WILLAMETTE NATIONAL FOREST Middle Fork Ranger District

Transcription

1 WILLAMETTE NATIONAL FOREST Middle Fork Ranger District SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION REPORT FOR WILDLIFE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Outlook Landscape Diversity Project (OLDP) June 02, 2016 PREPARED BY: /s/ Joanne Lowden DATE: 06/02/2016 Joanne Lowden District Wildlife Biologist Middle Fork Ranger District Willamette National Forest

2 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this Supplemental Information Report (SIR) is to document and include additional information and minor changes associated with the Outlook Landscape Diversity Project (OLDP) into the environmental analysis for wildlife. CHANGES TO DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION The Riparian Reserve treatment acres were reduced for Alternative A (Proposed Action) from 936 acres to 820 acres.riparian Reserve treatment acres are reported in Table 3 of the Biological Evaluation for the Outlook project (Davis 2015c). Table 5 of the Biological Evaluation (Davis 2015c) compares the overall effect of the action alternatives on terrestrial habitat as a percentage. The effect of Riparian Reserve treatment acres on terrestrial habitat is reduced from 5% to 4%. The change in proposed Riparian Reserve treatment acres does not change the rationale of the effects analysis for any species or change the effect determinations made in the Biological Evaluation (David 2015c)or Terrestrial MIS (Davis 2015b)and Migratory Bird (Davis and Ferland 2015) reports. CHANGES TO THE CUMULATIVE EFFECTS SECTION An additional reasonably foreseeable action was included in the cumulative effects section for this project. Aggregate resources are in need for maintaining Forest System roads and the Forest Service is proposing to open/expand two quarry sites. The action consists of possible pit development and crushing of 10,000 cubic yards of various classes of aggregate size. The quarry projects would remove up to 2 acres of suitable northern spotted owl (NSO) habitat at each proposed site. One of the proposed sites is located within NSO site #2896 which is also within the Outlook analysis area. Current habitat condition of NSO sites is one factor used to evaluate potential habitat impacts to northern spotted owls. Suitable habitat of 50% or greater in the core area and 40% or greater in the home range is considered sufficient to maintain NSO life history functions (USDA et. al, 2014). Table 10 of the Biological Evaluation (Davis 2015c) reports current suitable habitat for NSO site #2896 as 99% for the nest patch, 91% for the core area, and 77% for the home range.under Alternatives A and D, 33 acres of dispersal habitat would be removed from the home range of NSO site #2896 and under Alternative B, 3 acres of suitable habitat would be removed from the home range. When combined with the proposed quarry projects this would result in a net loss of 5 acres of suitable habitat under Alternative B and 2 acres of suitable habitat loss under Alternatives A and D. The additive effect of proposed habitat removal for these two projectswould not significantly change the percentage of suitable habitat available within the home range of this site or affect the ability of the site to maintain NSO life history functions. The small amount of habitat proposed for removal by the quarry projects would not substantially change therationale of the cumulative effects analysis or the effect determinations for any species

3 made in the Biological Evaluation(Davis 2015c) orterrestrial MIS (Davis 2015b)and Migratory Bird (Davis and Ferland 2015) reports. The cumulative effects section of the Dead Wood Effects (Davis 2015a) report identifiestwo reasonably foreseeable actions that could result in cumulative effects to dead wood from modification of habitat. Neither of the identified are expected to have long-term significant negative or positive influence on dead wood habitat at the 5 th field watershed scale. The proposed quarry projects would remove current and future dead wood within the expansion footprints (approximately 2 acres each). This would result in a reduction of dead wood at a small scale, but would not be expected to have a significant positive or negative effects at the 5 th field watershed scale. The Outlook project is expected to result in a negative cumulative effect and overall reduction in short to long-term recruitment of dead wood, but wouldresult in a long-term beneficial effect over time. The additional consideration of the proposed quarry projects does not substantially change the conclusions or recommendations of the Dead Wood Effects (Davis 2015a) report. CHANGES TO THE PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES The project design features were adapted from the wildlife environmental analysis. Minor edits were made to improve the clarity and reduce redundancy in the originally proposed design features. Changes to the project design features retained the original intent and would not affect the rationale of the effects analysis for any species or change the effect determinations made in the Biological Evaluation (Davis 2015c), Terrestrial MIS (Davis 2015b) report, Migratory Bird (Davis and Ferland 2015) report, or Dead Wood Effects (Davis 2015a) report. Proposed seasonal restrictions by species and activity were also included for each treatment unit. Objective Design Feature Location Wildlife To reduce effects to northern spotted owls and designated critical habitat from habitat modification and potential disturbance To reduce impacts to sensitive raptor bald eagle from potential habitat modification and Seasonal restrictions will be imposed on with the potential to disrupt NSO nest sites during the breeding season. The general seasonal restriction period for spotted owls is March 1 July 15 and may be extended through September 30 for some. If NSO nest activity is detected in areas not previously identified, seasonal restrictions and standard buffer distances would be applied. Helicopter operations plans will be reviewed to ensure seasonal and spatial restrictions are in place to avoid disruption to NSO nest sites during the breeding season. Protect existing remnant overstory trees and large snags to the greatest extent feasible during project. Protect existing remnant overstory trees and snags within 1.1 miles of rivers and reservoirs to the extent feasible during project. refer to wildlife disturbance review binder for specific locations where seasonal restriction is required (See below for quick list of units.)

