Birch Project Scoping Report August 2010 Kawishiwi Ranger District, Superior National Forest

Transcription

1 Scoping Report August 2010 Kawishiwi Ranger District, Superior National Forest I. Introduction The Kawishiwi Ranger District of the Superior National Forest is proposing management activities within the Birch Project Area. This scoping report identifies the primary purpose of the project as implementation of the Superior National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan). This report also describes the project area and the proposed management activities as well as informs the public of the proposal and provides them an opportunity to submit comments and concerns. The proposed activities in the Project Area are intended to move vegetation from its existing condition toward the desired conditions as described in the Forest Plan by managing forest vegetation age, composition, structure and spatial patterns. The proposed activities also address the transportation system associated with the vegetation activities and long-term federal, nonfederal, and public access needs. II. Project Location The Project Area (Figure 1) encompasses National Forest System land near Ely, MN as well as areas to the south and west of Ely in St. Louis and Lake Counties (Townships 61 to 63 North and Ranges 11 to 13 West). The Project Area boundary is generally outlined by Shagawa, Birch, White Iron, and Burntside Lakes and the South Kawishiwi River. Since the ownership within the Project Area (over 91,000 ac) is very mixed, only 29,000 acres (32 percent) are part of the National Forest System (NFS). The majority of the remaining ownership includes approximately eight percent in St. Louis County, nine percent in Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and 38 percent in private ownership. Proposed activities are only located on NFS land and are shown on the Proposed Action Map.

2 Figure 1. Birch Project Area vicinity map. Scoping Report 2

3 III. Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action Vegetation and Associated Transportation System A. Vegetation Management In general, vegetation management direction in the Forest Plan is based on the desire that vegetation is present in amounts, distributions, and characteristics that are representative of the spectrum of environmental conditions that would have resulted from the natural cycles, processes, and distribution under which current forest ecosystems and their accompanying biological diversity evolved. Therefore, the primary purpose of the Birch Project is to maintain and promote native vegetation communities that are diverse, productive, healthy, and resilient by moving the vegetation component toward Landscape Ecosystem (LE) objectives described in the Forest Plan. A1. Vegetation Composition, Age and Spatial Patterns Landscape Ecosystems are ecological areas characterized by their dominant vegetation communities and patterns as a result of local climate, glacial topography, dominant soils, and natural processes such as succession, fire, wind, insects and disease. Desired vegetation composition, age, tree species diversity and wildlife habitat (Management Indicator Habitat) objectives are specified for each LE on the Superior National Forest. The three LEs in this project area include Dry Mesic Red and White Pine, Jack Pine-Black Spruce and Lowland Conifer within the two previously mentioned LEs. Some existing vegetation conditions in the Birch Project Area do not meet the Forest Plan desired LE conditions for vegetation composition, age, or spatial arrangement and size. In the majority of the Project Area, older forests of primarily aspen and jack pine are over represented, while young forests of jack pine and aspen/birch are underrepresented. In addition, the current conditions of both young and mature forest patches are of lower quality for wildlife habitat and have poorer spatial arrangement on the landscape than desired. The interdisciplinary team identified some opportunities to move the area toward the desired conditions, including opportunities to increase the amount of young jack pine, birch and aspen forest and to increase the size of young patches. Specific actions would: Increase jack pine forest type Overall: Decrease aspen forest type Release natural advance regeneration (white pine in particular) and diversity plant long lived conifer such as white pine, red pine and white spruce (Figure 2) Restore landscape scale vegetation patterns (Figure 3 and 4) Maintain mature forest patches as interior habitat to meet some wildlife species needs while creating young forest to meet the needs of other species Reduce forest edge and increase the size of young forest patches Restore the diversity of tree species within stands by increasing long-lived conifer species Favor long-lived conifer species such as red pine, white pine and white spruce on nutrient sensitive soils Scoping Report 3

4 Figure 2. An example of natural advance white pine regeneration in the Twin Lakes area. Figure 3. Landscape view of the Birch Project Area, southeast of Mitchell Lake looking west over an area proposed for creating young stands with harvest. Scoping Report 4

