate the direct and indirect effects of activities proposed in Alternative 2, on the introduction and spread of non-native invasive plant species. Only non-invasive, annual, or native plants would be planted in are areas associated with this proposal, including log decks, so no invasive plants would be intentionally introduced. Indirectly, project activities would provide microsites for non-native invasive plants once soil has been disturbed. If non-native invasive plants are treated, these sites are likely to become dominated by native vegetation. Given that the design criteria is followed, indirect effects on the project would be minimized as treatments would allow native species to occupy the site particularly in areas where prescribed burning occurs and areas of less fragmented ownership patterns. Non-native invasive plants continue to increase throughout the state and few incentives exist for private land owners to control these species once established. Many invasive 73

78 Sumter National Forest plants colonize roadside habitats, and would continue to spread if left uncontrolled. Statewide, opportunities exist for private and state landowners to cost share with federal agencies to control invasive plants, and through Wyden amendment authorities, and forests can treat adjacent lands when invasive plant populations pose a threat. Although the project is likely to have minor direct effects to the introduction and spread of invasive plants and to rare communities, indirectly, the project would increase the spread of nonnative invasive plants if left uncontrolled. The cumulative effects of project activities may impact and spread non-native invasive plants, when considering the incidence of nonnative invasive plants on private lands, and the broken ownership patterns, impacts are likely to be somewhat higher. Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects of Alternative 3 In alternative 3 the direct and indirect effects on the spread of non-native invasive plants is not expected to differ from Alternative 2. Minimal direct and indirect effects are anticipated given design criteria are followed. Rare Plant Communities Rare Communities Affected Environment Rare communities are plant associations or assemblages of plants and animals that occupy a small portion of the landscape but contribute significantly to plant and animal diversity. Wildlife and plants found in these areas are a combination of species commonly found across the forest, and species that are almost always found in or near these more specialized habitats. Rare communities can be forested or non-forested and address a wide-range of habitat conditions, from basic mesic coves to natural woodlands and rock outcrops. Some may be found as inclusions within larger stands and others may be larger. In coordination with NatureServe and other partners, a list of rare communities which are imperiled globally, or represent habitat for state or globally-impaired species, was developed for the Revised Land and Resource Management Plan, Sumter National Forest (Forest Plan). This list continues to be updated as information on rare species and their habitats are compiled throughout the range of the species. Rare communities of significance on the Enoree Ranger District are listed in Table

79 Table Rare Plant Communities with potential to occur on the Enoree Ranger District, Sumter National Forest 6 Rare Plant Community Group Bogs, Seeps, and Ponds Riverine Vegetation Basic Mesic Forest Cliffs and Bluffs Rock Outcrops Glades, Barrens, and Associated Woodlands Abandoned Mines Effects Analysis Rare Plant Community Piedmont Gabbro Upland Depression Forest Atlantic Upland Depression Willow Oak Swamp Forest Piedmont Low Elevation Headwater Seepage Swamp Floodplain Canebrake Southern Piedmont Oak Bottomland Forest American Beech-Southern Sugar Maple/Common Pawpaw Forest Piedmont Triassic Basin Oak Bottomland Forest Basic Piedmont Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest Granite Dome or Dome Woodland Granitic Flatrock Piedmont Blackjack Prairie Piedmont Diabase Barren Piedmont Acidic Hardpan Woodland Piedmont Montmorillonite Woodland Xeric Hardpan Forest Mafic Xeric or Dry-Mesic Piedmont Oak Forest Mafic Shortleaf Pine-Oak Woodland Rich Granitic Lower Piedmont Deciduous Woodland Southern Inner Piedmont Mafic Barren Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects of Alternative 1: No Action There would be effects to rare plant communities with the No Action alternative. Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects of the Action Alternatives Rare plant communities are not known to occur within the project area. There would be no effects from either of the action alternatives Wildlife: Management Indicator Species Affected Environment A wide variety of wildlife species occur throughout the Enoree Ranger District of the Sumter National Forest. Wildlife habitat in the project area consists of loblolly pine and mixed pine-hardwood stands of varying ages, hardwood inclusions, some open habitats, and wildlife openings. Several understory species associated with the proposed treatment stands are important sources of food and cover for wildlife and also provide nesting habitat for some species. 6 Based on Carolinas and Georgia Piedmont Vegetation (NatureServe 2001). 75

80 Sumter National Forest Management Indicator Species (MIS) are those whose presence in a certain location or situation at a given population level indicate a particular environmental condition. Their population changes are believed to indicate effects of management activities on a number of other species. MIS are representative of the diversity of species and associated habitats and can be used as a tool for identifying specialized habitats and creating habitat objectives and standards and guidelines. The MIS concept is to identify a few species that are representative of many other species and to evaluate management direction by the effects of management on MIS habitats. Both population and habitat data are used to monitor MIS on National Forests. The Forest Plan lists 13 species as MIS; 12 are avian species and one is a mammal. Trends in MIS populations are normally assessed relative to trends in their respective habitats. This section focuses on terrestrial MIS. Aquatic species are addressed in the Aquatic Communities section. Sumter National Forest MIS are listed in Table , along with general comments regarding their habitats. General discussions of these species and their relationship to monitoring can be found in the Forest Plan. Table Management Indicator Species for the Sumter National Forest Species Acadian Flycatcher Empidonax virescens American Woodcock Scolopax minor Black Bear Ursus americanus Brown-headed Nuthatch Sitta pusilla Eastern Wild Turkey Meleagris gallopavo Field Sparrow Spizella pusilla Hooded Warbler Wilsonia citrina Northern Bobwhite Colinus virginianus Pileated Woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus Pine Warbler Dendroica pinus Prairie Warbler Dendroica discolor Scarlet Tanager Piranga olivacea Swainson s Warbler Limnothlypis swainsonii Habitats Uses mesic sites with a diverse canopy structure; found in heavily wooded deciduous bottomlands, swamps, riparian thickets, and in the wooded ravines of drier uplands Often found in shrub- and seedling-dominated regeneration areas in association with riparian areas; requires moist soil conditions for feeding Trends in population indices and harvest levels will be used to help evaluate the results of management activities on this high profile species Uses open, mid-late successional pine (age classes over 20 years); not common in dense stands of pines; will overwinter This species is most common in extensive bottomland forests where the understory is moderate; also occurs in extensive upland hardwood or mixed forests, less so in pine forests Uses woodland, grassland, and savanna habitats; fairly common in old fields, open brushy woodlands, and forest edge habitats Uses mesic deciduous forest with a shrubby understory; frequents dense thickets; fairly common in upland and bottomland woodlands Uses fields, grasslands, brushy habitats, and open woodlands; significantly declining over most of its range due to habitat loss and changes in farming practices Uses mature and extensive forests, primarily in deciduous forests; occurs in both deep woods and swamps as well as in rather open and upland forests; excavates nesting and roosting cavities Uses middle-aged to mature open pine forest; seldom in hardwoods; overwinters throughout much of its breeding range Frequents brushy old fields, open pine stands, and other early successional habitats Uses mature deciduous forest and some mixed conifer-hardwood forests; requires large areas of forest for breeding Uses canebrakes and other early-successional riparian habitats 76

81 Based on habitat within the project area and the biological requirements of the species, eight MIS are considered and analyzed in this Environmental Assessment (EA). The remaining five species are not discussed in detail. Listed in Table are the species that are excluded from analysis and the reason why they are not addressed for this project. Table Management Indicator Species excluded from analysis in the Georgia Aster and Shortleaf Pine Management project Species Acadian Flycatcher Empidonax virescens American Woodcock Scolopax minor Black Bear Ursus americanus Scarlet Tanager Piranga olivacea Swainson s Warbler Limnothlypis swainsonii Environmental Consequences Reason for Exclusion from Analysis This species is an indicator for trends in frequency of occurrence in riparian habitats. Proposed management activities would not take place within riparian areas so this species was excluded from analysis. This species is an indicator for trends in frequency of occurrence in early successional riparian habitats. Proposed management activities would not take place within riparian areas so this species was excluded from analysis. This species is uncommon on the Enoree Ranger District so it was excluded from analysis. This species is an indicator for trends in frequency of occurrence in oak forests and the effectiveness of management for maintaining oak forests. Proposed management activities would not occur in this habitat so this species was excluded from analysis. This species is an indicator for presence and trends in frequency of occurrence in canebrakes and other early-successional riparian habitats. Proposed management activities would not take place within riparian areas so this species was excluded from analysis. Vegetation manipulation changes the diversity and abundance of wildlife species in a given area. Planning regulations define diversity as the distribution and abundance of different plant and animal communities and species within [an] area (36 CFR 219.3(g)). In general, forested areas that are in various stages of development and include periodic openings support a wide diversity of species and habitats. Management activities that result in different types of habitats, including prescribed burning, thinning, and herbicide use, tend to increase wildlife diversity. Impacts beneficial to wildlife are typically greater with a combination of management activities versus any of the treatments separately. Table lists the MIS that occur or have habitat within the proposed project area. These are the species that are analyzed in this EA. Following the table are effects to these MIS by alternative. Table Habitat association of Management Indicator Species that occur or have habitat within the Georgia Aster and Shortleaf Pine Management project area Habitat Association Early Successional/Disturbance Dependent Late Successional Pine Mixed Pine-Hardwood Forest Species Field Sparrow, Northern Bobwhite, Prairie Warbler Brown-headed Nuthatch, Pine Warbler Eastern Wild Turkey, Hooded Warbler, Pileated Woodpecker 77

82 Sumter National Forest Effects Analysis Alternative 1: No Action Under this alternative, proposed actions (select removal of individual trees to enhance existing woodland conditions, natural openings, and canopy gaps; planting Georgia aster and other native herbaceous plants to supplement existing understory; controlling understory and midstory woody species using manual and mechanical methods; controlling understory and midstory woody species using herbicides; and shortleaf pine restoration) would not occur. The natural resources and ecological processes within the project area would continue at the existing level of human influence. The characteristics of the forest environment would be affected primarily by natural disturbances such as insects, disease, and weather events. Custodial management of recreation areas, roads, prescribed burning, and other projects already approved under prior decisions would continue under the No Action alternative. Direct Effects Direct effects are effects to the species known or assumed to occur in the proposed project area. They occur at the same time and place as the project activity. There would be no direct effects to any of the MIS under this alternative since no activities would take place. Indirect Effects Indirect effects include the consequences of management activities that result in the modifications of habitat and ecological conditions that affect food, water, shelter, and other biological requirements for a species. MIS associated with Early Successional/Disturbance Dependent habitats (Field Sparrow, Northern Bobwhite, Prairie Warbler) Additional habitat for these species would not be restored or enhanced under the No Action alternative. Field Sparrow, Northern Bobwhite, and Prairie Warbler use open, early successional habitats that are maintained by frequent disturbance. Under alternatives 2 and 3, several proposed treatments would benefit these species: select removal of individual trees to enhance existing woodland conditions, natural openings, and canopy gaps; understory and midstory woody vegetation control using manual/mechanical methods and herbicide; and shortleaf pine restoration. Under the No Action alternative, these activities would not take place. Without these treatments, many stands within the project area would continue to develop into mature mixed pinehardwood forests with dense midstories dominated by sweetgum and other shade-tolerant woody plants and little herbaceous vegetation on the forest floor. These conditions would not provide suitable habitat for early successional/disturbance dependent species. MIS associated with Late Successional Pine (Brown-headed Nuthatch, Pine Warbler) 78

83 Over time under the No Action alternative, seedling/sapling habitat within the project area would develop into poletimber habitat, which would then develop into sawtimber habitat. This progression would result in a more mature and continuous forest canopy dominated by pines, benefiting wildlife that are associated with late successional pine habitats. However, over a prolonged period of time, the abundance of sweetgum and other pioneering species within the project area would increase, and these would slowly replace pine and preferred hard mast species. This condition would be detrimental to those species that use late successional pine forests such as the Brown-headed Nuthatch and Pine Warbler. MIS associated with Mixed Pine-Hardwood Forest (Eastern Wild Turkey, Hooded Warbler, Pileated Woodpecker) The No Action alternative would benefit those MIS that use mature forest for foraging and cover, such as the Eastern Wild Turkey, Hooded Warbler, and Pileated Woodpecker, since a more mature and continuous forest canopy would develop under this alternative. However, over a prolonged period of time the abundance of pioneering species within the project area would increase and would slowly replace pine and preferred hard mast species. This condition would be detrimental to these species. Additionally, less edge would be created with the No Action alternative providing less foraging areas for Eastern Wild Turkey. Cumulative Effects Cumulative effects are effects to the species and their habitats over time, and consider past, present, and future actions. There are other projects being implemented and/or planned on the Enoree Ranger District that would continue under the No Action alternative. Projects include timber harvesting, prescribed burning for hazard fuel reduction and wildlife habitat improvement, road maintenance, and trail construction and maintenance. With the No Action alternative, no additional activities would take place so there would be no additional cumulative effects within the project area or across the District. Alternative 2: Proposed Action Direct Effects Direct effects are not expected to occur to MIS. All MIS are highly mobile avian species that would relocate to undisturbed areas if they were displaced by proposed activities. However, it is possible that if any of these species were nesting during select removal of individual trees, planting of Georgia aster and other native herbaceous plants, manual/mechanical control of understory and midstory species, herbicide treatments, or shortleaf pine restoration, nests and nestlings could be lost due to the activities. These effects are considered minor since only a portion of the area would be managed at any one time. In addition, project activities would have to occur at the exact time when species are most vulnerable and also occur over successive years to have substantial impacts. This is unlikely given past management practices. Additionally, avian species will re-nest multiple times throughout the nesting season, so no significant decrease in MIS reproductive potential is expected. 79

84 Sumter National Forest The use of herbicides is not expected to have a direct effect on avian species. While the use of some herbicides can have direct effects on wildlife by causing injury or mortality from direct spray, drift or ingestion of contaminated food or water, those herbicides proposed in this alternative, namely imazapyr and triclopyr, are practically non-toxic to wildlife species. Imazapyr is practically non-toxic to terrestrial animals and birds. The acute oral LD50 7 of imazapyr for mallard ducks (Anas platyrhynchos) and northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus) are both greater than 2,150 mg/kg (US Forest Service 2004a). Acute toxicity studies in northern bobwhite and mallard ducks found no adverse effects at dietary concentrations up to 5,000 ppm (Fletcher et al. 1984a,b). Imazapyr is rapidly eliminated in the urine and feces of animals and is not known to accumulate in animal tissues (Miller et al. 1991). The acute oral LD50 of triclopyr for mallard ducks and northern bobwhite are 1,698 mg/kg and 2,935 mg/kg, respectively (US Forest Service 2011b). A one-generation reproduction study showed no reproductive effects, symptoms of toxicity or abnormal behavior when mallards were given up to 500 ppm of triclopyr in their diet for a 20-week period, including 10 weeks prior to egg laying and 10 weeks during egg laying. Newton et al. (1990) predicted that triclopyr would not be present in animal forage in doses large enough to cause either acute or chronic effects to wildlife and concluded that the tendency for triclopyr to dissipate quickly in the environment would preclude any problems with bioaccumulation in the food chain. Indirect Effects MIS associated with Early Successional/Disturbance Dependent habitats (Field Sparrow, Northern Bobwhite, Prairie Warbler) Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing woodland conditions, natural openings, and canopy gaps; controlling understory and midstory woody species using manual/mechanical methods and herbicides; and shortleaf pine restoration would increase the quantity and quality of early successional habitat that these MIS require. MIS associated with Late Successional Pine habitats (Brown-headed Nuthatch, Pine Warbler) These MIS use middle-aged to mature pine habitats, although Pine Warbler can be found in pine woods in a variety of age classes. Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing woodland conditions, natural openings, and canopy gaps and shortleaf pine restoration would remove mature pines, reducing habitat in the short-term for these species. Brown-headed Nuthatch is a year-round resident that nests in dead trees near or 7 Acute toxicity is commonly measured by the lethal dose (LD) that causes death in 50 percent of treated laboratory animals. LD 50 indicates the dose of a chemical per unit body weight of an animal and is expressed as milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). Chemicals are highly toxic when the LD 50 value is small and practically nontoxic when the value is large. 80

85 in pines. This species would take advantage of any standing snags left during project activities, but otherwise would have to move to other areas dominated by mature pines to nest. Once the shortleaf pine (restoration stands) matures, then it would provide suitable habitat for MIS associated with late successional pine habitats. MIS associated with Mixed Pine-Hardwood Forest (Eastern Wild Turkey, Hooded Warbler, Pileated Woodpecker) Eastern Wild Turkey is most common in extensive bottomland forests where understory is moderate; however, they do occur in a variety of habitats, including mature pine forests. There would be a short-term decrease of mature pine forest within shortleaf pine restoration stands; however, this habitat type is not limiting across the Sumter National Forest and shortleaf pine stands would develop into mature pine forests in the long-term. Eastern Wild Turkey would utilize the woodland conditions, natural openings, and canopy gaps created in alternative 2, especially if there were a hardwood component left within the area. This species would also benefit from understory/midstory control using manual/mechanical methods and herbicide, because it would improve foraging and brood-rearing habitat within the understory. Hooded Warblers primarily inhabit deciduous forests, but are also found in the dense understories of mixed pine-hardwood forests. Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing woodland conditions, natural openings, and canopy gaps, controlling understory/midstory species using manual/mechanical methods and herbicides, and shortleaf pine restoration would reduce habitat for Hooded Warbler. However, mixed pine-hardwood forests with dense understories are common on the Enoree Ranger District, so habitat for this species would remain abundant on National Forest land. Pileated Woodpecker is a year-round resident that occupies mature forests with abundant snags. There would be a short-term reduction in habitat for this species with the implementation of shortleaf pine restoration as mature trees would be removed. However, pileated woodpecker would use any snags that are left after the harvest to forage for insects and insect larvae. Once the shortleaf pine stands mature, the habitat would be available for this species. Select removal of individual trees to enhance woodland conditions, natural openings, and canopy gaps and controlling understory/midstory woody species using manual/mechanical methods and herbicides would not affect pileated woodpecker habitat, as snags would be retained. All MIS in Table This alternative proposes herbicide treatments for controlling understory and midstory woody species and in shortleaf pine restoration stands. Desirable hard and soft mast producing species and healthy shortleaf pine would not be targeted during herbicide treatments. Indirect effects associated with herbicide release consist of modifications to understory vegetation which may alter nesting, roosting, foraging, and wintering habitats of MIS. These modifications are not expected to have detrimental effects to MIS. 81

