SPECIALIST REPORT FOR AQUATIC SPECIES. For The HALF WHISKEY MOON LOOKOUT FOREST RESTORATION PROJECT. Flaming Gorge Ranger District

Transcription

1 SPECIALIST REPORT FOR AQUATIC SPECIES For The HALF WHISKEY MOON LOOKOUT FOREST RESTORATION PROJECT Flaming Gorge Ranger District Ashley National Forest August 31, 2016 Updated October 25, 2016 /s/ Daniel J. Abeyta Prepared by: Daniel J. Abeyta Biological Scientist Ashley National Forest

2 Introduction This is a project that would involve removing merchantable mountain pine beetle killed trees and dwarf mistletoe infected trees, as well as thinning some young, pre-commercial size trees, from an area located in the vicinity of Half Moon Park, Whiskey Creek, and the historic Ute Lookout Tower on the Flaming Gorge Ranger District of the Ashley National Forest. The project area is around 9 miles southwest of Manila, Utah. Specific proposed treatments include up to 529 acres of clear cutting or overstory removal, 396 acres of pre-commercial thinning, 94 acres of felling or girdling, 37 acres of sanitation/salvage, 36 acres of treatments for roadside safety, and 21 acres of an expanded shaded fuel break around the Ute Lookout Tower. The maximum total treated acreage would be 1,113 acres within a 1,787-acre project area. Background A significant level of tree mortality has occurred in the project area as a result of past and current mountain pine beetle infestations. Most of the mortality, which is in lodgepole pine and ponderosa pine, has occurred in the last 3-5 years. Some of the trees still retain their economic value as forest products. Also, some of these dead trees present or will present a falling hazard to motorists traveling along Forest Service Road (FSR) There are also a significant number of lodgepole pine dwarf mistletoe infected trees which, if left untreated, will impact young trees and affect the future resiliency and adaptive capacity of stands in the project area. The number of young (20-35 year old) lodgepole pine trees in the area have increased due to post harvest regeneration. The high stand densities in these stands will slow individual tree growth and will increase the time required to produce relatively large trees. Purpose and Need The purpose of the proposed project is to improve the resilience and adaptive capacity of lodgepole pine and ponderosa pine stands in the project area, reduce hazardous fuel loading, promote aspen, increase safety along FSR 10221, and capture the economic value of beetlekilled trees and mistletoe infected trees. The purpose also includes minimizing the future impact of lodgepole pine dwarf mistletoe and improving the individual tree growth rate of residual trees. This project would help create healthy stands by promoting age-class diversity and by reducing high stand densities, as well as by reducing the impact of dwarf mistletoe on regeneration. It would reduce the risks from potentially destructive wildfires by breaking up fuel continuity and reducing the future accumulation of heavy fuel loads. It would also encourage additional aspen regeneration, help facilitate future management actions, and promote large tree development. This project would reduce the wildfire threat to the nearby historic Ute Lookout Tower, which is located in the project area near the southeastern boundary. This project could also reduce potential wildfire threat to the summer home community of Half Moon Park, which is located approximately ¼ mile to the west of the project boundary. Specific project objectives include the following: 2