5 Figure 4. Landscape view of the Birch Project Area, south of Twin Lakes looking northwest over an area proposed for creating young stands with harvest. Dry Mesic Red and White Pine LE: Increase young aspen/birch and jack pine Maintain or increase old/old growth/multi-aged aspen/birch and spruce/fir Decrease mature aspen/birch and older jack pine Jack Pine-Black Spruce LE Increase young aspen/birch and jack pine Maintain or increase old/old growth/multi-aged spruce/fir Decrease mature and old/old growth/multi-aged aspen/birch and jack pine Lowland Conifer within the Dry mesic Red and White Pine LE and Jack Pine-Black Spruce LE Increase young black spruce/tamarack A2. Wildlife including Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Species Forest Plan direction for the habitat of many wildlife species is addressed by the LE/MIH objectives described in the vegetation management section above. By implementing the proposed actions, habitat would be maintained, protected and improved for a variety of species. These include, but are not limited to, black bear, moose, ruffed grouse and bald eagle. Other species and habitat needs would be protected through project design following the Forest Plan Operational Standards and Guidelines (Appendix 3). Other species would benefit from habitat management actions not associated with timber harvest. These specific wildlife habitat management actions would: Improve habitat browse in upland brush and lowland brush/grass sites using shearing, mowing or burning Scoping Report 5

6 Increase the conifer component of stands to improve summer thermal cover for moose and deer with underplanting and diversity planting in areas both harvested and not harvested Removal of balsam fir from around known bald eagle nests to reduce the risk of fire and to promote the natural regeneration of red and white pine for future nest sites Manage shorelines for long lived conifer and mature tree species including some very old aspen (Figure 5) Figure 5. A shoreline to be managed for long lived conifer species in the Birch Project Area. A3. Insects, Diseases, and Disturbance Processes Fuels Reduction The Forest Plan identifies the need to Treat areas of highest fire risk (based on Fire Regime and Condition Class) to minimize effects of unwanted wildland fire (pg. 2-19). The need exists to restore overall health and reduce hazardous fuel levels in forest communities, especially along roadsides, by changing the vegetative condition through vegetative management. Balsam fir is a significant component in the understory of many stands; which increases the occurrence of active crown fire and decreases firefighter effectiveness of suppression. High intensity fires result in increased risk to firefighter safety and an increased chance of losing ecosystem components. In addition, the Lake and St. Louis County Community Wildfire Protection Plans (CWPP) provide direction to reduce the risk of wildfire, protect life and property and move an area back to the ecological condition associated with the historical natural fire regime. By implementing the Forest Plan and supporting the CWPPs, the interdisciplinary team proposes to reduce fuel levels and help restore a more natural fire regime to the Project Area. Fuels reduction can be accomplished through a variety of techniques. Some traditional techniques include commercial timber harvest, prescribed burning and hand or mechanical Scoping Report 6

7 cutting along with pile burning. Newer techniques may include biomass harvesting. Biomass is used for alternative renewable energy to offset higher energy prices, address climate change concerns and to support State incentives to produce such energy. Biomass harvesting includes the process of cutting, collecting and removing woody material from forested, brushland or openland sites. In addition to utilization of tops and limbs from trees harvested in a commercial timber sale, biomass harvest might include some utilization of smalldiameter trees or stems, dead trees, down logs, brush and stumps (Figure 6). Biomass harvest removes more woody material from a site than would be removed under a typical commercial timber harvest. Often biomass harvesting is conducted in addition to commercial timber harvesting on the same site, either in conjunction with the commercial timber harvest or soon after. Figure 6. An example of biomass removal in a pine thinning (taken from Sustaining Minnesota Forest Resources Voluntary Site-level Forest Management Guidelines, 2007). Biomass harvest can also be conducted on sites where a commercial timber harvest is not occurring. This type of fuel reduction is proposed for shorelines within the Birch Project Area that are protected from logging by the Shipstead-Newton Nolan (SNN) Act of The SNN Act protects the natural beauty of certain shorelines for recreational purposes, therefore limiting management activities in those areas. Specific techniques proposed for these areas in the Birch Project include cutting and piling of unmerchantable (five inch diameter or less) balsam fir (live and dead) through mechanical means such as hand or brush saws, as well as enhancement of the shorelines through brush reduction and releasing young advance regeneration of desired conifer species (pine and spruce). None of these treatments along shorelines would be accomplished through commercial logging; however the biomass would be removed, sold and/or traded for other services. Fuel reduction may occur within a variety of areas; however, biomass harvest would primarily be an option in areas with good access for equipment. Fuel reduction areas with limited access would likely be burned. The Superior National Forest implements the Minnesota Forest Resources Council (MFRC) Voluntary Site-level Guidelines when managing forest resources. Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines are Scoping Report 7