86 Sumter National Forest Cumulative Effects Cumulative effects are effects to the species and their habitats over time, and consider past, present, and future actions. This cumulative effects analysis tiers to the Management Indicator Species Population and Trends (USDA 2001) that provides context for species and their habitats across the Sumter National Forest. Typical ongoing activities in the project area include timber harvesting, prescribed burning, wildlife habitat improvements and management activities, recreational trail use and management, and road maintenance. Within compartments 7, 9, and 11, the Enoree Ranger District is planning the Chester County Stream and Riparian Restoration/Enhancement Project, which would restore and enhance the hydrologic and aquatic functions within four watersheds located on National Forest land. Habitats for all MIS, with the exception of early successional/disturbance species, are generally increasing on the Sumter National Forest. This alternative would contribute to the creation and perpetuation of habitat for early successional species. MIS associated with Early Successional/Disturbance Dependent habitats (Field Sparrow, Northern Bobwhite, Prairie Warbler) All MIS associated with early successional/disturbance dependent habitats are experiencing population declines across their geographic range and on the Sumter National Forest. From 1992 to 2004, Field Sparrow, Northern Bobwhite, and Prairie Warbler populations on the Francis Marion & Sumter NFs (FMS) declined 19.1%, 10.0%, and 8.1% per year, respectively (La Sorte et al. 2007). The most commonly accepted reason for decline is loss and fragmentation of habitat. The proposed action would increase breeding, foraging, and wintering habitat for these species. MIS associated with Late Successional Pine habitats (Brown-headed Nuthatch, Pine Warbler) Brown-headed Nuthatch populations have increased 5.4% per year on the FMS from 1992 to Pine Warbler populations have remained relatively stable (0.2% annual decline) over the same period of time (La Sorte et al. 2007). The population stability of these MIS is a reflection of the quantity and quality of available habitats on the Sumter National Forest. The implementation of alternative 2, along with other activities on the Sumter National Forest and surrounding private lands, is not expected to adversely affect species that use late successional pine habitats. MIS associated with Mixed Pine-Hardwood Forest habitats (Eastern Wild Turkey, Hooded Warbler, Pileated Woodpecker) Populations of Eastern Wild Turkey suffered dramatic declines in the early 1900s. Aggressive stocking programs successfully reintroduced Eastern Wild Turkey to most of its eastern range where populations continue to increase. This species uses upland forests of oaks, hickories, and pines as well as bottomland forest. Habitat management should center on maintaining mature bottomland hardwood forest, open upland forests, and 82

87 scattered openings dominated by herbaceous cover. Under this alternative no management activities would occur within bottomland hardwood habitats. Proposed select removal of individual trees to enhance existing woodland conditions, natural openings, and canopy gaps; understory and midstory control using manual/mechanical methods and herbicide applications; and shortleaf pine restoration would result in in short- and long-term availability of grass- and forb-dominated openings, benefiting Eastern Wild Turkey. Hooded Warbler populations have declined 0.6% annually during (La Sorte et al. 2007). Although project activities would result in lost habitat for this species, mature mixed pine-hardwood forests with well-developed understories are common across the District. Cumulative effects of the proposed action are not expected. Trend estimates indicate that populations of Pileated Woodpecker are stable across the southeastern United States. Pileated Woodpecker use extensive areas of late successional coniferous and deciduous forest. However, young forests that retain scattered, large, dead trees also provide suitable habitat. This species is versatile in utilizing various forest habitats and adapts well to human habitation. Habitat exists for Pileated Woodpecker on private property across the Piedmont, including in rural and suburban settings. The implementation of alternative 2 is not expected to have adverse cumulative effects on Pileated Woodpecker. Alternative 3 Alternative 3 is similar to alternative 2 with the following exceptions: Commercial thinning of timber to create habitat for Georgia aster and other woodland species would occur in portions of compartment 11, stand 3 (60 acres). Broadcast seeding (hand-sowing) would be included as an option to establish Georgia aster. In order to control understory and midstory woody species, up to three applications of directed foliar spray or stem injection methods would be done over a ten-year period; triclopyr ester (Garlon 4 or equivalent) would not be used as a directed foliar spray; and pines would not be controlled using herbicides. Pine control in Alternative 3 would rely on manual and mechanical methods and prescribed burning. Compartment 68, stand 37 would be included in Alternative 3 and would be restored to shortleaf pine. Approximately 435 acres of loblolly pine stands (compartment 9, stands 3, 5, 7, and 10 and compartment 68, stands 7, 10, and 37) would be converted to shortleaf pine in areas where suitable soils exist. Spacing of planted shortleaf pine would be done on a 7 foot by 10 foot spacing. In addition to imazapyr and triclopyr (as stated in Alternative 2), glyphosate and aminopyralid would also be used for site preparation and release of planted shortleaf pine. 83

88 Sumter National Forest The prescription for compartment 9, stand 1 would be changed to select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions, planting Georgia aster and other species to supplement existing understory, and using manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species in the understory. A 364-acre burn block, which includes two treatment stands (compartment 68, stands 7 and 10), has been identified and would be burned on a 3- to 5-year burn interval. See Chapter 2 in this EA for specific differences between alternatives 2 and 3. Direct Effects Direct effects to all MIS under this alternative would be similar to alternative 2, including effects to all MIS resulting from thinning of timber to create habitat for Georgia aster and other woodland species; broadcast seeding (hand-sowing) to establish Georgia aster; and shortleaf pine restoration on additional stands. In alternative 3, up to three applications of directed foliar spray or stem injection methods would be done over a ten-year period. In addition to the herbicide use period being extended, two additional herbicides (glyphosate and aminopyralid) would be used in alternative 3. Glyphosate is of relatively low toxicity to birds. The acute oral LD50 of glyphosate for northern bobwhite is greater than 2,000 mg/kg (US Forest Service 2011a). Avian reproduction studies yielded no reproductive effects at dietary exposure levels of up to 1,000 ppm (US Forest Service 1989). The effects of glyphosate on wild mammals have been examined in numerous field studies (Sullivan and Sullivan 2000; Santillo et al. 1989). These studies indicate that glyphosate will not cause unreasonable adverse effects to wildlife species. Aminopyralid is practically non-toxic to birds based on acute exposure to northern bobwhite that resulted in an LD50 value of greater than 2,250 mg/kg (EPA 2005). In 5-day dietary studies with northern bobwhite and mallard ducks, LC50 concentrations were greater than 5,000 (EPA 2005). The mammalian toxicity of aminopyralid is relatively well-characterized in experimental mammals in a series of toxicity studies that are required for pesticide registration (US Forest Service 2007). In rats, mice, rabbits, and dogs, aminopyralid has low acute and chronic oral toxicity. For example, Brooks (2001) found that in rats the acute oral LD50 is greater than 5,000 mg/kg for aminopyralid. It seems reasonable to assume the most sensitive effects in wildlife mammalian species will be the same as those in experimental mammals. Results of acute exposure studies in birds indicate that avian species appear no more sensitive than mammals to aminopyralid in terms of acute lethality (US Forest Service 2007). Prescribed burning is not expected to have substantial direct effects on MIS. Because of the highly mobile nature of avian species, any disturbance resulting from prescribed burning activities would likely result in the temporary displacement of individuals to 84

89 undisturbed areas. It is possible that nests containing eggs or flightless nestlings might be lost during prescribed burns, but prescribed burning would have to occur at the exact time when nests are most vulnerable and also occur over successive years to have substantial impacts. Indirect Effects Indirect effects to all MIS under alternative 3 would be similar to alternative 2. The way in which select removal of individual trees to enhance existing woodland conditions, natural openings, and canopy gaps; planting Georgia aster and other native herbaceous plants to supplement existing understory; controlling understory/midstory woody species using manual and mechanical methods and herbicides; and shortleaf pine restoration would take place under alternative 3 does not substantially differ from alternative 2. The additional 60 acres of timber thinning to create habitat for Georgia aster and other woodland species In alternative 3 would benefit MIS associated with early successional/disturbance-dependent habitats (Prairie Warbler, Field Sparrow, Northern Bobwhite). Prescribed burning within the 362-acre burn block would benefit all MIS by making their respective habitat associations more suitable. Cumulative Effects Cumulative effects of Alternative 3 on MIS would be the same as those of Alternative Proposed, Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive Species Affected Environment Several proposed, endangered, threatened, and sensitive (PETS) plant and animal species occur throughout the Enoree Ranger District of the Sumter National Forest. Habitat in the project area consists of loblolly pine stands of varying ages, hardwood inclusions, some open habitats, and wildlife openings. For additional information and descriptions of affected environment for PETS species and associated habitats see the Environmental Impact Statement for the 2004 Revised Land and Resource Management Plan, Sumter National Forest. A Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation (BA/BE) was prepared to determine whether the Georgia Aster and Shortleaf Pine Management project is likely to affect any PETS species or their habitats. This BA/BE is included in this EA as an appendix item and includes the list of PETS species for the Sumter National Forest. All species on this list were considered for this BA/BE. Using a step-down process, species and potential habitat in the project area were identified by: 1) Evaluating the location and nature of the proposed project; 2) Considering the species range, life history, and available habitat information; 85

90 Sumter National Forest 3) Reviewing records of known PETS species occurrences, which includes data from the South Carolina Heritage Trust Geographic Database of Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species; and 4) Reviewing the USFWS s South Carolina List of At-Risk, Candidate, Endangered, and Threatened Species for Chester, Newberry, and Union Counties (2015). Georgia aster (Symphiotrichum georgianus) occurs within the project area and was addressed in the BA/BE. Potential habitat exists for bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), indigo bush (Amorpha schwerini), and sweet pinesap (Monotropsis odorata). These species were also addressed in the BA/BE. All other species on the Sumter National Forest PETS list were eliminated from this analysis because they are not known to occur within or adjacent to the project area and they lack suitable habitat. Environmental Consequences Alternative 1: No Action Under this alternative, project activities would not occur. The natural resources and ecological processes within the project area would continue at the existing level of human influence. The characteristics of the forest environment would be affected primarily by natural disturbances such as insects, disease, and weather events. Custodial management of recreation areas, roads, prescribed burning, and other projects already approved under prior decisions would continue under the No Action alternative. Direct Effects Direct effects are effects to the species known or assumed to occur in the proposed project area. They occur at the same time and place as the project activity. Under the No Action alternative, there would be no direct effects on PETS species or their habitats since no activities would take place. Indirect Effects Indirect effects include the consequences of management activities that result in the modifications of habitat and ecological conditions that affect food, water, shelter, and other biological requirements for a species. Georgia aster. Under the No Action alternative, existing habitat for Georgia aster would not be enhanced and expansion of the species would not take place. Georgia aster use open that are maintained by frequent disturbance. Under alternatives 2 and 3, several proposed treatments would benefit this species: select removal of individual trees to enhance existing woodland conditions, natural openings, and canopy gaps; thinning of timber to create habitat for Georgia aster and other woodland species; planting Georgia aster and other native herbaceous plants to supplement existing understory; controlling 86

91 understory and midstory woody species using manual/mechanical methods and herbicides; shortleaf pine restoration; and establishment of a prescribed fire burn block (alternative 3 only). Under the No Action alternative, these activities would not take place. Without these treatments, many stands within the project area would continue to develop into mature mixed pine-hardwood forests with dense midstories dominated by sweetgum and other shade-tolerant woody plants and little herbaceous vegetation on the forest floor. These conditions would not provide suitable habitat for Georgia aster. Bald eagle, indigo bush, and sweet pinesap. There would be no indirect effects to any of these PETS species under the No Action alternative. Cumulative Effects Cumulative effects are effects to the species and their habitats over time, and consider past, present, and future actions. There are other projects being implemented and/or planned on the Long Cane Ranger District that would continue under the No Action alternative. Projects include timber harvesting, prescribed burning for hazard fuel reduction and wildlife habitat improvement, road maintenance, and trail construction and maintenance. The Enoree Ranger District has also proposed the Chester County Stream and Riparian Restoration/Enhancement Project, which is near some project stands. With the No Action alternative, no additional activities would take place so there would be no additional cumulative effects within the project area or across the District. Alternative 2: Proposed Action Direct Effects Bald eagles are not known to occur within the project area. Proposed treatment stands are not likely to be used for foraging since bald eagles generally forage over large water bodies, including rivers and lakes. However, some proposed treatment stands (especially those that occur within ½ mile of open water) may provide roosting or nesting habitat for this species. If a bald eagle were roosting or nesting in a treatment stand, project activities could disturb them; however, Forest Plan Standard FW-28 8 provides protective measures that would prevent adverse direct effects to this species. The use of herbicides in alternative 2 for controlling understory and midstory species and site preparation and release in shortleaf pine stands is not expected to have a direct effect on bald eagles. While the use of some herbicides can have direct effects on wildlife by causing injury or mortality from direct spray, drift, or ingestion of contaminated food or 8 Forest Plan Standard FW-28 (p. 2-9) states, in part: Protection zones are delineated and maintained around all bald eagle nests and communal roost sites, until they are determined to be no longer suitable through coordination with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The protection zone extends a minimum of 1,500 feet from the nest or roost. Activities that modify the forest canopy within this zone are prohibited. All management activities not associated with bald eagle management and monitoring are prohibited within this zone during the periods of use. 87

92 Sumter National Forest water, those herbicides proposed in this alternative, namely imazapyr and triclopyr, are practically non-toxic to birds and other wildlife species. Imazapyr is practically non-toxic to terrestrial animals and birds. The acute oral LD50 9 of imazapyr for mallard ducks (Anas platyrhynchos) and northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus) are both greater than 2,150 mg/kg (US Forest Service 2004a). Acute toxicity studies in northern bobwhite and mallard ducks found no adverse effects at dietary concentrations up to 5,000 ppm (Fletcher et al. 1984a,b). Imazapyr is rapidly eliminated in the urine and feces of animals and is not known to accumulate in animal tissues (Miller et al. 1991). The acute oral LD50 of triclopyr for mallard ducks and northern bobwhite are 1,698 mg/kg and 2,935 mg/kg, respectively (US Forest Service 2011b). A one-generation reproduction study showed no reproductive effects, symptoms of toxicity, or abnormal behavior when mallards were given up to 500 ppm of triclopyr in their diet for a 20- week period, including ten weeks prior to egg laying and ten weeks during egg laying. Newton et al. (1990) predicted that triclopyr would not be present in animal forage in doses large enough to cause either acute or chronic effects to wildlife, and concluded that the tendency for triclopyr to dissipate quickly in the environment would preclude any problems with bioaccumulation in the food chain. Georgia aster. Proposed activities are designed to enhance and expand existing Georgia aster populations. Project activities, including the select removal of individual trees to enhance existing woodland conditions, natural openings, and canopy gaps; thinning of timber to create habitat for Georgia aster and other woodland species; planting Georgia aster and other native herbaceous plants to supplement existing understory; controlling understory and midstory woody species using manual/mechanical methods and herbicides; and shortleaf pine restoration could result in direct effects to Georgia aster. In order to avoid direct effects from project activities, design criterion #2 10 (from Section 2.4 in the Environmental Assessment) would be implemented. Indigo bush and sweet pinesap are not known to occur within the project area. There would be no direct effects to these species during the implementation of the proposed action. 9 Acute toxicity is commonly measured by the lethal dose (LD) that causes death in 50 percent of treated laboratory animals. LD 50 indicates the dose of a chemical per unit body weight of an animal and is expressed as milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). Chemicals are highly toxic when the LD 50 value is small and practically nontoxic when the value is large. 10 Design criterion #2 (from Section 2.4 in the Environmental Assessment): Known Georgia aster occurrences would be avoided during all tree felling activities, thinning of timber, planting of Georgia aster and other native herbaceous plants, using manual/mechanical methods and herbicide applications to control understory and midstory woody species, all shortleaf pine restoration activities, construction of dozer and hand lines for prescribed burning, and all other ground-disturbing activities. 88

93 Indirect Effects Bald eagle. Activities that involve tree removal (namely, select removal of individual trees to enhance existing woodland conditions, natural openings, and canopy gaps and shortleaf pine restoration) could affect the availability of potential roost and nest trees, particularly in those treatment stands near the Broad River (compartments 7-9, 11, and 17). However, considering the amount of available habitat within the surrounding areas, any loss of potential nest or roost sites is insignificant and would not have an adverse indirect effect on bald eagles. Georgia aster habitat is expected to improve with the implementation of the proposed action. All proposed treatments are designed to enhance habitat conditions for existing Georgia aster populations and to expand the distribution of the species. Indigo bush and sweet pinesap. Habitat for these species is also expected to improve with implementation of alternative 2. Project activities would result in open, woodland conditions that would improve habitat suitability for indigo bush and sweet pinesap. Additionally, since sweet pinesap is often associated with shortleaf pine, then shortleaf pine restoration should result in long-term habitat improvements. Cumulative Effects Cumulative effects are those resulting from incremental impacts of project activities added to other past, present, and future actions. Cumulative effects can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions that take place over a period of time. Other management activities that have taken place on the Enoree Ranger District include prescribed burning, timber sales, precommercial thinning and release of timber, southern pine beetle control, recreation trail reconstruction and maintenance, seeding of roads, skid trails, firelines, and log decks, road maintenance (grading, brushing, and mowing), and wildlife opening management. Most of these activities are expected to continue in the near future at approximately the same levels. The Enoree Ranger District is proposing the Chester County Stream and Riparian Restoration/Enhancement Project to restore and enhance the hydrologic and aquatic functions on approximately 18 miles of streams within four watersheds. The project would take place near treatment stands in compartments 7, 9, 11, and 17. The Chester County Stream and Riparian Restoration/Enhancement Project is not likely to contribute to cumulative effects on PETS species or their habitats. Private lands within or adjacent to the proposed project areas are made up of timberland, home sites, pastures, and farmland. Intensive timber management activities on private lands, including thinning, regeneration cuts, and road building, have occurred heavily over the past 10 years within some of these areas. 89

94 Sumter National Forest The cumulative effects of the proposed project in combination with other past, present, and future actions are not anticipated to result in any measurable loss of the evaluated species or their habitats. Alternative 3 See the attached BA/BE for the analysis of direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of alternative 3 on PETS species. Following is a summary of the effects on evaluated PETS species and their habitats and the determinations of effect Bald eagle. With the implementation of Forest Plan Standard FW-28, there would be no effects to bald eagles. Activities that involve tree removal could affect the availability of potential roost and nest trees, but considering the amount of available habitat within the surrounding areas, any loss of potential nest or roost sites is insignificant and would not have an adverse indirect effect on bald eagles. The effects determination made in the BA/BE for bald eagles is that activities proposed under alternative 3 would have no impacts to the species or its habitats. Georgia aster. With the implementation of design criterion #2 (see Section 2.4 in Environmental Assessment), there would be no direct effects to Georgia aster. Project activities are expected to enhance existing habitat and to increase the availability of suitable habitat for this species. The effects determination made in the BA/BE for Georgia aster is that alternative 3 would have beneficial impacts on this species. Indigo bush and sweet pinesap are not known to occur within the project area. Project activities are expected to improve potential habitat for these species. The effects determination made in the BA/BE for indigo bush and sweet pinesap is that alternative 3 would have no impacts Migratory Birds Affected Environment The Forest Service is recognized as a national and international conservation leader and plays a pivotal role in the conservation of migratory bird populations and their habitats. Within the National Forest System, conservation of migratory birds focuses on providing a diversity of habitat conditions at multiple spatial scales and ensuring that bird conservation is addressed when planning for other land management activities. The Enoree Ranger District occurs within a geographic area known as the piedmont in South Carolina. This area is associated with Bird Conservation Region (BCR) 29 Southern Piedmont. The 47 million-acre BCR 29 is a transitional area between the coastal plain and the Appalachian Mountains that is dominated by pine and mixed pinehardwood forests with some interior wetlands, reservoirs, and riverine systems. This BCR provides habitat for 140 breeding bird species, many of which have experienced steep population declines in recent decades. 90