3 1. Improve the resilience and adaptive capacity of the project area by promoting age-class diversity, managing stand densities, and reducing the future impact of lodgepole pine dwarf mistletoe. 2. Maintain or promote tree vigor and form in young stands to minimize the future impacts of biotic (e.g., mistletoe and bark beetles) and abiotic damage (e.g., snow damage and wind throw) by managing stand densities. 3. Promote aspen in the project area by creating conditions suitable for aspen establishment and development. 4. Reduce the risk of uncharacteristic or unacceptable wildfires by reducing hazardous fuel build-up, reducing fuel bed depth, and managing canopy densities. 5. Reduce the wildfire threat to the Ute Lookout Tower. 6. Promote motorist safety along FSR Capture the declining economic value of beetle-killed trees and mistletoe infected trees. 8. Maintain or improve terrestrial wildlife habitat by moderating the detrimental effects of the recent mountain pine beetle epidemic. 9. Protect, maintain, improve, or restore water and soil resources. Alternative 1. No Action Alternative 2. The proposed action (a total of approximately 1,113 acres within a 1,787-acre project area) would involve the following treatments: Clearcutting and overstory removal acres and 120 acres, respectively. These regeneration treatments would involve the removal of beetle-killed trees and dwarf mistletoe infected trees. Beetle-killed trees in the area include both lodgepole pine and ponderosa pine. The dwarf mistletoe infected trees are lodgepole pine. We are proposing to clear-cut where there is no understory or the understory already has a high degree of dwarf mistletoe infected trees. We are proposing overstory removal where there is an established, healthy understory. If natural re-stocking levels in these regeneration harvest areas are found to be inadequate, we would plant within 5 years post-harvest. In areas infected enough to do these regeneration treatments, patches would range from around 5 acres for the smallest patches up to the largest patch in the worst-hit area which at this point we estimate would be nearly 170 acres in size. Initial field review indicates most adjacent past clearcuts have re-grown enough to provide adequate wildlife hiding cover. However, one stand reviewed so far (stand 89) does not yet provide adequate hiding cover. We would consider adjacent stands that do not yet provide hiding cover to be part of an opening. Maximum size limits for even-aged regeneration harvest do not apply to areas harvested due to insect and disease attack (16 U.S.C. 1604[g][3][F] and FSH [64.21]). However, our Forest Plan specifies maximum clearing sizes of 40 acres for the management areas (b, f, and n) this project lies within. 3

4 Forest Plan amendment. We are proposing a Forest Plan amendment to allow for some clearcutting and overstory removal patches larger than 40 acres. This Forest Plan amendment would be site-specific to this project area. This treatment would capture the value of the dead and infected trees as well as reduce the level of dwarf mistletoe infection in the regeneration and reduce losses from windthrow. It would also reduce the threat of uncharacteristically severe wildfires by reducing future hazardous fuel build-up and fuel bed depth. In addition, this treatment would encourage some additional aspen regeneration. Pre-commercial thinning 396 acres. This would be an intermediate stand treatment in which we would remove young lodgepole pine trees generally less than 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH) to reduce the tree density to approximately 300 to 360 trees per acre. This treatment would promote tree growth and large tree development, desirable form, and vigor by managing stand densities. This treatment would also help to reduce the threat of unacceptable wildfires by reducing the canopy bulk density. Felling/girdling 94 acres. We would fell or girdle infected trees around the edges of pre-commercial thinning treatments to prevent infection of the regeneration. This treatment would help control dwarf mistletoe in the area and promote tree vigor and form in young stands. Sanitation/salvage 37 acres. This would be an intermediate stand treatment in which we would remove dead and insect and disease damaged trees. This would generally be a lighter removal than the clearcut and overstory removal areas because of lower levels of mortality. Affected trees that would be targeted for removal would include mainly beetle killed ponderosa pine, lodgepole pine, and Douglas-fir, and dwarf mistletoe infected lodgepole pine. This treatment would capture the value of the dead and infected trees, reduce the future impact of dwarf mistletoe infection, and promote age-class diversity in the area. It would also reduce the threat of uncharacteristically severe wildfires by reducing future hazardous fuel build-up and fuel bed depth as well as by opening the canopy. In addition, this treatment would encourage some additional aspen regeneration. Roadside safety treatment 36 acres. We are proposing this treatment for those areas along FSR within the project boundary that would not be covered by other treatments. Activities would include removing brush and smaller, live trees in select locations to improve sight distance and removing any trees that present a falling hazard to Forest users along this route. No immediate hazards have been identified, however, as hazard trees develop in this area, we would add them to the project. Trees deemed hazards may be dead, rotten, exhibit extreme cracking or root-pull or have other hazardous characteristics. Any trees along the roadway that exhibit an immediate hazard would be removed as part of normal operations and maintenance, i.e., we would not wait for this NEPA decision to remove immediate hazards. This treatment would enhance motorist safety, reduce fuel build-up, and possibly capture the economic value of any identified hazard trees. 4