4 Objective Design Feature Location disturbance To reduce impacts to sensitive raptor peregrine falcon from potential disturbance To reduce potential disturbance to migratory birds during the nesting season Seasonal restrictions will be imposed on with the potential to disturb bald eagle nest sites during the breeding season. The general seasonal restriction period for bald eagles is January 1 August 31. If bald eagle nest activity is observed in areas not previously identified, seasonal restrictions and standard buffer distances would be applied. Seasonal restrictions will be imposed on with the potential to disturb peregrine falcon nest sites during the breeding season. The general seasonal restriction period for peregrine falcons is January 15 July 31. If peregrine falcon nest activity is observed in areas not previously identified, seasonal restrictions and standard buffer distances would be applied. Protect active roost and nest sites to the extent feasible during project. If nests or signs of nesting activity are observed before or during project implementation, defer all treatments with the potential to disturb or destroy nests until they are no longer active. In the event a significant roosting or nesting area is located within the project area, the District wildlife biologists should be contacted to assess project and formulate site specific management guidelines to ensure protection of the site. refer to wildlife disturbance review binder for specific locations where seasonal restriction is required (See below for list of units.) refer to wildlife disturbance review binder for specific locations where seasonal restriction is required (See below for quick list of units.) To reduce impacts to bats and their habitat To minimize potential impacts to western pond turtles Identify snags and trees during layout that have cavities or sloughing bark that could be used as natal or roost sites by bats. If found, retain where possible by incorporating into skip areas or as leave trees. If necessary to fell for safety reasons, leave as high a stump as possible to maintain potential for future use. For snag creation involving trees 20 diameter, consider treatment options to create bat crevices or induce heart rot to maximize potential benefit for bat use. In the event a significant bat roost is located within the project area, the District and Forest wildlife biologists should be contacted to inspect the site, assess any project for their potential to impact bats, and formulate site specific management guidelines to ensure protection of the site. For project occurring on road 5821 including road maintenance and log hauling, inform equipment operators and drivers of the potential for pond turtles to be present in the roadway. If pond turtles are observed crossing roads, the sighting should be reported and if Haul routes utilizing road 5821