95 The following sources, along with an analysis of species range, life history, and available habitat information, were reviewed to identify priority migratory birds that are likely to occur in the project area: (1) Partners in Flight (PIF) Priority Bird List for BCR 29 (ACJV 2014); (2) USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern for BCR 29 (USFWS 2008); (3) South Carolina Breeding Bird Atlas (SCDNR 2014); and (4) The Land Manager s Guide to the Birds of the South (Hamel 1992). The results of this analysis produced the following table of priority migratory birds that are associated with and potentially affected by the Georgia Aster and Shortleaf Pine Management project. Table Priority migratory birds of the Georgia Aster and Shortleaf Pine Management project Species Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Brown Thrasher Toxostoma rufum Brown-headed Nuthatch Sitta pusilla Carolina Wren Thryothorus ludovicianus Chuck-will s-widow Caprimulgus carolinensis Eastern Towhee Pipilo erythrophthalmus Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens Field Sparrow Spizella pusilla Indigo Bunting Passerina cyanea Kentucky Warbler Oporonis formosus Northern Bobwhite Colinus virginianus Northern Flicker Colaptes auratus Pine Warbler Dendroica pinus Prairie Warbler Dendroica discolor Red-headed Woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus Whip-poor-will Caprimulgus vociferus White-throated Sparrow Zonotrichia albicollis Wood thrush Hylocichla mustelina Yellow-throated Vireo Vireo flavifrons Habitat Association Near water (estuaries, lakes, large ponds, open marshes, shorelines); seldom in deep woods Forests with well-developed forest understories or thickets Mature pine or mixed pine-hardwood forests Forests with well-developed forest understories or thickets Pine/hardwood forest types, especially near open areas Forests with well-developed forest understories or thickets Mature pine or mixed pine-hardwood forests Woodland, savanna, grassland Woodland, savanna, grassland Forests with well-developed forest understories or thickets Woodland, savanna, grassland Mature pine or mixed pine-hardwood forests Mature pine or mixed pine-hardwood forests Woodland, savanna, grassland Mature pine or mixed pine-hardwood forests Pine/hardwood forest types, especially near open areas Forests with well-developed forest understories or thickets Forests with well-developed forest understories or thickets Mature pine or mixed pine-hardwood forests 91

96 Sumter National Forest All other migratory bird species that occur in BCR 29 were excluded from analysis because they were not identified as PIF priority species or USFWS birds of conservation concern, the project area occurs outside of their known breeding, wintering, or migratory range, and/or suitable habitat does not exist within the project area. Effects Analysis Alternative 1: No Action Under this alternative, proposed actions (select removal of individual trees to enhance existing woodland conditions, natural openings, and canopy gaps; planting Georgia aster and other native herbaceous plants to supplement existing understory; controlling understory and midstory woody species using manual and mechanical methods; controlling understory and midstory woody species using herbicides; and shortleaf pine restoration) would not occur. The natural resources and ecological processes within the project area would continue at the existing level of human influence. The characteristics of the forest environment would be affected primarily by natural disturbances such as insects, disease, and weather events. Custodial management of recreation areas, roads, prescribed burning, and other projects already approved under prior decisions would continue under the No Action alternative. Direct Effects Direct effects are effects to the species known or assumed to occur in the proposed project area. They occur at the same time and place as the project activity. Under the No Action alternative, there would be no direct effects on priority migratory birds since no activities would take place. Indirect Effects Indirect effects include the consequences of management activities that result in the modifications of habitat and ecological conditions that affect food, water, shelter, and other biological requirements for a species. Migratory birds associated with woodland, savanna, and grassland habitats (Field Sparrow, Indigo Bunting, Northern Bobwhite, Prairie Warbler) Additional habitat for migratory birds associated with woodland, savanna, and grassland habitats would not be restored or enhanced under the No Action alternative. These species use open, early successional habitats that are maintained by frequent disturbance. Under alternatives 2 and 3, several proposed treatments would benefit these species: select removal of individual trees to enhance existing woodland conditions, natural openings, and canopy gaps; understory and midstory woody vegetation control using manual/mechanical methods and herbicide; and shortleaf pine restoration. Under the No Action alternative, these activities would not take place. Without these treatments, many 92

97 stands within the project area would continue to develop into mature mixed pinehardwood forests with dense midstories dominated by sweetgum and other shade-tolerant woody plants and little herbaceous vegetation on the forest floor. These conditions would not provide suitable habitat for migratory birds associated with woodland, savanna, and grassland habitats. Migratory birds associated with mature pine or mixed pine-hardwood forests (Brown-Headed Nuthatch, Eastern Wood-pewee, Northern Flicker, Pine Warbler, Red-headed Woodpecker, Yellow-throated Vireo) Under the No Action alternative, seedling/sapling habitat within the project area would develop into poletimber habitat, which would subsequently develop into sawtimber habitat. This progression would result in a more mature and continuous forest canopy dominated by pines, benefiting migratory birds that are associated with mature pine or mixed pine-hardwood forests. Migratory birds associated with forests with well-developed forest understories or thickets (Brown Thrasher, Carolina Wren, Eastern Towhee, Kentucky Warbler, White-throated Sparrow, Wood Thrush) Under the No Action alternative, well-developed forest understories and thickets would continue to develop and provide suitable habitat for priority migratory birds associated with these conditions. Migratory birds associated with pine/hardwood forest types, especially near open areas (Chuck-will s-widow, Whip-poor-will) Pine/hardwood forest types would continue to develop under the No Action alternative, providing habitat for migratory birds associated with these conditions. Migratory bird associated with water and seldom in deep woods (Bald Eagle) Since proposed activities would not occur with the No Action alternative, there would be no potential loss of suitable nest or roost trees for bald eagle. Connected Actions Actions are considered connected if they: (1) automatically trigger other actions which may require NEPA documentation, (2) cannot or will not proceed unless other actions are taken previously, or (3) are interdependent parts of a larger action and depend on the larger action for their justification. Skidding, decking, and hauling of logs, road maintenance, and erosion control measures are examples of connected actions. There would be no effects to any of the priority migratory birds related to connected actions since none would occur with the No Action alternative. 93

98 Sumter National Forest Cumulative Effects Cumulative effects are effects to the species and their habitats over time, and consider past, present, and future actions. There are other projects being implemented and/or planned on the Enoree Ranger District that would continue under the No Action alternative. Projects include timber harvesting, prescribed burning for hazard fuel reduction and wildlife habitat improvement, road maintenance, and trail construction and maintenance. Within compartments 7, 9, and 11, the Enoree Ranger District is planning the Chester County Stream and Riparian Restoration/Enhancement Project, which would restore and enhance the hydrologic and aquatic functions within four watersheds located on National Forest land. With the No Action alternative, no additional activities would take place so there would be no additional cumulative effects within the project area or across the District. Alternative 2: Proposed Action Direct effects Direct effects are not expected to occur to priority migratory birds. All priority migratory birds are highly mobile avian species that would relocate to undisturbed areas if they were displaced by proposed activities. However, it is possible that if any of these species were nesting during select removal of individual trees, planting of Georgia aster and other native herbaceous plants, manual/mechanical control of understory and midstory species, herbicide treatments, or shortleaf pine restoration, nests and nestlings could be lost due to the activities. These effects are considered minor since only a portion of the area would be managed at any one time. In addition, project activities would have to occur at the exact time when species are most vulnerable and also occur over successive years to have substantial impacts. This is unlikely given past management practices. Additionally, avian species will re-nest multiple times throughout the nesting season, so no significant decrease in reproductive potential is expected. The use of herbicides is not expected to have a direct effect on avian species. While the use of some herbicides can have direct effects on wildlife by causing injury or mortality from direct spray, drift or ingestion of contaminated food or water, those herbicides proposed in this alternative, namely imazapyr and triclopyr, are practically non-toxic to wildlife species. The acute oral LD5011 of imazapyr for mallard ducks (Anas platyrhynchos) and northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus) are both greater than 2,150 mg/kg (US Forest Service 2004a). Imazapyr is rapidly eliminated in the urine and feces of animals and is not known 11 Acute toxicity is commonly measured by the lethal dose (LD) that causes death in 50 percent of treated laboratory animals. LD 50 indicates the dose of a chemical per unit body weight of an animal and is expressed as milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). Chemicals are highly toxic when the LD 50 value is small and practically nontoxic when the value is large. 94

99 to accumulate in animal tissues (Miller et al. 1991). The acute oral LD50 of triclopyr for mallard ducks and northern bobwhite are 1,698 mg/kg and 2,935 mg/kg, respectively (US Forest Service 2011b). A one-generation reproduction study showed no reproductive effects, symptoms of toxicity or abnormal behavior when mallards were given up to 500 ppm of triclopyr in their diet for a 20-week period, including 10 weeks prior to egg laying and 10 weeks during egg laying. Newton et al. (1990) predicted that triclopyr would not be present in animal forage in doses large enough to cause either acute or chronic effects to wildlife and concluded that the tendency for triclopyr to dissipate quickly in the environment would preclude any problems with bioaccumulation in the food chain. Indirect effects Migratory birds associated with woodland, savanna, and grassland habitats (Field Sparrow, Indigo Bunting, Northern Bobwhite, Prairie Warbler) Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing woodland conditions, natural openings, and canopy gaps; controlling understory and midstory species using manual/mechanical methods and herbicides; and shortleaf pine restoration would result in nearly immediate early successional habitat, which would benefit migratory birds associated with woodland, savanna, and grassland habitats. Within one to two years after treatments, native grasses and forbs would become established in the understories of these forest stands, further improving habitat conditions. Migratory birds associated with mature pine or mixed pine-hardwood forests (Brown-Headed Nuthatch, Eastern Wood-pewee, Northern Flicker, Pine Warbler, Red-headed Woodpecker, Yellow-throated Vireo) Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing woodland conditions, natural openings, and canopy gaps should not affect habitat availability for migratory birds associated with mature pine or mixed pine-hardwood forests. Although mature pine trees may be removed during the select removal of trees to enhance existing open conditions, the remaining pine would provide suitable habitat for all species associated with this habitat type. Shortleaf pine restoration would result in the immediate loss of mature pine forest. However, once the shortleaf pine in the restoration stands mature, habitat would become available for species associated with mature pine or mixed pine-hardwood forests. Migratory birds associated with forests with well-developed forest understories or thickets (Brown Thrasher, Carolina Wren, Eastern Towhee, Kentucky Warbler, White-throated Sparrow, Wood Thrush) Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing woodland conditions, natural openings, and canopy gaps; planting Georgia aster and other native herbaceous plants to supplement the understory; controlling understory and midstory woody species using manual/mechanical methods and herbicides; and shortleaf pine restoration would not benefit these species, as most of the stands would be managed in an open condition. 95

100 Sumter National Forest However, considering the amount of available habitat across the District, proposed activities are not expected to have significant impacts on habitat availability for these species. Migratory birds associated with pine/hardwood forest types, especially near open areas (Chuck-will s-widow, Whip-poor-will) Effects of the proposed action on these species would be the same as those on migratory birds associated with mature pine or mixed pine-hardwood forests. Migratory bird associated with water and seldom in deep woods (bald eagle) Bald eagles often nest in mature or old-growth trees or snags, particularly pine, that are in close proximity to large bodies of water. Proposed activities in stands located near rivers, especially the Broad River, could affect potential roost and nest trees. However, project design criteria would prevent disturbance of any known nest or roost tree. Cumulative Effects All priority migratory birds are PIF priority species or USFWS birds of conservation concern. They are designated as such because they are experiencing various levels of population decline within BCR 29. The proposed action is expected to increase habitat for some groups of priority migratory birds (those associated with woodland, savanna, and grassland habitats), while at the same time result in short-term habitat loss for other groups of priority migratory birds (those associated with mature pine or mixed pinehardwood forests; pine/hardwood forest types, especially near open areas; forests with well-developed understories and thickets). The management proposed in Alternative 2 would have a net benefit on priority migratory birds. Any short-term habitat loss associated with the proposed action is not likely to adversely affect population trends at the BCR level. Alternative 3 Alternative 3 is similar to alternative 2 with the following exceptions: 1) Commercial thinning of timber to create habitat for Georgia aster and other woodland species would occur in portions of compartment 11, stand 3 (60 acres). 2) Broadcast seeding (hand-sowing) would be included as an option to establish Georgia aster. 3) In order to control understory and midstory woody species, up to three applications of directed foliar spray or stem injection methods would be done over a ten-year period; triclopyr ester (Garlon 4 or equivalent) would not be used as a directed foliar spray; and pines would not be controlled using herbicides. Pine control in Alternative 3 would rely on manual and mechanical methods and prescribed burning. 4) Compartment 68, stand 37 would be included in Alternative 3 and would be restored 96

101 to shortleaf pine. 5) Approximately 435 acres of loblolly pine stands (compartment 9, stands 3, 5, 7, and 10 and compartment 68, stands 7, 10, and 37) would be converted to shortleaf pine in areas where suitable soils exist. Spacing of planted shortleaf pine would be done on a 7 foot by 10 foot spacing. In addition to imazapyr and triclopyr (as stated in Alternative 2), glyphosate and aminopyralid would also be used for site preparation and release of planted shortleaf pine. 6) The prescription for compartment 9, stand 1 would be changed to select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions, planting Georgia aster and other species to supplement existing understory, and using manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species in the understory. 7) A 364-acre burn block, which includes two treatment stands (compartment 68, stands 7 and 10), has been identified and would be burned on a 3- to 5-year burn interval. See Chapter 2 in this EA for specific differences between alternatives 2 and 3. Direct Effects Direct effects to all priority migratory birds under this alternative would be similar to alternative 2, including effects to all species resulting from thinning of timber to create habitat for Georgia aster and other woodland species; broadcast seeding (hand-sowing) to establish Georgia aster; and shortleaf pine restoration on additional stands. In alternative 3, up to three applications of directed foliar spray or stem injection methods would be done over a ten-year period. In addition to the herbicide use period being extended, two additional herbicides (glyphosate and aminopyralid) would be used in alternative 3. Glyphosate is of relatively low toxicity to birds. The acute oral LD50 of glyphosate for northern bobwhite is greater than 2,000 mg/kg (US Forest Service 2011a). Avian reproduction studies yielded no reproductive effects at dietary exposure levels of up to 1,000 ppm (US Forest Service 1989). The effects of glyphosate on wild mammals have been examined in numerous field studies (Sullivan and Sullivan 2000; Santillo et al. 1989). These studies indicate that glyphosate will not cause unreasonable adverse effects to wildlife species. Aminopyralid is practically non-toxic to birds based on acute exposure to northern bobwhite that resulted in an LD50 value of greater than 2,250 mg/kg (EPA 2005). In 5-day dietary studies with northern bobwhite and mallard ducks, LC50 concentrations were greater than 5,000 (EPA 2005). The mammalian toxicity of aminopyralid is relatively well-characterized in experimental mammals in a series of toxicity studies that are required for pesticide registration (US Forest Service 2007). In rats, mice, rabbits, and dogs, aminopyralid has low acute and chronic oral toxicity. For example, Brooks (2001) found that in rats the acute oral LD50 is greater than 5,000 mg/kg for aminopyralid. It 97

102 Sumter National Forest seems reasonable to assume the most sensitive effects in wildlife mammalian species will be the same as those in experimental mammals. Results of acute exposure studies in birds indicate that avian species appear no more sensitive than mammals to aminopyralid in terms of acute lethality (US Forest Service 2007). Prescribed burning is not expected to have substantial direct effects on priority migratory birds. Because of the highly mobile nature of avian species, any disturbance resulting from prescribed burning activities would likely result in the temporary displacement of individuals to undisturbed areas. It is possible that nests containing eggs or flightless nestlings might be lost during prescribed burns, but prescribed burning would have to occur at the exact time when nests are most vulnerable and also occur over successive years to have substantial impacts. Indirect Effects Indirect effects to all priority migratory birds under alternative 3 would be similar to alternative 2. The way in which select removal of individual trees to enhance existing woodland conditions, natural openings, and canopy gaps; planting Georgia aster and other native herbaceous plants to supplement existing understory; controlling understory/midstory woody species using manual and mechanical methods and herbicides; and shortleaf pine restoration would take place under alternative 3 does not substantially differ from alternative 2. The additional 60 acres of timber thinning to create habitat for Georgia aster and other woodland species in alternative 3 would benefit MIS associated with early successional/disturbance-dependent habitats (Prairie Warbler, Field Sparrow, Northern Bobwhite). Prescribed burning within the 362-acre burn block would benefit all MIS by making their respective habitat associations more suitable. Cumulative Effects Cumulative effects of Alternative 3 on priority migratory birds would be the same as those of Alternative Aquatic Communities Affected Environment Watersheds on the Enoree Ranger District contain a warm water aquatic community that includes fish and macroinvertebrates. The warm water aquatic community serves as a management indicator that is monitored to indicate the effects of management on riparian resources. Fishes, crayfishes, mollusks, and aquatic insects are all components of the community. Aquatic species that may occur in the project area watersheds are listed in the following tables. 98

103 Table Fish species known to occur in project watersheds, Enoree Ranger District, Sumter National Forest (Rhode et al. 1994) Scientific Name Common Name Aphredoderidae Pirate Perches Aphredoderus sayanus sayanus Eastern pirate perch Catostomidae Suckers Carpiodes cyprinus Quillback Catostomus commersoni White sucker Erimyzon oblongus oblongus Creek chubsucker Hypentelium nigricans Northern hog sucker Minytrema melanops Spotted sucker Moxostoma macrolepidotum macrolepidotum Shorthead redhorse Moxostoma robustum Robust redhorse Moxostoma rupiscartes Striped jumprock Centrarchidae Sunfishes Lepomis auritus Redbreast sunfish Lepomis cyanellus Green sunfish Lepomis gibbosus Pumpkinseed Lepomis gulosus Warmouth Lepomis macrochirus Bluegill Lepomis marginatus Dollar sunfish Lepomis microlophus Redear sunfish Micropterus dolomieu Smallmouth bass Micropterus salmoides Largemouth bass Pomoxis annularis White crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus Black crappie Clupeidae Herrings Alosa sapidissima American shad Dorosoma cepedianum Gizzard shad Dorosoma petenese Threadfin shad Cyprinidae Carps and Minnows Clinostomus funduloides Rosyside dace Ctenopharyngodon idella Grass carp Cyprinella chloristia Greenfin shiner Cyprinella labrosa Thicklip chub Cyprinella nivea Whitefin shiner Cyprinella pyrrhomelas Fieryblack shiner Cyprinella zanema Santee chub Cyprinus carpio Common carp Eastern silvery Hybognathus regius minnow Hybopsis hypsinotus Highback chub Nocomis leptocephalus Bluehead chub Notemigonus crysoleucas Golden shiner Notropis altipinnis Highfin shiner Notropis cummingsae Dusky shiner Notropis hudsonius Spottail shiner 99