5 Fuel break 21 acres. This treatment would occur around the vicinity of the Ute Mountain Fire Lookout Tower and would maintain and expand previous fuels reduction efforts around this historic structure. There is a high level of dwarf mistletoe infection in many of the conifers in this area. In highly infected areas, we would remove most of the conifers, creating a fuel break with some pockets of less flammable aspen. In any non-infected portions of this area, we would leave some healthy conifers, while reducing fuel loading, ladder fuels, and canopy bulk density. This treatment would reduce the wildfire threat to the lookout tower, reduce the future impact of lodgepole pine dwarf mistletoe, and promote some aspen. All treatments would involve project design criteria to maintain or improve terrestrial wildlife habitat and to protect, maintain, improve, or restore water and soil resources these are two of the nine specific project objectives identified in the scoping letter. We would also include additional project design criteria and/or mitigation measures for all resources as necessary. If excess slash is created following the clearcutting, overstory removal, sanitation/salvage, roadside safety, or fuel break treatments, we may follow up these treatments with standard slash management practices, including either piling and burning, broadcast burning, mastication, or compaction of slash. Implementation would occur through a combination of commercial harvest, stewardship or service contracts, and reserving some areas for personal use post and pole removal by the public. We expect the majority of work to occur over the next 5 years. Alternative 3. An alternative action (same acreage of approximately 1,113 acres within a 1,787-acre project area) would involve the same treatments as the proposed action with the following exception: we would not do a Forest Plan amendment. Opening sizes in the areas designated for even-aged regeneration harvest (clearcut and overstory removal) would remain within the Forest Plan limitation of 40 acres. As in alternative 2, we would consider all contiguous qualifying acres, including any adjacent past clearcuts that do not yet provide adequate wildlife hiding cover, in opening size acreages. The purpose of this specialist report is to document existing aquatic habitat conditions and the species present in the project area. Moreover, the report documents potential project effects to these conditions and aquatic species within and adjacent to the project area. This analysis includes effects to aquatic Management Indicator Species (MIS) and Forest Service Sensitive Species within and adjacent to the Half Whiskey Moon Lookout Forest Restoration Project area. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT Whiskey Creek and its unnamed tributaries are the only perennial flowing streams within the project area. At the headwaters, this small stream flows at about ¼ to 1/3 cubic feet per second 5

6 (cfs). One-third cfs is equal to 150 gallons per minute. The stream was surveyed in November 2015 and again in June of Whiskey Creek does not support a fishery. This is primarily due to surface flows going underground prior to its confluence with Hope Creek and further downstream to Sheep Creek. The nearest connected perennial fishery is Sheep Creek which is approximately 2 miles downstream. The connectedness of Whiskey and Hope Creeks to Sheep Creek is restricted to spring runoff. In other words, the only time Whiskey and Hope Creeks flow into Sheep Creek is during spring runoff. The riparian area of Whiskey Creek at the headwaters is well established. It consists of willow, wild rose, grasses, aspen, and mixed conifer (see figure 1). The actual stream channel is much less established, suggesting very limited flows (< ¼ cfs) during the late summer and fall months. All other water sources within the project area are intermittent or seasonal waters. Figure 1. Headwaters of Whiskey Creek, June

7 Management Indicator Species (MIS): There are 12 MIS within the Ashley National Forest Plan. Out of 12 MIS, this report analyzes potential effects to two aquatic MIS and their habitat. The two MIS are: Cutthroat trout Macroinvertebrates MIS are evaluated because they play an important role in helping to maintain a healthy forest ecosystem. As per agency management direction, MIS are monitored at the Forest level rather than at the project level. MIS macroinvertebrates and cutthroat trout are both present within and adjacent to the project area. Cutthroat Trout Cutthroat trout is one of the aquatic MIS that live throughout the Ashley National Forest. This species is not present within the project area. Higher in the watershed, (upper reaches of Sheep Creek) cutthroat trout are present and actively managed to promote the species persistence. Aquatic Macroinvertebrates Aquatic macroinvertebrates are used by the Ashley National Forest as a management indicator species to monitor aquatic habitat conditions, primarily water quality. Macroinvertebrates were chosen as MIS for the following reasons: 1. The wide range of conditions they monitor. 2. Their relatively large size, which facilitates identification. 3. Their limited mobility restricts them to a particular environment. 4. They have a lifespan of months or years, which allows for response to impacts over time. The Forest Service has been collecting macroinvertebrates data on most major streams since Therefore, baseline as well as trend information is available. Macroinvertebrates are present and common within and adjacent to the project area. Ephemeroptera (mayflies), Plecoptera (stoneflies), and Trichoptera (caddis flies) known as EPT in the literature, are groups of insects that typically require high water quality consisting of high levels of dissolved oxygen (> 5 mg/l), and low sediment levels. A visual qualitative survey of the Whiskey Creek and Hope Creek revealed that these waterways have EPT s, however they re at relatively low numbers because of limited flow. Forest Service Sensitive Species Colorado River cutthroat trout see MIS section above Federally Listed Threatened and Endangered Species 7