8 intended to provide equal or greater protection than MFRC guidelines. Therefore, as with all proposed activities, the MFRC Guidelines and Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines will be followed for all biomass harvesting. Specific actions would: Reduce high and medium fire risk areas in upland forest types that have a component of balsam fir in the understory (Figure 8 and 9) Reduce older aspen stands (60 + years old) and spruce/fir stands that have sprucebudworm damage or potentially could be affected in the next 10 years Reintroduce fire in older pine stands (over 50 years old) including islands that have high fuel loadings, duff accumulations, and ladder fuels (Figure 10 and 11) Reduce hazardous fuels (including biomass removal) along shorelines protected from logging Insects The Birch project area may experience a major loss of black ash forest type if an infestation of the Emerald Ash Borer occurs (currently only in the southern part of Minnesota). Therefore, a pro-active effort is proposed to assess the existing condition of and treat single-aged, monoculture black ash stands near high risk corridors (i.e., highways and roads to campgrounds, summer home group areas, and high-use recreation areas) and black ash communities adjacent to harvest stands. Specific actions would: Release advanced regeneration of all tree species associated with black ash wet forest systems (American elm, balsam fir, basswood, red maple, yellow birch, quaking aspen, paper birch, balsam poplar, sugar maple, green ash) Reintroduce a variety of native tree species associated with black ash wet forest systems (often difficult due to persistent high water tables) through underplanting Thin the canopy for more shade-intolerant species (birch and balsam poplar) through stem removal and/or stem girdling. None of these treatments are expected to stop any potential infestation and subsequent mortality of black ash resources, but rather are intended to increase the resilience (by increasing diversity of tree species) of wet forest systems where black ash is presently a major component. These treatments would help maintain the integrity of wet forest systems, limit conversion to wet shrub lands or marshes and secure quality wetland habitats for possible black ash reintroduction. The Birch Project Area also includes a significant amount of lowland conifer/black spruce mixed stands infected with Eastern spruce dwarf mistletoe. This is a parasitic flowering plant that causes a serious disease of black spruce throughout its range. Dwarf mistletoe can also infect other tree species (white spruce, jack pine, white pine, red pine, balsam fir) but only when they are growing near already infected trees. Infection can result in reduced vigor, clumping of branches (witches' brooms) (Figure 7), deformities, lower quality wood, reduced stand stocking, increased susceptibility to other disease and mortality. Successful control can be achieved through proper silvicultural management to eradicate the parasite. Scoping Report 8

9 Figure 7. Large witches broom and thin upper crown on an infected tree. Specific actions would: Survey stands to detect presence of dwarf mistletoe prior to treatment Regenerate lowland black spruce forest type by clearcutting with reserves in stands where dwarf mistletoe is absent and clearcutting without reserves where it is present Treat residual trees in infected stands with a prescribed burn or hand cutting after harvest Reforest a buffer area around infected stands with less susceptible species such as tamarack Scoping Report 9

10 Figure 8. An example of a high fire risk area with thick balsam fir in the understory along Burntside Ridge Road. Figure 9. An example of thick balsam fir during and after (respectively) removal through cutting, hand piling and burning. Scoping Report 10

11 Figure 10. An example of a low intensity pine underburn. Before, during and after the burn, respectively. Scoping Report 11

12 Scoping Report 12 Birch Project

13 Figure 11. An example of an island in the Birch Project Area where fuel reduction is proposed. A4. Water Quality and Aquatic Habitat Enhancement Forest Plan direction encourages favoring long-lived tree species such as white and red pine, which benefit both lake and stream riparian and aquatic habitat conditions. Specific actions would: Enhance aquatic conditions by promoting recruitment, growth and longevity of longlived tree species by controlling understory vegetation and planting white pine, red pine and white spruce A5. Recreation/Scenery and Vegetation Enhancement The Project Area primarily contains three of the Management Areas (MA) described in the Forest Plan. Those Management Areas include General Forest, General Forest Longer Rotation and Recreation Use in a Scenic Landscape. Forest Plan direction states that within the Recreation Use in a Scenic Landscape Management Area, viewsheds are managed for scenic beauty and big-tree character and forest management enhances recreation and scenic objectives. Specific actions at the Birch Lake Campground would: Lightly thin (60% residual trees or more) and burn the vegetation along the access road to the campground Lightly thin the vegetation around the campground to improve the scenic quality and to mitigate hazardous fuels accumulation Forest Plan direction for areas with High Scenic Integrity Objectives states that high scenic quality is protected or enhanced in landscapes with outstanding scenic value and in high public use recreation areas and corridors. Specific actions would: Lightly thin the vegetation, increase tree species diversity (through planting red and white pine) to create a large tree/old forest character adjacent to Birch Lake, along Highway 169 and Highway 1 and around Forest Service forest entrance signs Scoping Report 13