104 Sumter National Forest Scientific Name Aphredoderidae Notropis lutipinnis Notropis petersoni Notropis procne Notropis scepticus Semotilus atromaculatus Esocidae Esox americanus. Esox niger Ictaluridae Ameiurus brunneus Ameiurus catus Ameiurus natalis Ameiurus nebulosus Ameiurus platycephalus Ictalurus punctatus Noturus gyrinus Noturus insignis insignus Pylodictis olivaris Lepisosteidea Lepisosteus osseus Moronidae Morone saxatilis Percidae Etheostoma collis Etheostoma olmstedi Etheostoma thalassinum Perca flavescens Percina crassa Stizosteddion vitreum Poeciliidae Gambusia holbrooki. Common Name Pirate Perches Yellowfin shiner Coastal shiner Swallowtail shiner Sandbar shiner Creek chub Pikes Redfin pickerel Chain pickerel Bullhead Catfishes Snail bullhead White catfish Yellow bullhead Brown bullhead Flat bullhead Channel catfish Tadpole madtom Margined madtom Flathead catfish Gars Longnose gar Temperate Basses Striped bass Perches Carolina darter Tessellated darter Seagreen darter Yellow perch Piedmont darter Walleye Livebearers Eastern mosquitofish The robust redhorse is ranked as G1 by NatureServe (2008). This ranking indicates that the species is at a very high risk of extinction due to extreme rarity (often 5 or fewer populations), very steep declines, or other factors. It is also listed as endangered by the American Fisheries Society (Jelks et. al. 2008), which indicates that the species is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. The snail bullhead, flat bullhead and Carolina darter are listed as vulnerable by the American Fisheries Society. This indicates that the species may become endangered or threatened by relatively minor disturbances to its habitat or that it deserves careful monitoring of its distribution and abundance in continental waters of the United States to determine its status. The Carolina darter is also ranked as G3 by NatureServe, indicating it is at moderate risk of extinction due to a restricted range, relatively few populations (often 80 or fewer), recent and widespread declines, or other factors. 100

105 The South Carolina Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy (Kohlsaat et. al. 2005) includes the South Carolina s Priority Species List. These species warrant conservation concern to maintain diversity in South Carolina waters. The species are ranked in priority as moderate, high, and highest. The quillback, Santee chub, seagreen darter, Piedmont darter, and Carolina darter are ranked with a high priority. The greenfin shiner, thicklip chub, fieryblack shiner, highback chub, snail bullhead, white catfish, flat bullhead, and striped bass are all ranked with a moderate priority. During US Forest Service surveys from 2001 to 2005, 22 fish species were captured in Enoree Ranger District streams. Two of these species are considered nonindigenous or introduced species to the watershed (Warren et. al. 2000). The green sunfish was captured in two streams and the yellowfin shiner was captured in 12 streams. Table Crayfish species known to occur in project watersheds, Enoree Ranger District, Sumter National Forest (Eversole and Jones 2004) Conservation Status Scientific Name Common Name NatureServe State AFS Cambaridae Cambarus acuminatus Acuminate crayfish G4 S4 CS Cambarus howardi Chattahoochee crayfish G3 CS Cambarus latimanus Variable crayfish G5 S4? CS Cambarus reduncus Sickle crayfish G4G5 S4 CS Cambarus reflexus Pine savannah crayfish G4 S3 CS Cambarus spicatus Broad River spiny crayfish G2 S3 V Cambarus striatus Hay crayfish G5 CS Distocambarus carlsoni Mimic crayfish G2G3 T Distocambarus youngineri Newberry burrowing crayfish G1 S1 E Procambarus acutus Eastern white river crayfish G5 S5 CS Procambarus clarki Red swamp crayfish G5 CS Procambarus troglodytes Eastern red swamp crayfish G5 S4S5 CS The Newberry burrowing crayfish is ranked as G1. The Newberry burrowing crayfish is also ranked as S1 by the SC Natural Heritage Program. The Broad River spiny crayfish is ranked as G2 and the mimic crayfish is ranked G2G3. The G2 ranking indicates that the species is at high risk of extinction due to very restricted range, very few populations (often 20 or fewer), steep declines or other factors. The Chattahoochee crayfish is ranked as G3. The Broad River spiny crayfish and Pine savannah crayfish are rated as S3 by the South Carolina Natural Heritage Program. American Fisheries Society status ranks (Taylor et al 2007) include CS (currently stable), V (vulnerable), T (threatened), E (endangered) and E* (endangered, possibly extinct). The V rank indicates that the species mat become endangered or threatened by relatively minor disturbances to its habitat and deserves careful monitoring of its abundance and distribution. The T rank indicates that a species is likely to become endangered throughout all or a significant portion of its range. The E rank indicates a species is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. The South Carolina Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy ranks the mimic 101

106 Sumter National Forest crayfish, pine savannah crayfish, and Newberry burrowing crayfish as highest priority. The Broad River spiny crayfish is rated as high priority. Table Freshwater mollusk species known to occur in project watersheds, Enoree Ranger District, Sumter National Forest (Alderman 2007) Conservation Status Scientific Name Common Name NatureServe State AFS Corbiculidae Corbicula fluminea Asiatic clam Unionidae Elliptio complanata Eastern elliptio G5 SNR CS Elliptio angustata Carolina lance G4 SNR SC Pyganodon cataracta Eastern floater G5 CS Utterbackia imbecillis Paper pondshell G5 SNR CS Villosa delumbis Eastern creekshell G4 SNR CS The majority of mollusk species are unranked by the South Carolina Natural Heritage Program. A non-native clam species, the Asiatic clam, has widespread occurrence. American Fisheries Society status ranks are from Williams et al The Eastern elliptio, Carolina lance, and Eastern creekshell are ranked as moderate priority by the South Carolina Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy. Aquatic insect surveys have not been conducted, but incidental catch reveals a variety of insect order classes present. Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects of Alternative 1: No action There would be no direct, indirect, or cumulative effects resulting from this alternative, as the aquatic community would remain in its present state. Direct and Indirect Effects of Alternative 2: Proposed Action The purpose of this project is to improve habitat conditions for existing Georgia aster populations and to expand the distribution of the species on national forest land. This project would also increase the amount of shortleaf pine on national forest land. Project activities could affect aquatic organisms through temporary sedimentation and herbicide contamination to waterways during treatments. Sedimentation Effects Fine sediment can alter and reduce the quality of aquatic habitats and eliminate benthic macroinvertebrates or reduce their density and diversity. This in turn decreases a food source for some aquatic species. Sedimentation can cause mortality in egg and larval stages of aquatic species reproduction. Sediments can fill in and destroy habitat niches within a stream. 102

107 Most of the proposed treatments are not likely to contribute to sedimentation of streams. Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing woodland conditions, natural openings, and canopy gaps; planting Georgia aster and other native herbaceous plants to supplement existing understory; and controlling understory and midstory woody species such as pines, sweetgums, and maples using herbicides are not likely to result in ground disturbance. Therefore, the likelihood of sedimentation resulting from these treatments is low. Controlling understory and midstory woody species such as pines, sweetgum, and maples using manual and mechanical methods and shortleaf pine restoration would involve ground-disturbing activities. These treatments could contribute to sedimentation of streams. However, considering the limited amount of disturbance associated with project activities and the requirement that soils not be saturated during tree harvesting, the chance of rutting and subsequent erosion is reduced to minor levels and the effects are short term. The recovery process would be relatively rapid after tree harvesting as pioneering vegetation consisting of grasses and forbs would soon occupy the site providing additional ground cover and stability to the soil. This would reduce sediment deposition impacts to aquatic communities adjacent to and downstream of the project areas. Herbicide Effects Herbicides would not be applied directly into water. However, project work would take place adjacent to streams and overspray or drift is possible. Following Forest Plan standards and site specific design criteria, the application methods would reduce the potential for herbicide entering streams and adversely impacting aquatic organisms and communities. While herbicide treatments do not contribute to soil compaction or disturbance, herbicide use could result in chemical contamination of nearby streams and other water bodies. Herbicides can affect aquatic organisms directly through direct contact or ingestion, or indirectly through increased organic matter inputs or effects on riparian vegetation (Fulton and West 2002). A herbicide risk assessment was completed and outlines design criteria to reduce the hazard quotient derived from spill scenarios into ponds to zero. These include: 1) mix water must be carried to the site by the contractor or workers, and 2) trucks containing herbicide or tank mixed herbicide will not be allowed to park within 200 feet of a stream or pond. This would reduce the risk of accidental spill and provide an opportunity to clean up or contain a spill before it reaches a stream. Herbicides and application equipment would be secured during transport to prevent tipping or jarring. There would be no mixing, loading, or cleaning of equipment within 200 feet of open water or wells. All equipment associated with herbicide use would be inspected daily for leaks. Broadcast spraying would not occur. The following methods would be used to apply herbicide: direct foliar spray and stem injections. These methods limit the potential for herbicide drift into nearby water resources where it could affect aquatic communities. 103

108 Sumter National Forest Imazapyr has a low potential for leaching into ground-water. Imazapyr may move from treated areas in streams. Most movement of imazapyr was found in runoff from storms. Use of a streamside management zone can reduce the amount of offsite movement of imazapyr in stormflow. The half-life of imazapyr in water is about 4 days. Triclopyr would not be a leaching problem under normal conditions since it binds to clay and organic matter in soil. Triclopyr may leach from light soils if rainfall is very heavy. Sunlight rapidly breaks down triclopyr in water. The half-life in water is less than 24 hours. Forest Plan standards limit use of herbicides on windy days and before or during rain storms. This would help to reduce adverse effects from herbicides in addition to application methods that would also reduce adverse effects. Applications would focus on target plants, but still may offer minimal potential for chemical drift or wash-off. Careful attention to weather including temperature, wind speed and humidity measurements, and adhering to BMPs would help to limit effects. Herbicide applications would follow label requirements and Forest Plan standards and guidelines and site-specific design criteria. These criteria require mix water to be brought to the application site and vehicles are required to park a minimum distance from bodies of water and streams. The dispersed nature of herbicide application directed at individual plants or groups of plants in combination with the low volume application rates present a low risk of pollution to surface or ground water. The application of herbicide to treat individual plants would not create any discernible ground disturbance or erosion. Additional effects of herbicides are contained in Vegetation Management in the Coastal Plain/Piedmont Final Environmental Impact Statement VMEIS IV-111). Spill plans and contingencies would be included and implemented if needed. Herbicide treatment leaves the forest litter, duff, and humus layers intact. Grass and shrubs would be left to occupy the site. Cumulative Effects of Alternative 2: Proposed Action Typical ongoing activities in the project area include timber harvesting, prescribed burning, wildlife habitat management activities, recreational trail use and management, and road maintenance. Within compartments 7, 9, and 11, the Enoree Ranger District is planning the Chester County Stream and Riparian Restoration/Enhancement Project, which would restore and enhance the hydrologic and aquatic functions within four watersheds located on National Forest land. The proposed action, when added with other proposed actions or decisions to be implemented, would not result in adverse cumulative impacts to aquatic communities with adherence to BMPs and Forest Plan standards. Direct and Indirect Effects of Alternative 3 Alternative 3 is similar to alternative 2 with the following exceptions: 104

109 1) Commercial thinning of timber to create habitat for Georgia aster and other woodland species would occur in portions of compartment 11, stand 3 (60 acres). 2) Broadcast seeding (hand-sowing) would be included as an option to establish Georgia aster. 3) In order to control understory and midstory woody species, up to three applications of directed foliar spray or stem injection methods would be done over a ten-year period; triclopyr ester (Garlon 4 or equivalent) would not be used as a directed foliar spray; and pines would not be controlled using herbicides. Pine control in Alternative 3 would rely on manual and mechanical methods and prescribed burning. 4) Compartment 68, stand 37 would be included in Alternative 3 and would be restored to shortleaf pine. 5) Approximately 435 acres of loblolly pine stands (compartment 9, stands 3, 5, 7, and 10 and compartment 68, stands 7, 10, and 37) would be converted to shortleaf pine in areas where suitable soils exist. Spacing of planted shortleaf pine would be done on a 7 foot by 10 foot spacing. In addition to imazapyr and triclopyr (as stated in Alternative 2), glyphosate and aminopyralid would also be used for site preparation and release of planted shortleaf pine. 6) The prescription for compartment 9, stand 1 would be changed to select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions, planting Georgia aster and other species to supplement existing understory, and using manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species in the understory. 7) A 364-acre burn block, which includes two treatment stands (compartment 68, stands 7 and 10), has been identified and would be burned on a 3- to 5-year burn interval. See Chapter 2 in this EA for specific differences between alternatives 2 and 3. Direct Effects Direct effects to aquatic organisms under this alternative would be similar to alternative 2, including effects to aquatic organisms resulting from thinning of timber to create habitat for Georgia aster and other woodland species; broadcast seeding (hand-sowing) to establish Georgia aster; and shortleaf pine restoration on additional stands. In alternative 3, up to three applications of directed foliar spray or stem injection methods would be done over a ten-year period. In addition to the herbicide use period being 105

110 Sumter National Forest extended, two additional herbicides (glyphosate and aminopyralid) would be used in alternative 3. The herbicide effects discussed for alternative 2 also apply to alternative 3. In alternative 3, prescribed burning would occur within compartment 68. Activities that have the potential to affect aquatic resources include the construction of firelines and burning in riparian areas. None of the constructed firelines would cross stream channels. Hand lines would be constructed within riparian corridors and water diversions would be installed as hand lines are constructed. This is in accordance with the Riparian Prescription of the 2004 Sumter National Forest Revised Land and Resource Management Plan. Streams would be used as natural control lines with the burn unit. Soil and vegetation disturbance occurring within riparian areas and on stream banks would be minimized by the use of hand lines and water-bars (used to divert water off of firelines onto vegetative surfaces). Sediment loading and turbidity may occur from soil disturbance within riparian corridors. Sediment loading and turbidity can cause mortality by injuring and stressing individuals or smothering egg and larval stages of aquatic species. Indirectly, sediments can affect aquatic populations by filling in and destroying habitat niches within a stream. Prescribed burning should not be intense enough to destroy trees in the riparian areas, thus ensuring large woody debris and leaf litter recruitment to the stream systems and temperature stability. The degree of impact on the aquatic community depends on the extent and duration of riparian disturbance and the time period it takes for site rehabilitation. Riparian corridors and stream crossings would be seeded and mulched immediately following prescribed burns to minimize impacts from prescribed fire activities. Indirect Effects Indirect effects to all aquatic organisms under alternative 3 would be similar to alternative 2. The way in which select removal of individual trees to enhance existing woodland conditions, natural openings, and canopy gaps; planting Georgia aster and other native herbaceous plants to supplement existing understory; controlling understory/midstory woody species using manual and mechanical methods and herbicides; and shortleaf pine restoration would take place under alternative 3 does not substantially differ from alternative 2. Cumulative Effects Cumulative effects of alternative 3 on aquatic organisms would be the same as those of alternative

111 3.3 Social Environment Recreation and Visual Resources Affected Environment Visitors come to the Sumter National Forest to participate in a wide variety of recreation opportunities in an outdoor setting. Since visitor perception of an outdoor setting is often greatly affected by changes in the visual quality of an area, these two resource areas are discussed together in this section. Visual character in the piedmont on the Sumter National Forest is characteristic of a rural area, consisting of forested and agricultural landscapes. Forested areas are often in various stages of regeneration as a result of harvesting activities on both private and national forest system lands, while a patchwork of small rural farms often provide added visual contrast. Small, rural communities or residence groupings are periodically found throughout the area. The Georgia Aster and Shortleaf Pine Management Project are located in Management Area 4. The landscape character under these prescriptions is generally natural appearing. The sights and sounds of human activities are evident in many areas (Forest Plan USFS, 2004). Scenic Integrity Objectives (SIO) is established for each management prescription area in the Sumter NF (Forest Plan, USFS, 2004). SIO is a desired level of excellence based on physical and sociological characteristics of an area and refers to the degree of acceptable alterations of the characteristic landscape (Forest Plan, USFS, 2004). The management prescription areas within the project area have SIO s that include: High, Moderate and Low. High: Human activities are not visually evident to the casual observer. Activities may only repeat attributes of form, line, color, and texture found in the existing landscape character. Moderate: Landscapes appear slightly altered. Noticeable human created deviations must remain visually subordinate to the landscape character being viewed. Low: Landscapes appear moderately altered, human created deviations begin to dominate the valued landscape character being viewed but borrow valued attributes such as size, shape, edge effect and pattern of natural openings, vegetative type changes or architectural styles outside the landscape being viewed. Stands in the project area fall within the following prescription areas; 4.G.1. Calhoun Experimental Forest. o The desired condition is, Visitors enjoy a natural appearing setting especially on trails away from high use areas. The recreational opportunities are in roaded natural and rural settings. 107

112 Sumter National Forest 5.C. Designated Utility Corridors o The desired condition is Recreational use is generally hunting related, although existing trail systems occasionally cross these corridors. The recreational opportunities are in roaded natural and rural settings. The landscape character ranges from natural appearing to pastoral/cultural. 7.D. Concentrated Recreation Zones o The desired condition is Provide and maintain high quality recreation sites in natural forested settings. The recreational opportunities are in roaded natural and rural settings. 7.E.1. Dispersed Recreation Areas (Piedmont Only) o Unique to the piedmont, the desired condition is Visitors may choose from a variety of high quality, well maintained dispersed recreational opportunities including, but not limited, to day hiking, mountain biking, horseback riding, photography, canoeing, kayaking, boating, fishing, hunting, waterfowl hunting, dispersed camping, and nature study. These areas are approximately ¼ mile from each side of the Enoree, Tyger, and Broad Rivers. The recreational opportunities are in roaded natural and rural settings. 7.E.2. Dispersed Recreation Areas with Vegetation Management o The desired condition, Visitors may choose from a variety of high quality, well maintained dispersed recreational opportunities that may include, but are not limited to, horseback riding, hiking, hunting, fishing, mountain bike riding, OHV riding, and nature study. Maintain, improve, or expand trails to meet local demands without negatively affecting the local ecosystem. The recreational opportunities are in roaded natural and rural settings. 8.B.2. Woodland and Grassland/Savanna Habitats o The desired condition is to Create and maintain woodland habitats (very open forests with low tree densities) and grassland/savanna habitat. Provides a variety of recreational opportunities, especially hunting. Hunting opportunities are some of the best available on the Sumter National Forest, most notably for upland game. Wildlife viewing opportunities are plentiful. The recreational opportunities are in roaded natural and rural settings. 9.A.3. Watershed Restoration o Desired condition is to restore active erosion are restored with soil and water rehabilitation work to improve soil and productivity and water quality. People use these areas for hunting or other dispersed recreational activities. Recreational opportunities in this area include, but are not limited to driving for pleasure, day hiking, dispersed camping, backpacking, hunting, fishing, nature study, mountain biking, viewing and photographing scenery. The recreational opportunities are in roaded natural and rural settings. 108

113 9.G.2 Restoration of Upland Oak-Hickory and Mixed Pine-Oak-Hickory Forests o The emphasis is to restore and maintain upland oak-hickory and mixed oak-hickory-pine forests. The landscape character is generally natural appearing. The sights and sounds of human activities, especially motorized uses along main travel corridors, are evident in many parts of these areas. Visitors frequently see other people in some parts of these areas. Hunting and wildlife and plant viewing are common activities. The recreational opportunities are in roaded natural and rural settings. 10.B. High Quality Forest Products (Piedmont Only) o Emphasis applied to land capable of producing high quality, valuable sawtimber. The desired condition is to grow and sell saw log size timber (pine and hardwood) in a sustained manner on upland sites. The recreational opportunities are in roaded natural and rural settings. These areas are very accessible and provide a variety of recreational opportunities, foremost of which is hunting. Table Project Prescription Areas and their Associated Scenery Integrity Objective (SIO) Prescription SIO Total Acreage Alternative 2 Total Acreage Alternative 3 10B L G1 L C L C M D H E1 H E1 M E2 H E2 M B2 L A3 H A3 M G2 M G2 L Management prescriptions provide for natural and rural setting recreational opportunities. Hunting, wildlife viewing and trail riding are common activities in these areas (USFS, 2004). The project area is very popular for dispersed recreation: The area provides hunting opportunities for varied game, including deer, wild turkey, rabbit, quail and woodcock. The majority of general forest area has a low to medium SIO. 109