8 Humpback chub, bonytail, Colorado pikeminnow, and razorback sucker are all endangered species that occur 50 plus river miles downstream in the Green River. Methods Ashley National Forest and Utah Division of Wildlife Resources (UDWR) documents, scientific references, recent aquatic biota surveys, and aquatic macroinvertebrates data were used to analyze potential effects from this project. Digital photography was also used to document physical and biological resources for this project. Effects Analysis Bounds of Analysis The analysis area for aquatic biota includes Whiskey Creek and one unnamed perennial tributary, Hope Creek, and few other very small unnamed intermittent water sources scattered throughout the project area. This area was focused on because these waters are the water sources in the area which could potentially support aquatic species that could be potentially affected by the proposed action. Measurement Indicators Measurement indicators serve as tools to quantify the effects to offer a basis for comparing the effects of management practices between the alternatives. The possible effects of the proposed action on aquatic resources are: Change in sediment delivery to the project area streams Change in habitat for macroinvertebrates and amphibians Change in species composition and density for both macroinvertebrates and amphibians Forest Plan, Laws and Regulations Goal: Protect and enhance the unique and valuable characteristics of riparian areas Land and Resource Management Plan The area of proposed action lies within the following Ashley National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan s (the Forest Plan s) management area prescriptions: n, range of resource uses and outputs; f, dispersed recreation roaded; g, undeveloped dispersed recreation unroaded, and h, developed recreation site facilities located through-out the Forest in other management areas as inclusions. Applicable Forest Plan Guidance Management Area Prescriptions for Riparian Activity 8

9 f-maintain. Control as needed to protect streambank stability, minimize sedimentation, prevent compaction, and maintain visuals (p. IV-8). n-maintain and restore riparian areas (p.iv-11). Standards and Guidelines for Riparian Objectives Riparian Objectives for f and n management areas: 1) Maintain or improve riparian areas and riparian dependent resource values including wildlife, fish, vegetation, watershed, and recreation in a stable or upward trend. Manage for species diversity. 2) Manage vegetation to enhance the riparian ecosystem. 3) Locate, design, construct, reconstruct, and maintain roads and trails to serve the projected land management objective at the lowest cost for transportation consistent with environmental protection and safety considerations. Standards and Guidelines for f and n management areas: 1) Maintain capability of riparian areas to act as an effective sediment buffering zone in relation to upslope activities. Restrict facilities and ground disturbing activities to areas outside riparian areas unless alternative routes have been reviewed and rejected as being more environmentally damaging. 2) Special harvesting techniques to protect riparian zones, such as directional felling and cable yarding will be applied when needed to protect the riparian ecosystems. Prohibit landings and decking areas and limit temporary roads within riparian areas. 3) Shape and/or crown the roads each time they are bladed to control water in the ditches and uniformly move water across the road to prevent surface and fill erosion. Minimize sedimentation, erosion during construction and continue restoration and erosion prevention measures where needed (p. IV and 50-51). Direct and Indirect Effects- Alternative 1 - No Action Alternative Direct and Indirect Effects: There are no direct or indirect effects from the No Action alternative. Effects to measurement indicators for this alternative discussed above are briefly summarized as follows: Sediment delivery to streams will stay at current low levels. Macroinvertebrates and amphibian habitat will remain the same. Species compositions will also remain the same. Alternative 2 - Proposed Action Alternative (1,113 acres) Direct effects: The primary area of concern within the proposed action area is that area proposed for a clear cut and overstory removal for approximately 1/4 mile along Whiskey Creek. On the south side of the stream there are relatively steep banks and clear cutting and overstory removal has the potential to increase the sediment load into this small perennial stream. If a 9

