Stafford Salvage and Restoration Project Fisheries MIS Report

Transcription

1 Stafford Salvage and Restoration Project Fisheries MIS Report 1. Introduction The purpose of this report is to evaluate and disclose the impacts of the Stafford Salvage and Restoration Project (the Project) on fisheries Management Indicator Species (MIS) identified in the Shasta-Trinity National Forest (STNF) Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) (USDA 1995). The STNF LRMP identifies three fish assemblages (USDA 1995, Page 3-11) and five fisheries management indicator species selected to represent those assemblages. Winter-run steelhead, spring-run Chinook salmon and summer steelhead represent the anadromous fish assemblage; rainbow trout represents the coldwater inland fish assemblage; and, largemouth bass represents the inland warmwater fish assemblage. Analyzing project effects to management indicator assemblages, including Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive (TES) species that are adequate representatives of the assemblages, involves the following steps: Identifying which management indicator assemblages have habitat that would be either directly or indirectly affected by the project alternatives. Disclosing the LRMP forest-level or bioregional-level monitoring requirements for this subset of forest management indicator assemblages. Analyzing project-level effects on management indicator assemblage habitats or habitat components for this subset. Discussing the forest scale habitat trends and/or the bioregional population trends of representative species for this subset. Relating project-level impacts on management indicator assemblage habitat to habitat at the forest scale and/or to population trends of representative species of the affected assemblages at the forest or bioregional scale. The Forest Service manages fish populations to maintain viable populations of wild, native fish (rainbow trout, salmon and steelhead) or to enhance fish populations of wild or introduced (largemouth and smallmouth bass) species. The Forest selected management indicators to ensure that viable populations of these species are maintained. Management indicator assemblage habitat trend is monitored using historic fish habitat surveys, watershed condition class modeling and baseline assessment using the Shasta Trinity National Forest Tributaries Matrix of Factors and Indicators as revised by the STNF Level 1 team (Appendix A). Population data for MIS is limited; however, available information is obtained from State and Federal agency partners including the California Department of Fish and Game, National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), the U.S. Geological Survey, and USDI Fish and Wildlife Service.

2 2. Project Level Management Indicator Assemblages Fisheries assemblages and species for the STNF are identified in the LRMP (USDA 1995, page 3-11). The management indicator assemblages for the Project were selected from this list, as shown Table 1, which identifies assemblages and categorizes them relative to effects of the Project, and lists the representative species. TABLE 2-1. MANAGEMENT INDICATOR ASSEMBLAGES AND OPTIONAL SELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVE SPECIES FOR PROJECT-LEVEL ANALYSIS. Management Indicator Assemblages Selected Assemblage Representative Category for Project Analysis 1 Rational Anadromous Fish Steelhead: winter- and Assemblage summer-run 3 Proximity Anadromous Fish Chinook Salmon: Springrun Assemblage 1 Proximity Inland coldwater fish assemblage Rainbow Trout 1 Proximity Inland warmwater fish assemblage Largemouth Bass 1 Proximity Category 1: Management indicator assemblage whose habitat is not in or adjacent to the project area and would not be affected by the project. Category 2: Management indicator assemblage whose habitat is in or adjacent to project area, but would not be either directly or indirectly affected by the project. Category 3: Management indicator assemblage whose habitat would be either directly or indirectly affected by the project. Largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), identified as Category 1, does not have habitat in the Upper and Lower Hayfork Creek 5 th field watersheds and this species will not be further discussed. Resident rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), identified as Category 1, does have habitat within the Upper and Lower Hayfork Creek 5 th field watersheds, but does not have habitat within the Project 7 th field watersheds. Suitable habitat does not exist in the main stem of Hayfork Creek due to the annual occurrence of lethal high water temperatures in combination with a lack of refugia from these lethal temperatures. This species will not be discussed further. Spring-run Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), identified as Category 1, have habitat within Lower Hayfork Creek 5 th field watershed, but are not known to occur within the Project 7 th field watersheds. Within the Lower Hayfork Creek 5 th field watershed, the upper extent of anadromy for Spring Chinook occurs near the Corral Creek/Hayfork Creek confluence (STNF Fish Distribution, GIS Data). This location is approximately 22 miles downstream of the lowermost Project boundary. Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss),identified as Category 3, have habitat within the Upper and Lower Hayfork Creek 5 th field watersheds, and are known to occur within and upstream of the Project 7 th field watersheds. Stafford Fire Salvage and Restoration Project MIS Report 2