114 Sumter National Forest Tyger and Broad Rivers- have a small stand that falls within their viewsheds that are within the project area and are listed with a high SIO. The rivers provide a great opportunity for fishing and boating. Woods Ferry Horse Trail- The trail system is a 15 mile loop equestrian trail with a high SIO, and provides recreational opportunities for hiking, mountain biking, horse riding and wildlife viewing. The multi-loop trail system enables riders to adjust the length and duration of their ride. The trail system is undergoing relocation and realignment efforts to meet trail sustainability and scenery objectives. State Road 574, S leads to the Woods Ferry Recreation Area, has a couple of stands that fall within the project area and is in the viewshed of this road. This road has a high SIO. The viewshed is a priority for people driving to and from the Woods Ferry Recreation Area and provides a great opportunity for scenery and wildlife viewing. There are no developed recreation sites within the project area. Leeds Seasonal Campground- located within the 7D management prescription area of the project area; has been closed and all features have been decommissioned. The Leeds Fire Tower still stands at the site, but is no longer in service. There are seven developed recreation sites in the proximity to the project areas: Woods Ferry Trailhead- Services the 15 mile Woods Ferry Horse Trail System. Site amenities include parking area and information board. Woods Ferry Recreation Area Complex- Site amenities include; campground, boat ramp to the Broad River, three accessible fishing platforms, picnic area with two picnic shelters, drinking water and CXT vault toilet facility. Fairforest and Leeds Rifle Ranges- Both ranges are accessible and have five shooting tables, shelter, and 100 yards shooting area and parking area. Poulous Loop Seasonal Campground- Site amenities include CXT vault toilet facility, 13 site campground. The surrounding forest environment sustains abundant wildlife, resulting in some of the most desirable upstate hunting areas. Other sites adjacent to or within proximity to the project area: Rose Hill Plantation State Park Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects of Alternative 1: No Action No short-term impacts on visual resources are anticipated under the No-action alternative. The stands would appear in character with closed-canopy forested conditions, the SIO would be met for the project area. While there would be no direct effects on recreation as a result of the No-action alternative, minor indirect effects could occur to dispersed recreation within and adjacent to the project area over the long-term. Over time, the areas within the project area would likely have a decrease of diversity of plants and wildlife, which may lead to a long-term, minor, localized, adverse impact on dispersed recreation from an associated decrease in opportunities for hunting, fishing and plant and wildlife viewing. 110

115 In addition, by the no-action alternative, Compartment 68, stands 7 and 10 would not be approved to be added to the prescribed burning program and the area could become severely overgrown and competition would choke out viable vegetation which would reduce wildlife and hunting opportunities in the area. Direct and Indirect Effects of Alternatives 2: Proposed Action Project work while ongoing would have temporary short term impacts on hunters and trail users by closing areas while work is being accomplished. In addition, there could be a temporary displacement of some species, subsequently limiting hunting opportunities in the area. This would be short term, and would affect a very small proportion of forest users. This impact will be temporary and short term. Other trail sections and general forest areas would be open for use. Select removal of individual trees to enhance woodland conditions and encourage Georgia Aster and native grasses would increase the compositional variety of vegetation of different sizes, shapes, species mixtures and colors. Long term, this would improve visual variety of the WFHT and the River corridors. This may also increase the diversity of some species in the area and increase hunting opportunities. However, impacts to the observer would vary, and some observers may not like the area opened up. The creation of canopy gaps for shortleaf restoration would impact scenery and recreation along the WFHT system. The creation of gaps increases sunlight on the trail system making it unpleasant to ride during the warmer weather and increasing vegetation growth into the trail corridor. By implementing the design criteria of creating a buffer and thinning within this buffer to basal area, impacts along the WFHT would be reduced. The heavy vegetation would impact the variety of wildlife in the area and hunting opportunities would be reduced. Short term the heavy vegetation would be controlled by herbicide or manual or mechanical methods. Some may consider the visual quality of the site to be degraded until the stand develops further. Impact of creating openings could be long term until a stand of shortleaf can be established. Long term, there would be beneficial effects of increasing visibility into stands, increasing vegetation and plant variety, enhancing wildlife viewing and hunting opportunities. The use of herbicide would have a short term, temporary impact on the scenery along the WFHT. The implementation of design criteria with the creation of a 75 feet buffer along the trail would help reduce the visual impact of herbicide use in creation of canopy gaps. Some users may not notice the change in visual, use to seeing work being done in area. Others may see the herbicide treatment as unwanted. Herbicide use would also lead to a short term decrease in plant diversity and wildlife habitat, which would likely reduce the number of species using the areas over the short-term. Long term there could be a higher success rate of reducing plant competition and having successful stands of Shortleaf pine and Georgia Aster and increase the scenic quality for trail users and hunters in the area. The use of mechanical and manual methods such as mowing, hand tools and chainsaws have less impacts to the scenic quality along the WFHT. The viewshed would be opened up and provide opportunities for improved hunting and wildlife viewing. Trail users would also have an open view of the forest area. Select removal of individual trees to be felled or girdled by hand or chainsaw impact would be minimal if the design criteria are implemented. The buffer area along trail 111

116 Sumter National Forest should reduce the impact by staying back off the trail corridor. Trees to be injected or fallen and are tall enough to fall within the established trail corridor would be a safety hazard to trail users and would need to be chainsaw and placed on the ground. Prescribed burning to control competition to Georgia Aster and Shortleaf pine would have a temporary short term impact when the area is closed to users. This impact would be minimal as other areas of the forest would be available and open. Implementation of design criteria would limit visual impacts to the project area. Impacts to the visual character of the landscape would change to a variety of conditions along it from closed canopy conditions to open gaps for the shortleaf restoration projects and likely occur during thinning operations of basal areas for Georgia Aster work. Long term, thinning to open stands up could increase hunting opportunities. The SIO would be met for the project area. Thinning stands would increase compositional variety by an arrangement of vegetation of different sizes, shapes, species mixtures and colors. Overall, variation in the vegetative textures, sizes, and types may be considered to have the benefit of providing increased visual variety in the landscape. The resultant visual character of the area would enhance visibility into nearby forested areas. Hardwood inclusions would be more visible during the fall, and would provide additional seasonal color contrasts in the forest landscape. Larger and more diverse forest floor plant communities, developing as a result of increased light availability, would provide additional visual character. However, impacts to the observer would vary, and some observers may consider the visual quality of the site to be degraded until the stand develops further. There is some potential for indirect impact of unauthorized off trail riding by equestrians that may increase as a result of the open forest conditions created by thinning activities by using skid trails and log landings. Off trail riding in these areas could lead to increased soil erosion and sediment movement into nearby creeks. Short-term, minor, localized, adverse impacts on dispersed recreation within and around the treatment areas may result in the short term. Long term the recreational hunting, trail riding and other dispersed activities would be improved. Therefore, short-term impacts on recreation resulting from Alternative 2 would be minor, at most by following design criteria listed. Cumulative Effects of Alternative 2 With a large portion of the Georgia Aster and shortleaf restoration Project falling within the Chester County Stream and Riparian Restoration/Enhancement Project area, the Chester project is accounting for effects of impacts to the SIOs of the WFHT. That project will have a greater impact to the WFHT than the Georgia Aster and Shortleaf Restoration Project. Cumulative effects of this proposal when added to the restoration project would not result in long term adverse impacts to scenery or recreation activities in the area with adherence to Forest Plan standards and site-specific design criteria as described in section 2.5 of this EA. 112

117 Direct and Indirect Effects of Alternative 3 Commercial harvesting would impact dispersed recreation users and would be temporary and short term. There would be short term visual impacts to the scenery, but would be limited with implementation of the design criteria. The SIO would be met for the project area. The impacts from truck and logging equipment would temporarily disturb wildlife in and adjacent to the treatment areas, potentially causing the temporary displacement of some species, subsequently limiting hunting opportunities. This impact would be minimal due to the fact that other areas in the immediate vicinity would be open and available for use. Broadcast seeding of Georgia Aster seeding would have no effect on scenic character or recreation activities in the project area. By increasing the length of herbicide cycle to ten years this would extend the visual impact to the WFHT, Tyger and Broad Rivers and the road leading into the Woods Ferry Recreation Area, S Herbicide use would cause temporary short term impacts to the visual quality. SIOs would be met during and after work is completed. Implementation of design criteria would reduce the impacts. The planting density of the shortleaf seedlings does not necessarily affect the visuals or recreation uses any differently. Both planting density would have very similar impacts on the visuals and recreation uses including hunters, trail users and wildlife watching. The short term impact of the stands being closed in and thick would reduce the wildlife and hunting opportunities along with the short term visuals impacts include the sightseeing and wildlife viewing would be reduced. Long term, the stands would eventually be thinned through natural and timber management practices. Coordination would need to occur between the Chester County and the Georgia Aster and shortleaf restoration projects to reduce the direct impacts to recreational users. Most importantly, coordination would need to occur in determining what areas of the forest would be opened or closed simultaneously for recreational use and this information would need to be disseminated as widely as possible. The change in compartment nine, stand one, to Georgia Aster and the implementation of the design criteria would limit impacts to scenery along the WFHT. The viewshed of the stand would be opened up along with a change in variety and size of vegetation. Long term, there would be an increase in wildlife and increase in hunting opportunities. By adding compartment 68, there should be no direct or indirect impact to the scenery of the area or the recreation resources. The impact of adding prescribed burning to the project could temporary impact hunters when the area is closed during prescribed burning activities, but this would be limited and short term, and other areas of the forest would be available for use. 113

118 Sumter National Forest Cumulative Effects of Alternative 3 The proposed work of the Chester County Restoration Project along with the Georgia Aster and Shortleaf Pine Management Project would have some adverse cumulative short term impacts to the scenery and recreational opportunities within the area. Forest users would be temporarily displaced, but this would have minimal impact due to other areas in the immediate vicinity would be available for use. Long term there would be a beneficial change in the scenic quality of the area. Sight distances would be increased, adding to the visual diversity of the area and a change in the variety of vegetation which could increase wildlife and hunting opportunities. Given the landscape pattern characteristics of the Piedmont area (the variety of land management activities taking place), significant cumulative impacts to visual quality and recreation are not expected Cultural Resources Affected Environment A cultural resources inventory was completed for the area of potential effects for historic properties within the project area. The purpose of the inventory was to identify and document any archeological resources and evaluate their eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) using the criteria established under 36 CFR 60 and 38 CFR 800. A total of 26 archeological sites were identified through archival research and during intensive cultural resource surveys. The surveys consisted of a literature review of archival cultural resources information for the area of potential effects, intensive field surveys, and site evaluations to determine individual site eligibility for inclusion in the NRHP. The South Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and Tribal Historic Preservation Office (THPO) of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians reviewed the survey reports and were consulted on historic property eligibility and effects. The inventory identified five sites that are possibly eligible for listing in the NHRP, but unevaluated. The remaining 21 sites were determined not eligible for the NRHP. Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects of Alternative 1: No Action There would be no effect on known historic properties. There would be no potential for cumulative effects to known historic properties or unevaluated sites as a result of the noaction alternative. Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects of Alternative 2: Proposed Action The action alternative would avoid effects to known historic properties and unevaluated archeological sites. Cultural resource surveys have identified historic properties in the area of potential effects. The five unevaluated sites (38CS187, 38CS191, 38CS195, 114

119 38CS520, 38UN1555) would be marked with painted boundaries to be protected from ground disturbance. An evaluation of proposed activities under the action alternative would minimize the potential effects to undiscovered sites. In accordance with the signed memorandum of understanding with SHPO, if any additional cultural resource sites are encountered during any project related activity, they would be treated as an unanticipated discovery. A Forest Service archeologist would be notified and activities suspended at that location until the location is evaluated using unanticipated discovery protocols in accordance with 36 CFR 60 and 43 CFR 10. The SHPO and THPO have reviewed the cultural resource survey reports and documentation of previous cultural resource surveys. They have been consulted on this project including the determination of National Register eligibility of all sites in the area of potential effects. Letters concurring with Forest Service eligibility determinations were received. Avoidance of known historic properties and unevaluated archeological sites would result in no cumulative adverse effects to cultural resources. In addition, the Sumter National Forest has completed a cultural resources overview of the Sumter National Forest (Benson 2006). The overview establishes a context for heritage resources on the Enoree Ranger District and provides a basis for evaluating cumulative effects to cultural resources. Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects: Alternative 3 Direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of alternative 3 on known historic properties or unevaluated sites would be the same as the proposed action Economics Affected Environment The economic analysis and project cost and revenue information are contained in the project file. Costs and revenues associated with restoration work are based on district and forest experience with similar activities. The benefits of this project are stated in the Purpose and Need section and are intrinsic in nature. Economic values for these benefits have not been calculated. The timber sales help to create the conditions necessary for the restoration of Georgia aster and shortleaf pine. Revenue from timber provides funding to support other associated project work including but not limited to understory stand treatments (manual, mechanical, herbicide and prescribed burning treatments), tree and Georgia aster planting. Costs for overhead, design and sale layout and project administration are similar between action alternatives and are not included. Costs incurred by the timber purchasers or other 115

120 Sumter National Forest parties are also not included. The analysis is intended to be a relative comparison and disclosure of costs and benefits for the alternatives. Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects of Alternative 1 No costs or revenues from the project would be realized under this alternative. Wood products would not be harvested and revenues would be foregone. Indirectly, the ability to restore Georgia aster and shortleaf pine from revenues generated as a result of timber sales would also be lost. Past, present and foreseeable future economic returns would be realized from other timber sales on the district and this alternative would have minimal effect on total economic return to the Sumter National Forest and counties. Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects of the Action Alternatives Two action alternatives were analyzed. Cost used in the economic analysis include timber hauling, system road reconstruction/reconditioning, temporary road construction, planting shortleaf pine and Georgia aster, prescribed burning, manual and mechanical treatment of undesirable understory woody vegetation and herbicide treatments. Revenues are based on appraisals of fair market value for wood products and the expected volume to be cut. Benefits and costs for the alternatives are displayed in Table , and detailed transactions are contained in the project file. Table Economic Comparison of the Alternatives* Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Present Value of Costs 0 $986,000 $1,168,000 Present Value of Benefits 0 $588,000 $891,000 Present Net Value 0 ($398,000) ($278,000) B/C Ratio * rounded to nearest thousand dollars Alternative 3 benefit/cost ratio is higher that the proposed action due to increased revenues from more acres being harvested with associated costs not being proportionately higher. The action alternatives produce nonmonetary benefits with the restoration of Georgia aster and shortleaf pine habitat. This would add to diversity on the landscape and provide benefits to plants and animals that are dependent on this type of habitat Environmental Justice and the Protection of Children Affected Environment Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations, requires Federal agencies to identify and address any disproportionate adverse human health or environmental effects of its projects on minority or low-income populations. Each Federal agency must conduct its programs, policies, and activities that substantially affect human health or the environment in a manner that ensures that such programs, policies, and activities do not have the effect of excluding persons or populations from participation in, denying 116

121 persons or populations the benefits of, or subjecting persons or populations to discrimination under, such programs, policies, and activities because of their race, color, national origin, or income level. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks, directs Federal agencies to identify and assess environmental health risks and safety risks that may disproportionately affect children. This Executive Order requires Federal agencies to ensure that [their] policies, programs, activities, and standards address disproportionate risks to children. An examination of environmental justice and effects of actions on environmental health risks and safety risks that may disproportionately affect children sets the stage for whether the action alternative or the No Action alternative poses disproportionate environmental, health or safety risks to children, minorities or low-income populations or individuals requiring additional analysis be completed. Table Percentage of Minorities and Persons Below Poverty in Union, Newberry and Chester Counties, South Carolina South Carolina Measures Union Newberry Chester Population, 2013 estimate 28,030 37,521 33,578 4,774,839 Black or African Americans, percent, % 31.2% % Other, percent, % 3.2% % Persons below poverty, percent, % 16.7% % Sources: US Census Bureau, 2014 The project is located within the Enoree Ranger District which is contained within Chester, Union and Newberry Counties, South Carolina. Table lists the population, percentage of minorities and persons below the poverty level within each of the counties comprising the project area, compared to the State of South Carolina as a whole. Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects of Alternative 1: No Action There would be no activities occurring under this alternative that would adversely affect minorities, persons below the poverty level or children. Therefore, no further environmental justice analysis from this alternative is necessary. There are no past, present or reasonably foreseeable activities on federal and private lands that would overlap with this alternative to result in cumulative disproportionate adverse effects to minorities, persons below the poverty level or children. Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects of Alternative 2: Proposed Action The proposed activities occur in counties that have a higher percentage of minorities and people below the poverty level than the state as a whole. 117

122 Sumter National Forest Noise generated during project activities may disturb adjacent residents or Forest users, although these impacts would be localized and temporary. The potential impacts resulting from Alternative 2 are not expected to adversely affect County residents, regardless of race or income. Forestry and agricultural activities are common activities throughout the counties and are associated with much of the population s source of income and lifestyle. The activities proposed would not disproportionately adversely affect minority and lowincome residents. Similarly, children would not be disproportionately affected. All members of the public would be restricted from work areas to maintain safety. Projects are proposed entirely on national forest system lands and would not disproportionately impact minority communities or people below the poverty level. Therefore, further environmental analysis is not required. There are no past, present or reasonably foreseeable activities on federal and private lands that would overlap with this alternative to result in cumulative disproportionate adverse effects to minorities, persons below the poverty level or children. Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects of Alternative 3 Direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of alternative 3 on minorities, persons below the poverty level or children would be the same as the proposed action Human Health and Safety Affected Environment The Forest Service Handbook (FSH), Forest Service Manual (FSM), and the Revised Land and Resource Management Plan, Sumter National Forest (Forest Plan) all provide guidance and establish required measures to protect human health and safety during forest management activities. The Sumter National Forest also has a spill response program in place to contain and remove contaminants, such as herbicides. Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects of Alternative 1: No Action This alternative would have no effect on human health and safety beyond current management actions in the area. Under the No Action alternative, no road improvements would occur, since none of the proposed vegetation management activities would occur. Past, present and current activities in the area that have the potential to impact human health and safety include prescribed burning, road maintenance, approved timber harvesting and herbicide applications for non-native invasive plants. All of these activities will comply with Forest Plan direction to protect public health and safety and also include project-specific design criteria to reduce risks. Adverse cumulative effects to human health and safety are not expected from this alternative. 118