14 Harvest or broadcast burn some areas with undesirable and less aesthetic species (such as off site aspen or dead and dying jack pine) along Highway 1 and 21 to regenerate them with species that are better suited to grow on those sites and can achieve a large tree/old forest character (such as jack pine and long lived red and white pine) Forest Plan direction states that within the General Forest and General Forest-Longer Rotation Management Areas, dispersed recreation facilities such as campsites and trails (day use, backpacking, portaging, bicycling, horseback riding, hunter walking, snowmobile, ATV use, interpretive) may be provided for public use. Specific actions would: Convert an existing path into a system hiking trail near the Birch Lake Campground Create an interpretive area at the Kawishiwi District Office and the International Wolf Center administrative sites. This demonstration project would provide visitors a firsthand look at vegetation treatments that are commonly used to promote healthy, productive and resilient forests within the Superior National Forest. Several small plots of up to a few acres in size would be created to show examples for some of the following treatments: creating young stands with harvest, improving stand conditions with harvest, restoring stand conditions without harvest and removal of hazardous fuels. This project would be similar in design to the Heritage Forest Demonstration Project on the Deschutes National Forest in Oregon ( A6. Forest Products The Forest Plan identifies the need to provide commercial wood (including biomass) for mills/plants in northern Minnesota at a level that is sustainable over time. A7. Tribal Rights and Interests The Forest Plan identifies the need to provide opportunities for traditional American Indian land uses and resources and facilitate the exercise of the right to hunt, fish, and gather as retained by Ojibwe whose homelands were subject to treaty in 1854 and The Forest Plan also identifies the need to maintain a consistent and mutually acceptable approach to government-togovernment consultation that provides for effective Tribal participation and facilitates the integration of tribal interests and concerns into the decision-making process. All three bands, Fond du Lac, Bois Forte and Grand Portage were consulted with and were provided an opportunity to assist in the development of the proposed action for the Birch Project. Cover letters and preliminary proposed action maps were mailed to all three bands and the Birch Project was discussed in more detail at a meeting with 1854 Treaty Authority and a meeting with Fond du Lac. Comments received and considered from 1854 Treaty Authority include: Wild rice population present in Canary, Blueberry and Birch (west end) Lakes Access to Canary and Blueberry Lakes Support of aspen removal around Canary Lake to deter beavers Support of proposed actions for vegetation management around other wild rice lakes Comments received and considered from Fond du Lac include: Areas around Birch and Bear Island Lakes as well as a mine reclamation site near Embarrass have pockets of good moose populations that may respond well to vegetation management. Scoping Report 14

15 B. Transportation System The Forest Plan identifies the need to provide a transportation system for long-term vegetation management and access to federal and other public lands. Specific actions would: Change the Operational Maintenance Level (OML) from OML2 to OML 1 (winter use only) on one section of road to avoid damage to wetlands on unfrozen ground Allow two special use authorizations; one to resolve a current road encroachment and one to allow State land managers access to their proposed treatment areas Allow State land managers to access their proposed treatment areas by adding eight sections of road, requested for temporary long-term use, to the system as OML 1 Decommission four existing sections of road that are no longer needed or are currently causing resource damage Change OML 1 to OML 2 on three sections of road to meet the current use needs to access Little Lake and for other recreational purposes Close one section of road to OHV s of which the beginning section was closed as part of the decision in the Forest Travel Management Plan, therefore closing the entire road to OHV s Change from OML 3 to dual use OHV on one section of road to allow special use permit holders to perform maintenance and ride for enjoyment (utilizing OHV s) on the road B1. Wildlife including Threatened and Endangered Species The Forest Plan identifies the need to maintain/restore habitat connectivity and reduce road density for Canada lynx to reduce the risk of human caused mortality. Proposed changes in OML from level 2 to level 1 and proposed road decommissioning discussed above will benefit many species including the federally listed Canada lynx and gray wolf. IV. Proposed Action A. Vegetation Management While developing the proposed action, the interdisciplinary team collaborated with and reviewed data from the State of Minnesota, St. Louis County, Lake County, Tribal representatives, and the Ely Alternative Energy Task Force. This collaborative effort was utilized to ensure similar forest management activities would occur across ownership boundaries. The proposed action is designed to meet Forest Plan LE objectives for age, composition and spatial arrangement of vegetation as well as objectives for fuels reduction, wildlife habitat, soil, scenery, recreation, water quality and aquatic habitat enhancement. The proposed action for vegetation management is summarized in Tables 1 and 2 and is displayed on the Proposed Action Map. The measures provided in the tables are preliminary estimates that may change based on additional on-the-ground information. Table 1 provides an overview of how the proposed action addresses some aspects of the Purpose and Need. Table 2 summarizes six general primary treatments based on total acres. Additional information and maps of the LEs and MAs in the Project Area can be found in Appendix 1 (attached). Additional information on the specific units included in the proposed action can be found in Appendix 2 (attached). Scoping Report 15