3 There is one MIS, Steelhead, whose habitat could be either directly or indirectly affected by the Project, identified as Category 3 in Table 1. The rational for this conclusion is based on (1) proximity of MIS species and their habitat in relation to Project activities (Table 2), (2) the Project has been designed to minimize potentially adverse effects to anadromous fish and their habitat to the greatest extent practicable, and (3) resource protection measures (including BMPs) will be implemented that also minimizes effects of the proposed Project to anadromous fish and their habitat. Table 2-2. PROXIMITY: Closest Distance between project activities and MIS Fish Species and their habitat in respective 7 th and 5 th field Watersheds 7 th Field Watershed(s)/ 5 th Field Watershed Stream Name Distance to Habitat occupied by Spring Chinook Distance to Habitat occupied by Steelhead Distance to Habitat occupied by Rainbow trout Distance to Habitat occupied by Largemouth Bass Carrier Gulch - Hayfork Creek 7 th / Upper Hayfork Creek 5 th Hayfork Creek 22 miles 300 feet Does Not Occur Does Not Occur Duncan Gulch-Hayfork Creek 7 th / Upper Hayfork Creek 5th Hayfork Creek 22 miles 300 feet Does Not Occur Does Not Occur Kingsbury Gulch- Kellogg Gulch 7 th / Lower Hayfork Creek 5th Hayfork Creek 22 miles 300 feet Does Not Occur Does Not Occur 3. Description of Proposed Project The Stafford Fire was a human-caused fire that started on September 5, 2012 along Wildwood Road on the South Fork Management Unit of the Shasta-Trinity National Forest in Trinity County, California. The fire burned for two weeks and was finally contained at 4,462 acres. There are 4,171 acres of National Forest System (NFS) lands and 291 acres of private land within the fire perimeter. Forest Service resource specialists began evaluating conditions in the project area immediately following the fire. The Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) analyses provided resource assessments on fire effects to soils, watersheds, vegetation, fisheries, and wildlife. Post-fire inventories of the transportation system were conducted to obtain condition status. Field crews conducted surveys on forested stands to collect data on stand mortality and salvage viability. Using field surveys, soil burn severities and vegetation burn severities were mapped to determine the changed conditions. The initial post-fire assessments were completed by the fall of This data was provided to resource specialists for additional analysis in order to make recommendations for developing the proposed action for the Stafford Fire Salvage and Recovery Project. Stafford Fire Salvage and Restoration Project MIS Report 3