123 Direct and Indirect Effects of the Action Alternatives Timber harvesting activities, temporary road construction, maintenance of system roads and prescribed burning require the use of heavy equipment (such as dozers, skidders, log loaders, bush-hogs, tractors and trucks) and manual equipment (chain saws, brush axes, etc.). The use of mechanical and manual equipment and the movement of trees and logs present the highest potential for safety risks during harvest activities. There is a risk of injury to contract workers, Forest Service personnel and the public. For all mechanical treatments in the project area, equipment operators must demonstrate proficiency with the equipment and be licensed to operate it. In addition, a helper must direct the operator where safety is compromised by terrain or limited sight distances (USDA, 1989b). The private timber sale contractor conducting the harvest would be responsible for adhering to safety specifications during the entire harvest process. These requirements include the: Installation of temporary traffic control devices on roads and trails open to public travel to warn users of hazardous or potentially hazardous conditions; Removal of logging slash from all trails open to the public; Development of a specific traffic control plan; and Installation of road closure devices, such as but not limited to barricades to control entry to the activity site (USDA, 2000a). In accordance with Forest Service Health and Safety Code Handbook (FSH ), vegetation management activities require all Forest Service workers to wear safety equipment, including hard hats, eye and ear protection, chaps, and fire retardant clothes. Monitoring of compliance with the Forest safety code would be accomplished through on-site inspections and reviews of accident reports (USDA, 1989b). Any risks to workers or the public would be minor and temporary. Adherence to safety measures would minimize or eliminate adverse human health and safety effects The herbicides proposed for use contain the active ingredients imazapyr, aminopyralid, triclopyr and glyphosate. Limonene is the adjuvant to be used and a water soluble dye would be mixed in. The herbicides would be applied by direct foliar spray from backpack sprayer equipment or by spray bottle using the hack and squirt method. There would be no broadcast spraying of herbicides. A herbicide risk assessment has been completed and can be found in the project file. Herbicide applications have the potential to adversely affect public and worker health and safety. Contractors applying herbicides have the potential to be inadvertently directly exposed to the herbicide as a result of drift or accidental contact during spraying. They can be indirectly exposed by contact with the herbicide residue on plant surfaces. They 119

124 Sumter National Forest have the potential to be harmed as a result of an accidental spill of the herbicide during mixing, loading and spraying. Only herbicides and additives registered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and approved by the USFS are proposed for use, and only a certified pesticide applicator would train the crew and supervise the application (USDA, 1989b). By following label directions, the use of herbicides would not be expected to harm contractor workers, Forest Service employees and the public in the area. Drift is negligible from these application methods and wearing personal protective equipment 12 [required by Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)] minimizes exposure from sprayed plant material. Personal cleaning after use also reduces the risk of further contamination. In accordance with FSH , public exposure to herbicides would be minimized by the clear placement of notice signs at application sites, especially in areas of anticipated visitor use. Monitoring and inspections during and after the project would be used to ensure that proper procedures were followed. Site-specific design criteria have been included with the project to reduce the risk to workers and the public. Accidental spills of herbicides or additives may pose a risk to human health and safety. Containers of herbicide would be secured in a part of the vehicle away from people, food, and drinking water to prevent tipping and contamination. Trucks containing herbicide or tank mixed herbicide would not be allowed to park within 200 feet of a stream or pond. Equipment would be required to be inspected daily for leaks and proper function. In the event of an accidental spill, the previously prepared spill plan (FSM ) would be implemented to contain and clean up the spill and notify the appropriate agencies and individuals (USDA, 1989b). Herbicides would be applied with strict conformance with herbicide label information and instructions. Road maintenance would improve safety conditions for Forest personnel and users during project activities. While this would have a beneficial effect on human health and safety, this effect would not be significant. Prescribed burning is planned on 364 acres. Risks to human health and safety include smoke inhalation and injury from the fire itself in the event that a controlled burn escapes the area. Various safety measures are in place to protect workers and the public from adverse effects during prescribed fires. A prescribed fire plan is required for each managed burn, which includes a smoke mitigation plan in the event that planned conditions change. Roads and highways are closed if the smoke impairs visibility enough to threaten public safety (USDA, 2000b). The public is notified through signs and closed roads, if necessary, and nearby residents adjacent to the Forest are notified prior to a prescribed burn. In addition, standards and guidelines and mitigation measures provided in the Forest Plan are adhered to during prescribed fires, which minimize or eliminate 12 Workers are required to wear a hard hat with plastic liner, waterproofed boots and gloves and other safety clothing. First aid equipment, including eyewash bottles and wash water separate from drinking water, are required to be on-site during application. 120

125 public human health and safety concerns resulting from smoke exposure and fire injuries. All burns are conducted by trained staff, supervised by an experienced burn boss, and monitored through review of burn plans, on-site inspections, and post-burn evaluations (USDA, 1989b). Indirectly, human health and safety could be impacted by smoke caused by prescribed fires. Smoke in the environment can aggravate existing respiratory conditions, such as emphysema. Although measures are followed to decrease the incidence of smoke on highways, traffic accidents could occur as a result of smoke on highways, particularly if road signs are disregarded. Cumulative Effects of the Action Alternatives Past, present, and future actions in and adjacent to the project area on federal and private lands include vegetation management, agriculture and grazing. All activities would comply with established standards, guidelines, and design criteria in the Forest Plan to protect workers, Forest Service employees and the public. Herbicide use in the area is currently restricted to treating non-native invasive species that pose threats to management objectives on national forest system lands and use on private lands. Adherence to Forest Plan standards and guidelines and design criteria in this EA along with other already approved projects would avoid substantial adverse cumulative impacts to human health and safety from the action alternatives Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources Irreversible commitments of resources are those resources that have been destroyed, removed or deteriorated to the point that renewal can occur only over a long period of time or at a great expense. Examples of this include the loss of a species endemic to a certain site or mineral extraction. Irretrievable commitments represent resource opportunities that are foregone or cannot be realized during the planning period. These decisions are reversible, but the production opportunities foregone are irretrievable. Power line rights-of-way or a road that is kept clear of trees and other vegetation are examples of irretrievable commitments of resources. There are no irreversible or irretrievable commitment of resources associated with the alternatives. 121

126 Sumter National Forest Chapter 4. Consultation and Coordination 4.1 Forest Service Interdisciplinary Team Members Jeffrey Magniez, Zone Wildlife Biologist (Interdisciplinary Team Leader) John Richardson, District Silviculturist Carrie Miller, District Biological Science Technician Robin Mackie, Forest Botanist Tarri McKinney, District Biological Science Technician Marcus Beasley, Assistant Fire Management Officer Alice Riddle, District Recreation Planner Chris Smith, District Timber Management Assistant Mike Harmon, District Archaeologist John Hodges, Engineering Technician Luis Mundo, Engineer 4.2 Other Forest Service Personnel Consulted Jim Knibbs, Forest NEPA Coordinator Geoff Holden, Forest GIS Coordinator Chris Evans, District Other Resources Assistant Bob Little, Zone Fire Management Officer Larue Bryant, Forest Engineer Jay Purnell, Forest Silviculturist Jason Jennings, Forest Soil Scientist Jeanne Riley, Forest Fisheries Biologist Mark Garner, Forest Wildlife Biologist 4.3 Other Agencies Consulted/Tribal Consultation South Carolina History and Archives, State Historic Preservation Office Tribal Historic Preservation Office, Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians United States Fish and Wildlife Service 122

127 References Adams, T. and D. Hook Implementation and Effectiveness Monitoring of Forestry Best Management Practices on Harvested Sites in South Carolina. South Carolina Forestry Commission. Columbia, South Carolina. 32 p. Adams, T Implementation Monitoring of Forestry Best Management Practices on Harvested Sites in South Carolina. South Carolina Forestry Commission. Columbia, South Carolina. 24 p. Adams, T Implementation Monitoring of Forestry Best Management Practices for Site Preparation in South Carolina. South Carolina Forestry Commission. Columbia, South Carolina. 24 p. Atlantic Coast Joint Venture (ACJV) Priority Bird Species in BCR 29. Online reference: Brooks, K XDE-750: Acute oral toxicity study in Fisher 344 Rats. Project Number: Unpublished study prepared by Dow Chemical Company. MRID No Dissmeyer, G. E.; Foster, G. R A Guide for Predicting Sheet and Rill Erosion on Forest Land. USDA-Forest Service, Southern Region. Technical Publication R8-TP6. 40 pages. Dissmeyer, G. E.; Stump, R. F Predicted Erosion Rates for Forest Management Activities in the Southeast. U. S. Department of Agriculture. Forest Service. State and Private Forestry, Southeastern Area. Atlanta GA. 39 pages. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Pesticide Fact Sheet: Aminopyralid. Online reference: Hamel, P.B The Land Manager s Guide to the Birds of the South. The Nature Conservancy, Southeastern Region, Chapel Hill, NC. Hibbart, A.R Forest Treatment Effects on Water Yield. In: International Symposium on Forest Hydrology. W.E. Sopper and H.W. Lull (eds.). Pergamon Press. New York. pp Haywood, J.D Seasonal Burning and Woody Plant Control Influence Native Vegetation in Loblolly Pine Stands. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station. Research Paper SRS-14. Jones, D., Implementation Monitoring of Forestry Best Management Practices for Harvesting and Site Preparation in South Carolina South Carolina Forestry Commission. Columbia, South Carolina. Kormanik, P.P., S.S. Sung, T.L. Kormanik, and J. Stanley Oak Regeneration: Why Big is Better. In: National Proceedings Forest and Conservation Nursery Association, Fort Collins, Colorado. GTR-PNW-365. Pp

128 Sumter National Forest La Sorte, F.A., F.R. Thompson, M.K. Tranni, and T.J. Mersmann Population trends and habitat occurrence of forest birds on Southern National Forests, US Forest Service, Northern Research Station, General Technical Report NRS-9. Lyon, L.J., M.H. Huff, R.G. Hooper, E.S. Telfer, D.S. Schreiner, and J.K. Smith Wildland Fire in Ecosystems: Effects of Fire on Fauna. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-42-Volume 1. McComb, W.C. and G.A. Hurst Herbicides and Wildlife in Southern Forests. In: Managing Southern Forests for Wildlife and Fish, A Proceedings, United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. General Technical Report SO- 65. McNab, W.H., T. Miller, and E.V. Brender Growth and Fusiform Rust Responses of Piedmont Loblolly Pine After Several Site Preparation and Regeneration Methods. Reprinted from: Southern Journal of Applied Forestry, Vol. 14, No. 1. Mengak, M.T., D.H. Van Lear, and D.C. Guynn, Jr Impacts of Loblolly Pine Regeneration on Selected Wildlife Habitat Components. In: Proceedings of the Fifth Biennial Southern Silvicultural Research Conference, Memphis, Tennessee, November 1-3, United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station, General Technical Report SO-74. Pgs Meyers, J.M. and A.S. Johnson Bird Communities Associated with Succession and Management of Loblolly-Shortleaf Pine Forests. In: Proceedings of the Workshop Management of Southern Forest for Nongame Birds, Atlanta, Georgia, January 24-26, United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. General Technical Report SE-1.4. Pgs Miller, J.H., B.R. Zutter, S.M. Zedaker, M.B. Edwards, and R.A. New hold Early Plant Succession in Loblolly Pine Plantations as Affected by Vegetation Management. Reprinted from: Southern Journal of Applied Forestry, Vol. 19, No. 3. Miller, P., C.H. Fung, and B. Gingher Animal Metabolism: Chapter 12 in The Imidazolinone Herbicides, D.L. Shaner and S.L. O Conner, eds. CRC Press. Boca Raton, FL. Muir, R.L., D.K. Laur, G.R. Glover, and J.H. Miller Pine Response and Hardwood Development After Brushsawing and Manual Herbicide Release of Loblolly Pine. In: Third International Conference on Forest Vegetation Management: Popular Summaries, K.G. Wagner and D.G. Thompson (comp), Newton, M., F. Roberts, A. Allen, B. Kelpsas, D. White, and P. Boyd Deposition and dissipation of three herbicides in foliage, litter, and soil brushfields of southwest Oregon. J. Agric. Food Chem., 38:

129 Pederson, Neil, Varner, J. Morgan, Palik, Brian J. January Canopy Disturbance and Tree Recruitment Over Two Centuries in a Managed Longleaf Pine Landscape. Forest Ecology and Management. Volume 254, pages Santillo, D.J., D.M. Leslie, and P.W. Brown Response of small mammals to glyphosate application on clearcuts. Journal of Wildlife Management 53: Seehorn, M.E The Influence of Silvicultural Practices on Fisheries Management: Effects and Mitigation Measures. In: Managing Southern Forests for Wildlife and Fish, A Proceedings, United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. General Technical Report SO-65. South Carolina Department of Natural Resources (SCNDR) South Carolina Breeding Bird Atlas, Online reference: Stransky, J.J. and L.K. Halls Forage and Pine Growth with Clearcutting and Site Preparation. In: Proceedings of the First Biennial Southern Silvicultural Research Conference, Atlanta, Georgia, November 6-7, United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station, General Technical Report SO-34. Pgs Sullivan D.S. and T.P. Sullivan Non-target impacts of the herbicide glyphosate: A compendium of references and abstracts. 5th Edition. Applied Mammal Research Institute, Summerland, British Columbia, Canada. Swank, W.T., L.W. Swift, Jr and J.E. Douglas Streamflow Changes Associated with Forest Cutting, Species Conversions and Natural Disturbances. In Ecological Studies of Forest Hydrology and Ecology at Coweeta. W.T. Swank and D.A. Corssley, Jr. (Eds). Springer-Verlag Swank, W.T., and others Effects of Timber Management Practices on Soil and Water. Syracuse Environmental Research Associates (SERA) Selected Commercial Formulations of Triclopyr Garlon 3A and Garlon 4 Risk Assessment Final Report. Submitted to the United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Syracuse Environmental Research Associates (SERA) Imazapyr (Arsenal, Chopper, and Stalker Formulations) Final Report. Prepared for the United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Tappe, P.A., M.G. Shelton, and T.B. Wigley Overstory-Understory Relationships in Natural Loblolly Pine-Hardwood Stands: Implications for Wildlife Habitat. In: Proceedings of the Seventh Biennial Southern Silvicultural Research Conference, Mobile, Alabama, November 17-19, United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station, July General Technical Report SO-93. Pgs US Fish and Wildlife Service South Carolina List of At-Risk, Candidate, Endangered, and Threatened Species. Online access: 125

130 Sumter National Forest US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Birds of Conservation Concern United States Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, Arlington, VA. Online reference: TACCIMO Report, unpublished analysis, report ran in US Fish and Wildlife Service National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines. Online access: lemanagementguidelines.pdf. US Forest Service. 2011a. Glyphosate: Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment Final Report. Prepared for USDA Forest Service by Syracuse Environmental Research Associates, Inc. SERA TR b. US Forest Service. 2011b. Triclopyr: Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment Final Report. Prepared for USDA Forest Service by Syracuse Environmental Research Associates, Inc. SERA TR a. US Forest Service Aminopyralid: Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment Final Report. Prepared for USDA Forest Service and National Park Service by Syracuse Environmental Research Associates, Inc. SERA TR a. US Forest Service Imazapyr: Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment Final Report. Prepared for USDA Forest Service by Syracuse Environmental Research Associates, Inc. SERA TR b. US Forest Service Management Indicator Species Population and Trends. Francis Marion and Sumter National Forests. US Forest Service Vegetation Management in the Coastal Plain/Piedmont Final Environmental Impact Statement. Southern Region. US Forest Service. 2004b. Revised Land and Resource Management Plan Sumter National Forest. Management Bulletin R8-MB 116A. Forest Service Southern Region. US Forest Service. 1989a. A Guide for Prescribed Fire in Southern Forests. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Region. Technical Publication R8-TP 11. February US Forest Service Monitoring and Evaluation Annual Report, Revised land and Resource Management Plan, Sumter national forest. Unpublished report. August, Van Lear, D. H., W. T. Swank, J. E. Douglass, and J. B. Waide Forest management 126

131 practices and the nutrient status of a loblolly pine plantation. Pgs In: I.U.F.R.O. symp. on forest site and continuous productivity. USDA For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep., PNW-163. Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Exp. Station. 406 p. Waldrop, Thomas A., Callaham Jr., Mac A., Stanturf, John A Does Prescribed Burning in Southern Forests Release significant Amounts of Mercury to the Atmosphere? Joint Fire Science Program Project Number White, Lindsay; Trettin, Carl; Hansen, William; Law, Dennis; The Effects of Prescribed Fire and Thinning on Fuels, Erosion, and Nutrients in a Disturbed Piedmont Forest of South Carolina, study. 127

132 Sumter National Forest Appendix 1: Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation The Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation begins on the following page. The document is inserted into this appendix as previously written and formatted. 128

133 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT / BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION Georgia Aster and Shortleaf Pine Management US Forest Service Enoree Ranger District Sumter National Forest Chester, Newberry, and Union Counties South Carolina May 2015 I. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation (BA/BE) is to determine whether the proposed action is likely to affect any proposed, endangered, threatened, or sensitive (PETS) species or their habitats. Proposed, endangered, and threatened species are designated by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and are managed under the authority of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) (Public Law , as amended) and the National Forest Management Act (Public Law ). The ESA requires Federal agencies to ensure that no actions that they authorize, fund, or carry out are likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any proposed, endangered, or threatened species or their habitat. Sensitive species are managed under the authority of the National Forest Management Act requiring that National Forests manage for "viable populations of all native and desirable nonnative species" both across the range of the species and within the planning area. Sensitive species designation occurs on a periodic basis through the recommendation of Forest Biologists who consult with local State Heritage Programs, The Nature Conservancy, and local species experts. The Regional Forester administratively designates sensitive species. The objectives of this BA/BE are: To ensure that Forest Service actions do not contribute to the loss of viability of any PETS species; To comply with the requirements of the ESA; and To provide a process and standard to ensure PETS species receive full consideration in the decision-making process. II. PROPOSED ACTION The Forest Service is proposing activities to (1) enhance existing Georgia aster populations, (2) expand Georgia aster at new sites, and (3) restore shortleaf pine communities on sites that are currently dominated by loblolly pine. Proposed activities would also improve habitat for wildlife species. The Forest Service developed three alternatives: Alternative 1, the No Action Alternative; Alternative 2, the Proposed Action; and Alternative 3, which was developed to 129

134 Sumter National Forest address key issues identified by the Forest Service interdisciplinary team. This BA/BE analyzes the effects of Alternative 3 on PETS species and their habitats. Management activities under Alternative 3 would include the following treatments: Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing woodland conditions, natural openings, and canopy gaps (1,160 acres) Individual trees would be felled or girdled with chainsaws or with hand tools. This activity is not intended to result in commercial timber sales, but is rather a means to improve habitat conditions at sites where Georgia aster and other woodland plants would be planted. Tree removal would be limited to patches no greater than one acre in size and would not exceed more than one patch per ten acres. Thinning of timber to create habitat for Georgia aster and other woodland species (60 acres) The residual basal area in those parts of the stands following thinning would range from BA. Dominant and co-dominant pines would be left as well as desirable hard mast species (e.g., oaks and hickories) and soft mast species (e.g., black cherry, persimmon, and dogwood). If thinning is not feasible, then select removal of individual trees may take place to enhance existing conditions. Other activities that could occur in these stands include planting Georgia aster and other native herbaceous plants to supplement existing understory and controlling understory/midstory woody species using manual/mechanical methods and herbicides. Planting Georgia aster and other native herbaceous plants to supplement existing understory (1,547 acres) Georgia aster plants would be hand-sown (seeds) or hand-planted (containerized plants) within expansion areas. Planting would require hand-digging planting holes approximately 6 to one foot deep. Georgia aster would be planted in patches within project stands, as opposed to evenly distributing plants across an entire stand. Patches would vary in size from several dozen plants to hundreds of plants. All Georgia aster planted within the project area would come from local ecotypes. Native grasses (such as Andropogon gerardii, Schizachyrium scoparium, and Sorghastrum nutans) and forbs (such as Asclepias spp., Liatris spp., and Baptisia spp.) may also be established to enhance native plant diversity. Native grasses and forbs would be hand-sown (seeds), no-till planted (seeds), or hand-planted (containerized plants). All native grasses and forbs planted within the project area would come from local ecotypes. Controlling understory and midstory woody species such as pines, sweetgum, and maples using manual and mechanical methods (1,681 acres) Manual methods (e.g., handtools and chainsaws) and mechanical methods (e.g., mowing and masticating) would be used to control the sprouts, seedling, and saplings of woody species (such as pines, sweetgum, maples, elms) to restore and maintain open understories and midstories in project stands. Controlling understory and midstory woody species such as sweetgum, and maples using herbicides (imazapyr and triclopyr) (1,681 acres) Imazapyr and triclopyr would be used to control woody species (such as sweetgum, maples, elms) in the understory and midstory that compete with Georgia aster, shortleaf pine, and other desirable vegetation with project stands. Directed foliar spray or stem injection methods would be used. Up to three applications would be done over a ten-year period. Directed foliar spray would be applied using backpack sprayers. The application would be a low volume direct spray where foliage of target species is sprayed to speckle the leaf surface. Per 130