16 Depending on the content of public scoping comments and further environmental analysis, the interdisciplinary team may recommend additional stands for treatments in management Alternatives. All stands recommended for treatment would fit within the context of the project s Purpose and Need, Forest Plan direction, and agency regulations. Table 1. Proposed Action: Vegetation Management Proposed Action Outcome (Acres) Increase acres in the 0-9 age class in uplands 4,200 Increase acres of lowland conifer in the 0-9 age class 200 Increase within stand diversity in harvested stands 950 Decrease the amount of aspen 3,000 Increase the amount of jack pine 3,100 Improve stand condition of mature stands with harvest 300 Restore within stand diversity in mature stands* 5,000 Increase the amount of forest restored to or maintained in a healthy condition to reduce the risk of insect damage** 200 Reduce risk of unwanted wildfire through fuels treatments 2,400 Improve wildlife habitat in non-forested areas 600 Enhance riparian habitat adjacent to streams and lakes 2,500 Estimated timber volume (million board feet) 30 Estimated timber biomass volume (tons per acre)**** 50,000 *** Estimated non timber biomass volume (tons per acre)**** 5 Table 2. Proposed Action: Vegetation Management Primary Treatments Outcome Proposed Action Primary Treatment (Acres) Create young stands with harvest (i.e., clearcut or coppice cut reserves, two-aged coppice cut, shelterwood harvest) 4,400 Improve stand condition with harvest (i.e., thin, improvement cut, sanitation cut) 500 Restore stand condition without harvest (i.e., tree release and weed, site preparation for seeding or planting) 4,100 Remove hazardous fuels* (i.e., broadcast burn, underburn, pile burn, compact/crush fuels) 1,800 Wildlife habitat improvement* (i.e., burn, release and weed in non-forest uplands) 600 Vegetation management interpretative area 30 Total Acres Treated 11,500 *This estimate does not include harvest alone, only harvest followed up with a secondary fuels or wildlife treatment. Harvest alone can help accomplish this objective as well. Scoping Report 16

17 B. Transportation System The transportation system proposed action is summarized in Table 3 and is displayed on the Proposed Action Map. Some temporary roads will also be needed for accessing stands to carry out forest vegetation management activities. Temporary roads will only be used for short periods of time, will not become part of the permanent forest transportation system and will be closed after all management activities have been completed. Table 3. Proposed Action: Transportation system management. OML stands for Objective Maintenance Level. The Forest Plan (p. Glossary 17-18) defines OML 1, 2, and 3 as well as OHV (off-highway vehicle). Proposal Miles Add as OML Add as a system hiking trail 0.74 Add as a long term special use 0.65 Decommission 2.59 Change OML 1 to OML Change OML 2 to OML Change OML 3 to dual use OHV 2.04 Close to OHV 0.36 V. Forest Plan Operational Standards and Guidelines Forest Plan Operational Standards and Guidelines would be implemented with the proposed actions and are summarized in Appendix 3 (attached). The document includes the Standards and Guidelines that are routinely employed during harvesting, road work, and prescribed burning operations. Additional specific measures may be included based on public comment analysis. VI. Decisions to Be Made Mark Van Every, Kawishiwi District Ranger, is the responsible official. Decisions to be made include: Is an Environmental Assessment an adequate level of analysis for this project What actions will be approved to address the Purpose and Need Where those actions will take place Mitigation measures needed There will be another opportunity to comment on the Birch Project once the draft document is complete. A decision is expected in 2011, with implementation to begin thereafter. Primary treatments will start within five years of the decision and could take several years to complete. Scoping Report 17

18 VII. Treatments The Proposed Action Map depicts primary stand treatments, as summarized in six categories: create young stands with harvest, improve stand condition with harvest, restore stand condition without harvest, remove hazardous fuels, wildlife habitat improvement and vegetation management interpretive area. Appendix 2 contains the Vegetation Treatment Codes and Definitions for the Project Area. The second table within Appendix 2 provides codes and complete definitions of treatments used on the Proposed Action Map. A key part of the preliminary prescription is whether or not the stand age would change. Nuances of the prescription could change during implementation. For example, a coppice cut with reserves could change to a seed tree cut if further field reviews indicate that is the preferred treatment for the stand. Scoping Report 18