4 Based on the Upper Hayfork Creek, Lower Hayfork Creek and Middle Hayfork Creek/Salt Creek Watershed Analysis, the Land and Resource Management Plan for the Shasta-Trinity National Forests (1995) and post fire assessment, we have identified a need to: Create conditions that will support the long-term survival of new forest stands including removal of dead trees to limit the long-term accumulation of heavy fuels and the restoration of fire to its natural role in the ecosystem. Establish forest stands at densities appropriate to contribute to forest harvest in the future and to maintain wildlife habitat (Forest Plan, pg ). Retain open roads on the Forest transportation system that will be needed for future activities such as forest health projects, timber management, fire protection, recreation use and management, and wildlife management (Forest Plan, pg. 4-17). Manage the open road system for safety of users including removing danger/hazard trees (FSH Section 41.7) and managing the loading distribution and arrangement of natural and activity fuels for low flame lengths and low rate of spread adjacent to open roads. Reduce surplus activity fuels that remain after meeting wildlife, riparian, soil and other environmental needs (Forest Plan, pg. 4-17). Manage natural and activity fuel loading, distribution and arrangement within WUI for low flame lengths and rate of spread. Create conditions that will maintain or restore the sediment regimes under which aquatic ecosystems evolved (Forest Plan, pg. 4-53). Quickly recover the monetary value of wood through salvage and sale, where feasible and appropriate, to provide revenue and offset the costs to the public. Four alternatives are being analyzed in detail: the Preferred Alternative, the No Action Alternative, a Community Protection Alternative, and a Timber Salvage Alternative. Two alternatives were considered but eliminated from detailed study because they did not meet Forest Plan objectives. Alternative 1: Preferred Alternative The Proposed Action would treat 1,775 acres within the Stafford Fire area through a combination of salvage, fuels reduction and reforestation activities to meet the Purpose and Need. Treatments would be excluded from the Wells Inventoried Road Area. Salvage treatments would be excluded from Riparian Reserves, but hazardous fuels reduction to protect infrastructure and reforestation would occur within Riparian Reserves. All treatments would retain all pines over 20 inches in diameter except for hazard trees. Alternative 2: No Action To meet the intent of 40 CFR (d) a No Action alternative will be developed. Based on Forest Service policy direction, this is interpreted to mean that no new action will occur from this alternative. Any fire or safety impacts from the current condition would not be mitigated at this time. Alternative 3: Community Protection Alternative The Community Protection Alternative is designed to strategically treat fuels in key areas of the Stafford fire area to afford suppression resources more options in suppressing a wildfire. A Stafford Fire Salvage and Restoration Project MIS Report 4

5 smaller percentage of the Stafford fire area is being treated in this alternative than the proposed action but the treatments will be more intensive. This treatment will meet Shasta-Trinity Land and Resource Management Plan standards and guides. Alternative 4: Timber Salvage Alternative The Timber Salvage Alternative would harvest approximately 613 acres of salvage removal of dead and dying trees. The definition of dying is the 70% mortality threshold using the Marking Guidelines for Fire-Injured Trees in California (Smith and Cluck 2011). The salvage treatments will be used to provide economic return and employment opportunities and reduce fuels. Salvage treatments would be implemented by cable yarding on an estimated 464 acres and mechanical skidding on an estimated 149 acres. These salvage activities would begin during the current year and possibly continue into The Project has four primary Project Elements: PE1- Salvage of fire-killed trees: (utilizing a combination of tractor, helicopter and cable methods) PE2- Fuels Reduction: (utilizing lop/scatter, pile/burn, underburning, chipping) PE3- Reforestation: (planting mixed conifer species within salvaged and unsalvaged burn areas) PE4- Road Related Actions: (existing road use and maintenance, temporary road construction, hazard tree removal and landing construction and use) Resource Protection Measures (RPMs) and Best Management Practices (BMPs) The following Resource Protection Measures, and their associated BMPs where applicable, have been included in the Proposed Action to avoid or minimize impacts on fish and their habitat in the short and long term: General Resource Protections Retain existing coarse woody debris (CWD) whenever possible provided the amount of logs does not exceed fuel management objectives. At least 6 logs/acre (at least greater than 20 inches diameter and 10 feet long) should be retained with 4 to 8 tons/acre of fuel remaining for protection of soil fertility. Retain a minimum of 10 snags per acre of the largest diameter (greater than or equal to 15 inches DBH) where available. Snags will be averaged across 40-acre areas. Cull trees and hardwood tree species will remain standing unless otherwise identified as a safety hazard to the harvest operation. If these must be felled for safety reasons, retain on the landscape as downed wood. When retaining snags and burned trees to meet snag retention standards, those with cat faces, burned out cavities, or those that are otherwise damaged to the degree that a cavity may form are particularly beneficial. Stafford Fire Salvage and Restoration Project MIS Report 5