135 gallon of mix water, the herbicide mixture for this application is 0.5 ounce Arsenal AC or equivalent (imazapyr), 0.5 ounce of Cidekick adjuvant or equivalent, and spray pattern indicator. Stem injections would be applied with hatchets and squirt bottles, or similar application devices, using a mixture of 64 ounces water, 6 ounces Arsenal AC or equivalent (imazapyr) and 64 ounces Garlon 3A or equivalent (triclopyr amine). Stem injection would be applied to target vegetation too large to treat with a foliar spray. Shortleaf pine restoration Approximately 386 acres of loblolly pine stands (compartment 9, stands 3, 5, 7, and 10 and compartment 68, stands 7, 10, and 37 would be converted to shortleaf pine. The selection of these stands is based on the Campbell and Copeland (1954) numerical system for field rating sites for littleleaf disease hazard based on soil characteristics. Shortleaf pine restoration would require the removal of all loblolly pine while retaining healthy shortleaf pine and desirable mast-producing hardwoods (such as oaks and hickories). It is anticipated that not enough shortleaf pine would be left to restock the stands, so planting shortleaf pine seedlings would be needed. Shortleaf pine seedlings would be hand-planted on a 7 foot by 10 foot spacing after the unwanted competition has been controlled through burning, chemical treatment, and/or manual treatments. Prior to timber harvest, burning would be used to reduce loblolly pine seedlings. Following the timber harvest, the shortleaf pine restoration stands would be chemically site prepared during the growing season (May through September) to help control unwanted competition (sweetgum, yellow poplar, maple, loblolly pine). Herbicide site preparation consists of the use of herbicides containing the active ingredients imazapyr (such as Arsenal AC or equivalent) and triclopyr (Garlon 3A, Garlon 4, or equivalents). The herbicides would be applied at label rates to control sprouting of unwanted tree species. The objective of the herbicide treatment is to promote the growth of selected species by limiting competition from non-preferred species (i.e., early pioneering/soft mast species). Preferred species, including shortleaf pine, oak, and hickory, would be selectively released from competition from loblolly pine, sweetgum, yellow poplar, red maple, sourwood, winged elm, and blackgum. Herbicide treatments would occur between the months of May through September and 2-3 years after initial harvest. The herbicides would be applied using foliar spraying and hack-n-squirt methods. Foliar spray Herbicides would be applied using a backpack sprayer to spray the foliage of targeted plants using a mixture containing 0.5 ounce of Arsenal AC (active ingredient imazapyr), 0.5 ounce of Milestone (active ingredient aminopyralid), 5 ounces Accord XRT II (active ingredient glyphosate), ¼ ounces of Bullseye spray pattern indicator (water soluble dye), and ½ ounces of Cidekick adjuvant (limonene) per gallon of water 13. Herbicides would be applied to targeted vegetation by speckling the leaf surface during the period of mid-june 13 Commercial herbicides/adjuvants/dyes referenced in this document represent those formulations that are commonly used for the proposed forestry treatments. However, other equivalent formulations may be used for implementation of the proposed treatments. Equivalent formulations would include any other brand name herbicides that have an equivalent proportion of the specified active ingredient and inert ingredients. 131

136 Sumter National Forest through October of the second or third growing season. The anticipated application rate would be 10 gallons of mix, 5 ounces of Arsenal AC (0.16 pound of imazapyr) per acre, 5 ounces of Milestone, and 50 ounces of Accord per acre. Hack-n-squirt A hatchet is used to cut into the tree surface of larger (greater than 6 feet tall) targeted vegetation and imazapyr (Arsenal AC or equivalent) and triclopyr (Garlon 3A) herbicide is sprayed/injected into the cut area. A cutting tool, such as a hatchet, machete, or sandvik, would make the cuts. A mixture of 50 percent Garlon 3A and 50 percent water, plus 6 ounces of Arsenal AC per gallon of mixture would be used. All treated areas would be monitored for further follow-up treatments after the initial treatment. All downed vegetation would be left on-site to decompose Herbicides would be used to release shortleaf pines and desirable mast-producing hardwoods (such as oaks and hickories) from competing vegetation. An average of 450 seedlings of pine, oaks, and hickories per acre is the desired stocking level. Stands would be treated for release approximately 1-2 years after initial restoration efforts and when the survival and stocking checks indicate more than one hundred stems per acre of sweetgum, maple, and yellow poplar. The herbicides and the applications used would be similar to the herbicide site preparation treatments described above. There may be portions of compartment 9, stands 3, 5, 7, and 10 and compartment 68, stands 7, 10, and 37 where local soil conditions do not warrant shortleaf restoration. Where this is the case, thinning of timber to create habitat for Georgia aster and other woodland species may occur. The residual basal area in those parts of the stands following thinning would range from BA. Dominant and co-dominant pines would be left as well desirable hard mast species (e.g., oaks and hickories) and soft mast species (e.g., black cherry, persimmon, and dogwood). If thinning is not feasible, then select removal of individual trees may take place to enhance existing conditions. Other activities that could occur in these stands include planting Georgia aster and other native herbaceous plants to supplement existing understory and controlling understory/midstory species using manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species. Establishment of prescribed fire burn block A 362-acre burn block would be established in compartment 68, stands 7 and 10. The objectives of prescribed burning would be to manage the existing population of Georgia aster and to help establish planted Georgia aster and other native plant species. Burning would also provide and improve habitat for wildlife species and reduce the risk of destructive wildfire caused by excessive fuel loading. Burning could occur during the growing season (April-October) or during the dormant season (November-March). New control lines would include dozer and hand lines. A prescribed burn plan would be completed prior to implementation of any burning activity. Burn plans contain maps, a description of the burn unit, other resource coordination, contingency plans, firing patterns, smoke management guidelines, a complexity analysis, and any site-specific mitigation that may be necessary for that particular unit. Forest-wide direction and standards in the 2004 Revised Sumter Land and Resource Management Plan, Sumter National Forest and South Carolina Best Management Practices for Forestry (BMPs) will be followed. 132

137 Table 1. Summary of Alternative 3 Compartments and Stands, Georgia Aster and Shortleaf Pine Management, Enoree Ranger District, Sumter National Forest Comp Stand Acres Comment 1 Proposed Action Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision 133

138 Sumter National Forest Comp Stand Acres Comment 1 Proposed Action Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 2- to 3-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 2- to 3-year interval under separate NEPA decision 134

139 Comp Stand Acres Comment 1 Proposed Action Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision 135

140 Sumter National Forest Comp Stand Acres Comment 1 Proposed Action Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision , 3 Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 2- to 3-year interval under separate NEPA decision 136

141 Comp Stand Acres Comment 1 Proposed Action Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 2- to 3-year interval under separate NEPA decision Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species Select removal of individual trees to enhance existing conditions; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species Shortleaf Pine restoration; use herbicides for site preparation and release of crop trees; plant Georgia aster and other species; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision 137

142 Sumter National Forest Comp Stand Acres Comment 1 Proposed Action Shortleaf Pine restoration; use herbicides for site preparation and release of crop trees; plant Georgia aster and other species; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Shortleaf Pine restoration; use herbicides for site preparation and release of crop trees; plant Georgia aster and other species; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Shortleaf Pine restoration; use herbicides for site preparation and release of crop trees; plant Georgia aster and other species; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Shortleaf Pine restoration; use herbicides for site preparation and release of crop trees; plant Georgia aster and other species; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval (this area is included in the burn block that is analyzed in this EA) Shortleaf Pine restoration; use herbicides for site preparation and release of crop trees; plant Georgia aster and other species; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval (this area is included in the burn block that is analyzed in this EA) Shortleaf Pine restoration; use herbicides for site preparation and release of crop trees; plant Georgia aster and other species; use manual /mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision

143 Comp Stand Acres Comment 1 Proposed Action Thin stand to BA; plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 3- to 5-year interval under separate NEPA decision Plant Georgia Aster and other species to supplement existing understory; use manual/mechanical methods and herbicides to control woody species; prescribe burn on a 2- to 3-year interval under separate NEPA decision 26 Total 1,681 1 Comment: 1 = Stand is suitable for Georgia aster management in current condition; 2 = Existing vegetation management project (under separate NEPA) will occur in this stand, making it suitable for Georgia aster management; 3 = Georgia aster currently occurs in this stand; 4 = soil conditions are suitable for shortleaf pine restoration III. CONSULTATION HISTORY This BA/BE tiers to the Biological Assessment that was completed for the 2004 Revised Land and Resource Management Plan, Sumter National Forest (Forest Plan). The USFWS was consulted informally on the Forest Plan BA and concurred with a determination of not likely to adversely affect. IV. SPECIES CONSIDERED AND EVALUATED The complete list of PETS species for the Sumter National Forest is attached in Appendix A. All species on this list were considered for this BA/BE. Using a step-down process species and potential habitat in the project area were identified by: 5) Evaluating the location and nature of the proposed project; 6) Considering the species range, life history, and available habitat information; 7) Reviewing records of known PETS species occurrences, which includes data from the 139

144 Sumter National Forest South Carolina Heritage Trust Geographic Database of Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species; and 8) Reviewing the USFWS s South Carolina List of At-Risk, Candidate, Endangered, and Threatened Species for Chester, Newberry, and Union Counties. The USFWS s South Carolina List of At-Risk, Candidate, Endangered, and Threatened Species identifies red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis), Carolina heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorata), Georgia aster (Symphyotrichum georgianum), and bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) as potentially occurring in Chester County; wood stork (Mycteria americana) and bald eagle are identified as occurring in Newberry County; and Georgia aster is identified as occurring in Union County. Red-cockaded woodpecker is not included on the Sumter National Forest PETS list based on analysis in the Forest Plan; therefore it is eliminated from analysis in this BA/BE. Carolina heelsplitter and wood stork are eliminated from analysis in this BA/BE because they are not known to occur within the project area and project activities will not affect aquatic habitats. Georgia aster occurs within the project area and will be addressed in this BA/BE. Potential habitat exists for bald eagle, indigo bush (Amorpha schwerini), and sweet pinesap (Monotropsis odorata). These species will also be addressed in this BA/BE. All other species on the Sumter National Forest PETS list are eliminated from this analysis because they are not known to occur within or adjacent to the project area and they lack suitable habitat. V. EVALUATED SPECIES SURVEY INFORMATION The procedure used to decide when to inventory for PETS species is consistent with Forest Service Manual (FSM) Jeffrey M. Magniez, zone wildlife biologist, and Robin Mackie, Forest botanist, conducted surveys for botanical PETS species and their habitats during Additional botanical and wildlife PETS species surveys were performed in compartments 7, 9, 11, and 17 in (Adkins 2014). Enoree District personnel monitored known Georgia aster occurrences in 2013 (US Forest Service 2013). VI. ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE FOR THE SPECIES EVALUATED See the Forest Plan Final BA and BE and the 2013 Forest Plan Monitoring Report (US Forest Service 2014) for information on the status and environmental baseline for PETS species on the Sumter National Forest. Bald eagles nest in tall, usually living trees near an open body of water. This species usually forages near estuaries, lakes, ponds, rivers, open marshes, and shorelines. Bald eagles will soar over a body of water and swoop to the surface for fish. They also scavenge for dead fish and other carrion along shores and occasionally consume small birds and mammals. Although nationwide recovery efforts led to the removal of bald eagles from the Threatened and Endangered Species List on August 9, 2007 (Federal Register 2007), this species is still protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 USC c) and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 USC ). There are four known bald eagle nests on the Enoree Ranger District. They are located in compartments 6 (active in 2014), 18 (inactive in 2014), 108 (status unknown in 2014), and 116 (status unknown in 2014). The compartment 6 nest is located less than one mile from the 140

145 project area (compartment 7, stand 3). The compartment 18 nest is located approximately 1½ miles from the project area (compartment 17, stand 15). The nests in compartments 108 and 116 are located greater than 5 miles away from the project area. Additionally, the Broad River is used by bald eagles as foraging habitat. Treatment stands near the Broad River (namely, those in compartments 7-9, 11, and 17) may provide potential nesting or roosting habitat. Georgia aster is a relict species of the savanna/woodland plant community that existed in the southeast prior to widespread fire suppression and extirpation of large native grazing animals. The majority of the remaining populations survive adjacent to roads, along woodland borders, in dry, rocky woods, and within utility rights-of-way and other openings where current land management practices mimic natural disturbance regimes. Many existing populations across its range are threatened by woody plant succession resulting from fire suppression, development, highway expansion/improvement, and herbicide application. Based on 2013 monitoring data, nearly 6,000 plants from twelve populations are known to occur on the Sumter National Forest (US Forest Service 2014; US Forest Service 2013). On the Enoree Ranger District, there are seven geographically distinct populations with a total of approximately 3,200 plants. Georgia aster is known to occur in the following treatment stands (compartment/stand): 7/3, 8/13, 8/25, 11/3, 17/9, 17/16, 22/2, 36/13, 36/14, 63/11, 68/7, 68/10, and 68/37. Indigo bush is endemic to the southeastern piedmont. It occurs in rather xeric and rocky river bluffs and woodlands. Indigo bush is known to occur at one location on the Enoree Ranger District (compartment 35), less than one mile from the project area (compartment 35, stand 11). Although indigo bush is not known to occur within the project area, potential habitat does exist. Sweet pinesap is a cryptic species that occurs in dry to mesic upland woods under oaks and/or pines (especially Virginia pine, Pinus virginiana, and shortleaf pine, P. echinata), especially slopes or bluffs with abundant heaths. There are two records of sweet pinesap on the Enoree Ranger District (one in compartment 35 and one on private property near the town of Whitmire). The record from compartment 35 is less than one mile from the project area (compartment 35, stand 11). Because this species is inconspicuous and difficult to detect during surveys, it is possible that it is more common across the landscape than occurrence records suggest. Sweet pinesap is not known to occur within the project area, but potential habitat does exist. VII. EFFECTS OF PROPOSED MANAGEMENT ACTION ON EACH SPECIES EVALUATED This effects analysis takes into account not only the knowledge of species distribution from previous field surveys, but also the adequacy of those surveys. The best available science (including species habitat requirements, reasons for species decline, limiting factors, project area habitat conditions, and the biological effects of the intensity of the proposed action) is also considered in the effects analysis. The effects of a proposed action on a species can be direct, indirect, or cumulative. Direct Effects 141

146 Sumter National Forest Direct effects are effects to the species known to occur in the proposed project area. They occur at the same time and place as the project activity. Bald eagles are not known to occur within the project area. Proposed treatment stands are not likely to be used for foraging since bald eagles generally forage over large water bodies, including rivers and lakes. However, some proposed treatment stands (especially those that occur within ½ mile of open water) may provide roosting or nesting habitat for this species. If a bald eagle were roosting or nesting in a treatment stand, project activities could disturb them; however, Forest Plan Standard FW provides protective measures that would prevent adverse direct effects to this species. The use of herbicides in alternative 3 for controlling understory and midstory species and site preparation and release in shortleaf pine stands is not expected to have a direct effect on bald eagles. While the use of some herbicides can have direct effects on wildlife by causing injury or mortality from direct spray, drift, or ingestion of contaminated food or water, those herbicides proposed in this alternative, namely imazapyr, triclopyr, glyphosate, and aminopyralid, are practically non-toxic to birds and other wildlife species. Imazapyr is practically non-toxic to terrestrial animals and birds. The acute oral LD50 15 of imazapyr for mallard ducks (Anas platyrhynchos) and northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus) are both greater than 2,150 mg/kg (US Forest Service 2004a). Acute toxicity studies in northern bobwhite and mallard ducks found no adverse effects at dietary concentrations up to 5,000 ppm (Fletcher et al. 1984a,b). Imazapyr is rapidly eliminated in the urine and feces of animals and is not known to accumulate in animal tissues (Miller et al. 1991). The acute oral LD50 of triclopyr for mallard ducks and northern bobwhite are 1,698 mg/kg and 2,935 mg/kg, respectively (US Forest Service 2011b). A one-generation reproduction study showed no reproductive effects, symptoms of toxicity, or abnormal behavior when mallards were given up to 500 ppm of triclopyr in their diet for a 20-week period, including ten weeks prior to egg laying and ten weeks during egg laying. Newton et al. (1990) predicted that triclopyr would not be present in animal forage in doses large enough to cause either acute or chronic effects to wildlife, and concluded that the tendency for triclopyr to dissipate quickly in the environment would preclude any problems with bioaccumulation in the food chain. Glyphosate is of relatively low toxicity to birds. The acute oral LD50 of glyphosate for northern bobwhite is greater than 2,000 mg/kg (US Forest Service 2011a). Avian reproduction studies yielded no reproductive effects at dietary exposure levels of up to 1,000 ppm (US Forest Service 14 Forest Plan Standard FW-28 (p. 2-9) states, in part: Protection zones are delineated and maintained around all bald eagle nests and communal roost sites, until they are determined to be no longer suitable through coordination with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The protection zone extends a minimum of 1,500 feet from the nest or roost. Activities that modify the forest canopy within this zone are prohibited. All management activities not associated with bald eagle management and monitoring are prohibited within this zone during the periods of use. 15 Acute toxicity is commonly measured by the lethal dose (LD) that causes death in 50 percent of treated laboratory animals. LD 50 indicates the dose of a chemical per unit body weight of an animal and is expressed as milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). Chemicals are highly toxic when the LD 50 value is small and practically nontoxic when the value is large. 142