5 Objective Design Feature Location To maintain Johnson hairstreak (butterfly) habitat To minimize potential impacts and promote habitat for Management Indicator Species (MIS) and deadwood dependent wildlife species To manage dead wood (snags and logs) in a way that maintains current habitat and promotes levels of snags and logs that emulates estimated reference condition possible the animal should be moved off the road in its direction of travel. If dwarf mistletoe is observed during unit layout, the severity of the infection should be assessed at the stand level with the silviculturist and wildlife biologist. The assessment objective is to allow low level infections to persist for habitat and ecological processes. Within late-successional stands, do not select trees for snag creation and riparian reserve large wood augmentation that contain dwarf mistletoe. For cavity excavators (including pileated woodpecker and marten): Retain existing snags (> 10 dbh) and protect down logs (> 20 dia) to the greatest extent feasible. Retain a high percentage of green trees having crown abnormalities and/or obvious indicators of wildlife use such as pileated woodpecker foraging trees. For snag creation involving trees 20 diameter, consider treatment options that induce heart rot to maximize potential benefit to fisher. Enhance openings associated with project such as landings, burn piles, and soil treatment areas by applying Willamette native seed mix for deer and elk or other wildlife species. Consider all opportunities that support forage habitat improvement for deer and elk. For matrix diversity thinning units - an average of 12 trees per acre above the final desired stand density will be retained in order to create snags and contribute to future down wood levels. Where mapped and designated, late successional zones adjacent to the thinning units will be used to source additional snags where an average of two snags greater than 20 dbh will be created. For Matrix units thinned to create early-seral habitat - an average of four of the retained trees per acre will be topped or girdled to create snag habitat and two trees within the treatment skips will be topped or girdled to create snag and future down wood habitat. For LSR diversity thinning units retain an average of 15 trees per acre above the final desired stand density in order to create snags and contribute to future down wood levels. Where mapped and designated, late successional zones adjacent to the thinning units will be used to source additional snags where an average of four snags greater than 20 dbh will be created. For late successional zones that fall within the Inventoried Roadless area (SCZ-7, 27, 35, 40), snags will only be created using inoculation methods. No cutting, topping or saw use will occur in these 4 zones. Retain current snag, defective tree, and down wood habitat to the greatest extent feasible during project. The emphasis should be placed on protecting snags 10 dbh and down logs 20 diameter. Apply measures such as contour falling, strategic placement, or piling to maximize wildlife use potential for dead wood when safety or logistic reasons prevent protection of existing features. Monitor green tree mortality associated with prescribed All harvest units and elsewhere throughout the project area All harvest units and elsewhere throughout the project area All harvest units along with adjacent snag creation zones where designated

6 Objective Design Feature Location underburning to document accuracy of mortality estimate and anticipated post treatment snag levels to ensure applicable prescriptions are met. Monitor down wood consumption associated with prescribed underburning to ensure consumption projections are accurate. Wildlife Seasonal Restrictions by Unit: Northern Spotted Owl Seasonal Restriction (March 1 July 15) Unit # Chainsaws/ Heavy Equipment Prescribed Burning Helicopter Use* Helicopter Operations Plan Review** Peregrine Falcon Seasonal Restriction (January 15 July 31) All Activities Bald Eagle Seasonal Restriction (January 1 August 31) All Activities 1780 X X 1879 X X 1883 X X X 1904 X 1915 X 2043 X 2044 X 2100 X X 2116 X 2120 X X 2124 X 2176 X X 2188 X X 2205 X 2218 X 2275 X 2312 X 2329 X 2333 X 2334 X 2393 X 2408 X 2428 X 2438 X X 2452 X 2460 X

7 2496 X X X X 2501 X 2509 X 2511 X 2521 X 2525 X 2531 X 2549 X 2554 X X X 2556 X X 2563 X X X X 2570 X 2583 X X 2586 X 2589 X X X 2594 X 2608 X 2620 X X 2627 X 2630 X X 2635 X 2637 X 2641 X X 2647 X 2653 X 2655 X X 2666 X X X 2673 X 2677 X 2689 X X X X 2690 X 2731 X X 2795 X 3250 X 3260 X 3261 X 3266 X 3526 X 4940 X 4942 X * Seasonal restrictions for helicopter use within these units requires additional review by the wildlife biologist. Seasonal restrictions could potentially be extended through September 30 or reduced depending on the type of helicopter being proposed for use. **All helicopter operation plans must be reviewed by the wildlife biologist to avoid potential impacts to known wildlife sites in surrounding areas. ***Other not specified above must be reviewed by the wildlife biologist prior to

8 implementation. This includes blasting, wildlife tree creation, road repairs, and culvert replacement. Seasonal restrictions may be applied to these as necessary. LITERATURE CITED & DATA SOURCES Davis, R. F. 2015a. Dead Wood Effects for the Outlook Landscape Diversity Project Environmental Analysis. Middle Fork Ranger District, Willamette National Forest. November Davis, R. F. 2015b. Terrestrial MIS Effects for the Outlook Landscape Diversity Project Environmental Analysis. Middle Fork Ranger District, Willamette National Forest. November Davis, R. F. 2015c. Wildlife Biological Evaluation for the Outlook Landscape Diversity Project Environmental Analysis. Middle Fork Ranger District, Willamette National Forest. November Davis, R. F. and C. Ferland Migratory Bird Effects Analysis for the Outlook Landscape Diversity Project Environmental Analysis. Middle Fork Ranger District, Willamette National Forest. November USDA Forest Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management, USDI Fish and Wildlife Service OSO Willamette Planning Province FY2015 Biological Assessment of LAA Projects with the Potential to Modify the Habitat and/or Disrupt Northern Spotted Owls: July 30, 2014.