6 To avoid damage to Sensitive species that inhabit rock outcrops, trees will be directionally felled away from outcrops. If newly discovered populations of plants or animals are discovered, operations in the vicinity will halt until a determination is made on the impacts to that population. Where greater than 70% soil cover exists (post-fire), post-treatment total soil cover should be between 50 and 70% with at least 50% cover as fine organic matter (duff, litter, plant leaves/needles, fine slash (<3 inch material)) (Best Management Practice (BMP) 1.3, pg. 50, R5 FSH , Soil and Water Conservation Handbook Chapter 10, Water Quality Management Handbook). During wet weather operations, erosion control measures will be maintained daily. Erosion control measures shall be effective to minimize soil erosion and prevent damaging concentrations of surface flow (BMP 2.13, pgs ). To discourage introduction or establishment of noxious weeds into the project area, off road equipment will be cleaned prior to use in the project area (BMP 2.8, pgs ). This design feature requires all equipment or vehicles working off of established roads to be free of invasive species of concern and to present equipment for inspection by the Forest Service. Contactors and cooperators will clean equipment to remove seeds, soil, vegetative matter, and other debris that could contain or hold seeds before moving off-road equipment into the project area. Limestone caves are known to exist in the vicinity of the project area, but none immediately adjacent to proposed activities. If during project layout or implementation caves are found in units or within 250 feet of unit boundaries, the Forest Cave Coordinator would be consulted and a buffer flagged on the ground identifying an equipment exclusion zone, and/or modification of the prescription in the vicinity if needed. Riparian Reserves Aquatic Period of Operation (APO): The annual period of operations established to protect aquatic resources is from May 1 through October 15. The concept is also known as a limited-operating period. This period may be extended on either end of the stated seasonal range based on occurrence of all of the following criteria: 1) a 2 week dry weather forecast, 2) the ability to complete winterization activities at the end of each days operation, 3) acceptance of recommendations from the district fisheries biologist and/or hydrologist (after meeting the first two criteria), and 4) authorization by the appropriate Line Officer (after meeting the first three criteria). Project Riparian Reserves are established at 130 foot (height of 1 site-potential tree), 150 foot, and 300 foot slope distance from the edge of seasonal, permanent non-fishbearing, and fish-bearing streams, respectively, as specified in the Shasta-Trinity National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan, 1994, pages 4-53 and 4-54). Riparian Reserves will be measured along the slope from the high watermark up the hillslope (BMP 1.4, pg. 51, BMP 1.8, pg. 55, and BMP 1.19 pg. 66). Stafford Fire Salvage and Restoration Project MIS Report 6

7 TABLE 3-4. RIPARIAN RESERVE WIDTHS FOR THE STAFFORD FIRE SALVAGE AND RESTORATION PROJECT. Stream Type Perennial stream with fish Perennial stream with no fish Seasonally flowing or Intermittent streams Hillside Slope (%) Minimum Extent of Riparian Reserve Width (feet) Slope > 30% 300 Slope < 30% 300 Slope > 30% 150 Slope < 30% 150 Slope > 30% 130 Slope < 30% 130 To limit slope disturbance, Inner Gorge terrain (> 65% slope) that extends beyond Riparian Reserves will be buffered by 50 foot slope distance from mechanical equipment activities. In areas where treatments may conflict a hydrologist will be consulted. To provide for water quality, springs identified outside of Riparian Reserves will be flagged and avoided from mechanical equipment activities. To provide large wood for aquatic systems, hazard trees downstream of stream crossings will be felled and retained if greater than 20 inches DBH, up to 20 tons per acre. Naturally fallen or felled hazard trees may be removed from Riparian Reserves if trees must be removed to provide safe road passage or campground access, or the trees will pose a substantial risk to the forest road drainage system integrity, and a fisheries biologist determines, through site inspection and written documentation, that removal of individual hazard trees within Riparian Reserves is not inconsistent with the Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives. Removal will only be appropriate when a local area survey of the affected Riparian Reserves clearly indicates that the functioning level with respect to large wood will not change from current levels after individual tree removal. No new landings will be constructed within Riparian Reserves (BMP 1.12, pg. 59). No salvage harvest or fuels treatments will occur within Riparian Reserves (BMP 1.8, pg. 55). No heavy equipment is allowed within Riparian Reserves (BMP 1.8, pg. 55). All Riparian Reserves that are adjacent to or within proposed treatment units will be flagged and/or otherwise signed or marked on the ground, and also clearly identified in the Sale Area Map (BMP 1.4, pg. 51). No timber harvest would occur within unstable areas, including active landslides and inner gorges. Mechanical equipment would be excluded from unstable lands and also for a buffer of 50 feet above active landslides and inner gorges. It would also be excluded from slopes >35% as described in the soils resource protection measures. Water Drafting No water drafting will be allowed on NFS lands for non-firefighting purposes. Stafford Fire Salvage and Restoration Project MIS Report 7