147 1989). The effects of glyphosate on wild mammals have been examined in numerous field studies (Sullivan and Sullivan 2000; Santillo et al. 1989). These studies indicate that glyphosate will not cause unreasonable adverse effects to wildlife species. Aminopyralid is practically non-toxic to birds based on acute exposure to northern bobwhite that resulted in an LD50 value of greater than 2,250 mg/kg (EPA 2005). In 5-day dietary studies with northern bobwhite and mallard ducks, LC50 concentrations were greater than 5,000 (EPA 2005). The mammalian toxicity of aminopyralid is relatively well-characterized in experimental mammals in a series of toxicity studies that are required for pesticide registration (US Forest Service 2007). In rats, mice, rabbits, and dogs, aminopyralid has low acute and chronic oral toxicity. For example, Brooks (2001) found that in rats the acute oral LD50 is greater than 5,000 mg/kg for aminopyralid. It seems reasonable to assume the most sensitive effects in wildlife mammalian species will be the same as those in experimental mammals. Results of acute exposure studies in birds indicate that avian species appear no more sensitive than mammals to aminopyralid in terms of acute lethality (US Forest Service 2007). Georgia aster. Proposed activities are designed to enhance and expand existing Georgia aster populations. Project activities, including the select removal of individual trees to enhance existing woodland conditions, natural openings, and canopy gaps; thinning of timber to create habitat for Georgia aster and other woodland species; planting Georgia aster and other native herbaceous plants to supplement existing understory; controlling understory and midstory woody species using manual/mechanical methods and herbicides; shortleaf pine restoration; and establishment of a prescribed fire burn block could result in direct effects to Georgia aster. In order to avoid direct effects from project activities, design criterion #2 16 (from Section 2.4 in the Environmental Assessment) would be implemented. Indigo bush and sweet pinesap are not known to occur within the project area. There would be no direct effects to these species during the implementation of the proposed action. Indirect Effects Indirect effects are effects to the species habitat in or near the project area and they could occur during or after project implementation. Bald eagle. Activities that involve tree removal (namely, select removal of individual trees to enhance existing woodland conditions, natural openings, and canopy gaps and shortleaf pine restoration) could affect the availability of potential roost and nest trees, particularly in those treatment stands near the Broad River (compartments 7-9, 11, and 17). However, considering the amount of available habitat within the surrounding areas, any loss of potential nest or roost sites is insignificant and would not have an adverse indirect effect on bald eagles. Georgia aster habitat is expected to improve with the implementation of alternative 3. All 16 Design criterion #2 (from Section 2.4 in the Environmental Assessment): Known Georgia aster occurrences would be avoided during all tree felling activities, thinning of timber, planting of Georgia aster and other native herbaceous plants, using manual/mechanical methods and herbicide applications to control understory and midstory woody species, all shortleaf pine restoration activities, construction of dozer and hand lines for prescribed burning, and all other ground-disturbing activities. 143

148 Sumter National Forest proposed treatments are designed to enhance habitat conditions for existing Georgia aster populations and to expand the distribution of the species. Indigo bush and sweet pinesap. Habitat for these species is also expected to improve with implementation of alternative 3. Project activities would result in open, woodland conditions that would improve habitat suitability for indigo bush and sweet pinesap. Additionally, since sweet pinesap is often associated with shortleaf pine, then shortleaf pine restoration should result in long-term habitat improvements. Cumulative Effects Cumulative effects are those resulting from incremental impacts of project activities added to other past, present, and future actions. Cumulative effects can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions that take place over a period of time. Other management activities that have taken place on the Enoree Ranger District include prescribed burning, timber sales, precommercial thinning and release of timber, southern pine beetle control, recreation trail reconstruction and maintenance, seeding of roads, skid trails, firelines, and log decks, road maintenance (grading, brushing, and mowing), and wildlife opening management. Most of these activities are expected to continue in the near future at approximately the same levels. The Enoree Ranger District is proposing the Chester County Stream and Riparian Restoration/Enhancement Project to restore and enhance the hydrologic and aquatic functions on approximately 18 miles of streams within four watersheds. The project would take place near treatment stands in compartments 7, 9, 11, and 17. The Chester County Stream and Riparian Restoration/Enhancement Project is not likely to contribute to cumulative effects on PETS species or their habitats. Private lands within or adjacent to the proposed project areas are made up of timberland, home sites, pastures, and farmland. Intensive timber management activities on private lands, including thinning, regeneration cuts, and road building, have occurred heavily over the past 10 years within some of these areas. The cumulative effects of the proposed project in combination with other past, present, and future actions are not anticipated to result in any measurable loss of the evaluated species or their habitats. VIII. DETERMINATION OF EFFECT AND RATIONALE Bald eagle NO IMPACTS Rationale: With the implementation of Forest Plan Standard FW-28, there would be no effects to bald eagles. Activities that involve tree removal could affect the availability of potential roost and nest trees, but considering the amount of available habitat within the surrounding areas, any loss of potential nest or roost sites is insignificant and would not have an adverse indirect effect on bald eagles. 144

149 Georgia aster BENEFICIAL IMPACTS Rationale: With the implementation of design criterion #2 (see Section 2.4 in Environmental Assessment), there would be no direct effects to Georgia aster. Project activities are expected to enhance existing habitat and to increase the availability of suitable habitat for this species. Indigo bush, sweet pinesap NO IMPACTS Rationale: There would be no direct effects to these species because they are not known to occur within the project area. Project activities are expected to improve potential habitat for these species. IX. SIGNATURE This Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation was completed by: /s/ Jeffrey M. Magniez 5/21/2015 Jeffrey M. Magniez Date Zone Wildlife Biologist Sumter National Forest X. REFERENCES AND DATA SOURCES Alderman, J.M Updated Freshwater Mussel Surveys Within the Broad River Basin for US Forest Service, Enoree Ranger District. Unpublished report by Alderman Environmental Services, Inc., Pittsboro, NC. Atkins North America, Inc Resource Report 6: PETS Species and Wildlife. Unpublished report by Atkins North America, Inc., Raleigh, NC. Brooks, K XDE-750: Acute oral toxicity study in Fisher 344 Rats. Project Number: Unpublished study prepared by Dow Chemical Company. MRID No Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Pesticide Fact Sheet: Aminopyralid. Online reference: 145

150 Sumter National Forest Federal Register Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Removing the Bald Eagle in the Lower 48 States From the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. 72 (130): Fletcher D. 1984a. Acute Oral Toxicity Study with Arsenal Herbicide in Bobwhite Quail: Final Report: BLAL No. 84 QD 48. Unpublished report prepared by Bio-Life Association, Ltd. MRID No Fletcher D. 1984b. Acute Oral Toxicity Study with Arsenal Herbicide in Mallard Ducks: Final Report: BLAL No. 84 DD 25. Unpublished report prepared by Bio-Life Association, Ltd. MRID No Miller, P., C.H. Fung, and B. Gingher Animal Metabolism: Chapter 12 in The Imidazolinone Herbicides, D.L. Shaner and S.L. O Conner, eds. CRC Press. Boca Raton, FL. Newton, M., F. Roberts, A. Allen, B. Kelpsas, D. White, and P. Boyd Deposition and dissipation of three herbicides in foliage, litter, and soil brushfields of southwest Oregon. J. Agric. Food Chem. 38: Santillo, D.J., D.M. Leslie, and P.W. Brown Response of small mammals to glyphosate application on clearcuts. Journal of Wildlife Management 53: South Carolina Heritage Trust Geographic Database of Rare and Endangered Species Online reference: Sullivan D.S. and T.P. Sullivan Non-target impacts of the herbicide glyphosate: A compendium of references and abstracts. 5th Edition. Applied Mammal Research Institute, Summerland, British Columbia, Canada. The Catena Group Duke William States Lee III Sumter National Forest Stream Restoration Fish and Mollusk Community Baseline Studies. Unpublished report by The Catena Group, Hillsborough, NC. US Fish and Wildlife Service South Carolina List of At-Risk, Candidate, Endangered, and Threatened Species. Online reference: US Fish and Wildlife Service National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines. Online reference: US Forest Service Monitoring and Evaluation Annual Report Revised Land and Resource Management Plan, Sumter National Forest. US Forest Service Summary of Georgia Aster Monitoring, Sumter National Forest. Unpublished data. US Forest Service. 2011a. Glyphosate: Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment Final Report. Prepared for USDA Forest Service by Syracuse Environmental Research Associates, Inc. 146

151 SERA TR b. US Forest Service. 2011b. Triclopyr: Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment Final Report. Prepared for USDA Forest Service by Syracuse Environmental Research Associates, Inc. SERA TR a. US Forest Service Year Review and Recommendations Sumter National Forest Revised Land and Resource Management Plan. US Forest Service Aminopyralid: Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment Final Report. Prepared for USDA Forest Service and National Park Service by Syracuse Environmental Research Associates, Inc. SERA TR a. US Forest Service. 2004a. Imazapyr: Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment Final Report. Prepared for USDA Forest Service by Syracuse Environmental Research Associates, Inc. SERA TR b. US Forest Service. 2004b. Revised Land and Resource Management Plan Sumter National Forest. Management Bulletin R8-MB 116A. US Forest Service Vegetation Management in the Coastal Plain/Piedmont Final Environmental Impact Statement. Southern Region. Weakley, A.S Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, Georgia, and Surrounding Areas. University of North Carolina Herbarium. Working Draft of January 11,

152

153 APPENDIX A Sumter National Forest PETS List Proposed, Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive (PETS) Species of the Sumter National Forest (2014). Obs = Observed during field surveys or known to occur based on previous records; Hab = Suitable habitat exists within the project area; + = meets criterion, -- = does not meet criterion. P = piedmont (Enoree and Long Cane Ranger Districts), M = mountains (Andrew Pickens Ranger District). Habitat Description / Reason for Including In or Excluding From Species CAROLINA HEELSPLITTER Lasmigona decorata NORTHERN LONG- EARED BAT Myotis septentrionalis PERSISTENT TRILLIUM Trillium persistens RELICT TRILLIUM Trillium reliquum SMOOTH CONEFLOWER Echinacea laevigata WOOD STORK Mycteria americana FLORIDA GOOSEBERRY Ribes echinellum SMALL WHORLED POGONIA Isotria medeoloides ASHLEAF GOLDENBANNER Thermopsis mollis var. fraxinifolia BACHMAN S SPARROW Aimophila aestivalis Status Federally Endangered Federally Threatened Federally Endangered Federally Endangered Federally Endangered Federally Threatened Federally Threatened Federally Threatened Sensitive Sensitive Analysis Obs Hab Range Known historically from Catawba, Pee P Dee, and Saluda drainages in South Carolina; occurs in Mountain, Beaverdam, Cuffytown, Sleepy, and Turkey Creeks Not known to occur within project area; aquatic habitats will not be affected Winters in caves and cave-like structures (e.g., mines, railroad tunnels); summer roosts include cavities, underneath bark, crevices, or hollows of both live and dead trees Outside of known range Known from one site in South Carolina; occurs in mixed mesic forest in the Tugaloo River Composite watershed Outside of known range Basic mesic forests in Savannah and Chattahoochee drainages; known from the lower piedmont/fall line sandhills region Outside of known range Occurs along the Brevard Geologic Belt in association with grassy understories and open canopies Outside of known range Known to forage in freshwater wetlands on both Enoree and Long Cane Ranger Districts Not known to occur within project area; aquatic habitats (wetlands) will not be affected Known from the Stevens Creek drainage, on north facing hardwood slopes in association with basic soils Outside of known range Occurs in mixed mesic forests at moderate elevations (>1,000 feet) Outside of known range Pine-oak heaths and roadsides Outside of known range Occurs in forest stands with open canopies and grassy understories Not known to occur within project area M M P M P P M M P 149

154 Sumter National Forest Proposed, Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive (PETS) Species of the Sumter National Forest (2014). Obs = Observed during field surveys or known to occur based on previous records; Hab = Suitable habitat exists within the project area; + = meets criterion, -- = does not meet criterion. P = piedmont (Enoree and Long Cane Ranger Districts), M = mountains (Andrew Pickens Ranger District). Habitat Description / Reason for Including In or Excluding From Species BALD EAGLE Haliaeetus leucocephalus BILTMORE SEDGE Carex biltmoreana BROOK FLOATER Alasmidonta varicosa BUTTERNUT Juglans cinerea CAROLINA DARTER Etheostoma collis CAROLINA PLAGIOMNIUM Plagiomnium carolinianum CHAUGA CRAYFISH Cambarus chaugaensis DIANA FRITILLARY Speyeria diana EASTERN SMALL-FOOTED MYOTIS Myotis leibii EDMUND S SNAKETAIL Ophiogomphus edmundo Status Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Analysis Obs Hab Range Perennial rivers and lakes, nesting in -- + P, M dominant or co-dominant pines 3 km or less from open water Potential habitat occurs within project area Thin soils on rock outcrops and adjacent woodlands; known from the Chattooga River Corridor Outside of known range Small streams with gravel bottoms; known from Chattooga, Turkey and Upper Stevens Creek watersheds on the Long Cane Ranger District Outside of known range Basic mesic forests along the Brevard Geologic Belt; usually at old homesites Outside of known range Localized populations occur in lower and middle piedmont streams with slow to moderate current. Known from Saluda and Broad River watersheds Not known to occur within project area; aquatic habitats will not be affected Damp, shaded, vertical rock faces along streams in mountain gorges; known from Long Creek and Opossum Creek Outside of known range Fast-moving, rocky 3 rd and 4 th order streams in tributaries of the upper Savannah River; known most recently from the Chauga River; noted historically in Ramsey Creek, West Village Creek, Crane Creek, Cedar Creek, and a stream between Long Creek and the Chattooga River (1972 data) Outside of known range Violets are larval host plant; open areas for nectar sources in summer Outside of known range At southern terminus of range on Andrew Pickens Ranger District; known from Moody Creek near Lake Cherokee; may commonly roost in hemlock trees near streams in summer Outside of known range Clear moderately flowing mountain streams and rivers with sand or gravel riffles; known to occur in the Chattooga River Outside of known range M P, M M P M M M M M 150

155 Proposed, Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive (PETS) Species of the Sumter National Forest (2014). Obs = Observed during field surveys or known to occur based on previous records; Hab = Suitable habitat exists within the project area; + = meets criterion, -- = does not meet criterion. P = piedmont (Enoree and Long Cane Ranger Districts), M = mountains (Andrew Pickens Ranger District). Habitat Description / Reason for Including In or Excluding From Species FORT MOUNTAIN SEDGE Carex communis var. amplisquama FRASER S LOOSESTRIFE Lysimachia fraseri GEORGIA ASTER Symphyotrichum georgianus HARTWIG S LOCUST Robinia viscose var. hartwegii INDIGO BUSH Amorpha schwerini JEWELED TRILLIUM Trillium simile LANCELEAF TRILLIUM Trillium lancifolium LIVERWORT SP. Cheilolejeunea evansii LIVERWORT SP. Plagiochila caduciloba LIVERWORT SP. Plagiochila sharpii LIVERWORT SP. Radula sullivantii MIGRANT LOGGERHEAD SHRIKE Lanius ludovicia migrans MOUNTAIN WITCH ALDER Fothergilla major Status Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive; Federal Candidate Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Analysis Obs Hab Range Found in rich coves, at Tamassee Knob, M East Fork of the Chattooga, and White Rock Cove on the Andrew Pickens Ranger District Outside of known range Open stands or rights-of-way with grassy understories Outside of known range Open stands or rights-of-way with grassy understories; piedmont and lower elevations in mountains Known to occur within project area Pine-oak heaths and roadsides in the mountains; one location known near Village Creek on the Andrew Pickens Ranger District Outside of known range Pine-oak heaths and oak-hickory communities Potential habitat occurs within project area Basic mesic forests of the mountains Outside of known range Basic mesic forests of the piedmont Not known to occur within project area Bark of trees in moist escarpment gorges or gorge-like habitats Outside of known range Found on damp, shaded, vertical rock faces along streams in mountain gorges; southern appalachian endemic Outside of known range Found on damp, shaded, vertical rock faces along streams in mountain gorges Outside of known range Wet shaded rocks and crevices Outside of known range Breeds in open areas dominated by grasses interspersed with shrubs, trees, or bare ground; uses agricultural landscapes (pastures) Not known to occur within project area Occurs in oak-hickory forests; may occur on monadnocks or north-facing slopes in piedmont Outside of known range M + + P, M M -- + P M P M M M M P M 151

156 Sumter National Forest Proposed, Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive (PETS) Species of the Sumter National Forest (2014). Obs = Observed during field surveys or known to occur based on previous records; Hab = Suitable habitat exists within the project area; + = meets criterion, -- = does not meet criterion. P = piedmont (Enoree and Long Cane Ranger Districts), M = mountains (Andrew Pickens Ranger District). Habitat Description / Reason for Including In or Excluding From Species NODDING TRILLIUM Trillium rugelii OGLETHORPE OAK Quercus oglethorpensis PIEDMONT ASTER Eurybia mirabilis PIEDMONT STRAWBERRY Waldsteinia lobata RADFORD S SEDGE Carex radfordii RAFINESQUE S BIG-EARED BAT Corynorhinus rafinesquii RAYED PINK FATMUCKET Lampsilis splendida ROBUST REDHORSE Moxostoma robustrum SHOAL S SPIDER LILY Hymenocallis coronaria SOUTHERN APPALACHIAN SALAMANDER Plethodon teyahalee SOUTHERN OCONEE BELLS Shortia galacifolia var. galacifolia SPREADING POGONIA Cleistes bifaria Status Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Analysis Obs Hab Range Rich wooded slopes over mafic or P, M calcareous rocks Not known to occur within project area Upland wetland depressions and streamside forests in the Carolina Slate belt Not known to occur within project area Nutrient-rich bottomlands and moist slopes, endemic to the NC and SC piedmont Not known to occur within project area Occurs in mixed mesic hardwood forests in the lower elevations of the mountains Outside of known range Occurs in basic mesic and mixed mesic hardwood forests Outside of known range Restricted to the mountains, sandhills, and coastal plain Physiographic regions; may be found in hollow trees or behind loose bark near streams, caves, mines, or human-made structures Outside of known range Primarily a costal plain species; one occurrence in Middle Saluda River Composite watershed Not known to occur within project area; aquatic habitats will not be affected Occurs in the Lower Savannah River composite watershed and introduced to the Broad River Not known to occur within project area; aquatic habitats will not be affected Rocky river shoals; sandhills and piedmont Not known to occur within project area; aquatic habitat will not be affected Mature mesic hardwood forests Outside of known range Large colonies in mixed mesic forests near Lake Jocassee Outside of known range Dry ridgetops under pines Outside of known range P P M M M P P P M M M 152

157 Proposed, Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive (PETS) Species of the Sumter National Forest (2014). Obs = Observed during field surveys or known to occur based on previous records; Hab = Suitable habitat exists within the project area; + = meets criterion, -- = does not meet criterion. P = piedmont (Enoree and Long Cane Ranger Districts), M = mountains (Andrew Pickens Ranger District). Habitat Description / Reason for Including In or Excluding From Species SUN-FACING CONEFLOWER Rudbeckia heliopsidis SWEET PINESAP Monotropsis odorata WEBSTER S SALAMANDER Plethodon websteri WHORLED HORSEBALM Collinsonia verticillata Status Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Analysis Obs Hab Range Open forests with herbaceous M understories; known from roadsides in the vicinity of Lake Cherokee Outside of known range Shortleaf pine-oak heaths in the southern Appalachians and piedmont Potential habitat occurs within project area Mesic hardwood slopes with rocky outcrops; Greenwood, Edgefield, and McCormick Counties Not known to occur within project area Found in basic mesic forests along the Brevard Geologic Belt in South Carolina Outside of known range -- + P, M P M 153

158 Sumter National Forest Appendix 2: Treatment Maps 154

159 155

160 Sumter National Forest 156

161 157

162 Sumter National Forest 158

163 159

164 Sumter National Forest 160

165 161

166 Sumter National Forest 162

167 163

168 Sumter National Forest 164

169 165

170 Sumter National Forest 166

171 167

172 Sumter National Forest 168

173 169

174 Sumter National Forest 170

175 171

176 Sumter National Forest 172

177 173

178 Sumter National Forest 174

179 175

180 Sumter National Forest 176

181 177

182 Sumter National Forest 178

183 179