10 sediment load entered the creek, there could be short term impacts to aquatic macroinvertebrates, such as increase sediment tolerant taxa. However, since Whiskey Creek is fishless, there would be no effects to fishes. With the 150 foot buffer along this creek these impacts will be minimized and likely short term (1-2 yrs.) in nature. Indirect effects: Since Whiskey Creek flows underground before entering main stem Sheep Creek there should not be indirect effects to this perennial fish bearing stream. Bounds of Analysis- Area Description The cumulative effects spatial boundary for aquatic biota and their habitat is the Sheep Creek drainage to the north, Carter Creek drainage to the south, Brownie and Sheep Creek Lakes to the west and the Sheep Creek Geological Loop road to the east. Cumulative Effects: Alternative 1 No Action Alternative As stated above, there are no direct or indirect effects from the no action alternative. If the project does not take place a continued build-up of ladder and ground fuels will occur over time. If there is a natural fire start in the project area, the potential for a severe and intense wildfire through the riparian areas increases which could result in short and long term negative effects to amphibians and macroinvertebrates as well as their respective habitats. These could include but not be limited to; increased stream temperature, increased sedimentation, decreased overhead cover for shading, and decreased water quality for cold water dependent species. Alternative 2 Proposed Action From a cumulative effects perspective there are just a few other projects/activities that have occurred, are occurring, or are reasonably likely to occur in the cumulative effects area. Adjacent to the project area is an ongoing ponderosa pine understory burning project. The purpose of this project is to reduce ladder fuels and improve overall health of ponderosa pine stands. Typical other forest activities include ATV riding, livestock grazing, fuelwood gathering, and camping, however these activities combined with the direct effects of the proposed action will not result in long term (5-10 yrs.) negative effects to aquatic resources because of preestablished management guidelines which minimize impacts. 10

11 Design Criteria: 150 foot buffer of no heavy/mechanized equipment around perennial water sources 100 foot buffer along perennial water sources for cabling activities 50 foot buffer for chainsaw felling and girdling 50 foot buffer for intermittent water sources. References Ashley National Forest Land Management Plan, 1986 Behnke, R.J Native trout of western North America. American Fisheries Society Monograph 6. Clipp, Hannah, Anderson, James T Environmental and Anthropogenic Factors Influencing Salamanders in Riparian Forests Hirsch, C.L., S. E. Albeke, and T. P. Nesler Range-wide status of Colorado River cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki pleuriticus) Colorado River cutthroat trout Conservation Team Report. Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fort Collins Hirsch C.L., S. E. Albeke, and T. P. Nesler Range-wide status of Colorado River cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki pleuriticus) Colorado River cutthroat trout Conservation Team Report. Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fort Collins USDA, Forest Service Inland Native Fish Strategy Peterson, D., T. C. Osborne, and D. J. Abeyta The Status of Fishes and Amphibians on the Flaming Gorge Ranger District, Ashley National Forest (Summer 2009). Ashley National Forest. Utah Division Wildlife Resource Utah Conservation Data Center (< >). Accessed January 15, Stebbins, R Field Guide Western Amphibians. Young, M.K., R. N. Schmal, T. W. Kohley, and V. G. Leonard Colorado River Cutthroat trout Oncorhynchus clarki pleuriticus. Conservation Assessment for Inland Cutthroat Trout: Distribution, status and habitat management implications., D.A. Duff, ed., U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Region, Ogden, Utah, Young, M.K Colorado River Cutthroat Trout (Oncorhynchus clarkia pleuriticus): A Technical Conservation Assessment. Rocky Mountain Research Station. USDA. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-207-WWW. 11