8 Mechanical Treatments Ground-based mechanical equipment will only operate on fine-textured soils (salvage units 54, 57, 58, 61, 99, 99A, 100; non-rocky areas) when the soils are dry down to 8 inches (evaluated by the forest soil scientist or personnel trained by the soil scientist). Wet weather logging will be permitted on soils with compaction hazard ratings of moderate or less. Mechanical skidding equipment is generally restricted to slopes less than 35% and operating during dry soil conditions. When slopes are greater than 35% and less than 45%, coordinate with soil scientist to allow mechanical skidding equipment use on primary skid trails that are slash covered (to achieve at least 90% soil cover) with flexible track skidders with low ground pressure equipment (BMP 1.9, pg. 56 and BMP 1.14, pg. 61). Trees to be removed by salvage will be limited to those killed by the Stafford Fire or those burned in the Stafford Fire that have a 70% or greater probability of mortality, based on the Marking Guidelines for Fire-Injured Trees in California. Trees with evidence of insect activity will also be removed as described by the Marking Guidelines for Fire-Injured Trees in California. Reforestation Activities Planted trees will be protected to minimize deer and rabbit browsing and manual release for acceptable levels of seedling survival and growth. Hardwood tree species that resprout after top-killed by fire will not be intentionally removed from the stand and seedlings will be planted outside of the dripline of the resprouting hardwoods. Dead vegetation within plantations will be strategically cut, piled and burned to prepare the site for reforestation activities. Some dead vegetation may be left standing on harsh sites to create shade and improve survival of seedlings. Resprouted woody shrubs may also be cut, piled, and burned for site preparation. A mix of ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, rust-resistant sugar pine and incense cedar will be planted on an average spacing of 16 foot to achieve a stocking of trees/acre by the fifth year (BMP 1.23, pg. 71). The overall distribution of trees through the area will vary from 12 to 20 feet depending on site conditions. The goal will be to create an uneven distribution that more closely represents a natural stand. Conifer seedlings will be released (competing vegetation will be removed) in year following reforestation; if, necessary, a second release will occur between the third and fifth year after reforestation. Manual release will include clearing woody herbs and small brush in a five-foot radius around selected trees; non-woody herbs and annual vegetation will not be targeted for treatment. Approximately 150 conifers per acre will be released where that number of seedlings survives. If the site is southfacing or droughty, vegetation may be strategically left on the south-side of the tree to moderate heat stress, especially in the first release. Roads/Landings/Temporary Roads/Skid Trails Effective dust abatement would be applied to any roads utilized by the timber purchaser where the potential for naturally occurring asbestos has been identified. These are areas underlain by ultramafic rock, as identified in the geologic map in the Stafford Fire Salvage and Restoration Project MIS Report 8

9 geology report. Maps showing the location of this rock type would be provided to the timber purchaser. Temporary roads would be located on gentle slopes to minimize earthwork, and would avoid unstable areas such as active landslides and inner gorges, and slope positions where they could deliver sediment to streams. They would also avoid slopes >45%, and cuts and/or fills in excess of five feet in height, unless field reviewed and approved by an earth scientist beforehand. Many of the benches in the project area are dormant landslides, and temporary roads would avoid the steeper slopes immediately below such benches. New landings would follow the same measures as for roads except that they would be confined to gentler slopes than the roads, since much more earthwork is required to create a flat large enough for a landing. New landings would be confined to slopes <20%, and avoid the steep slopes below landslide benches. Existing landings would not be expanded where slopes are >20%. Specifically, the landing on Road 31N51A below units 20 and 37 (at common boundary) would not be expanded, and drainage would be prevented from entering the active landslide downslope (Figure 1 in Geology Report). To minimize soil erosion, runoff from roads will be prevented from draining on to landings and skid trails by use of waterbars, mulching with weed free straw or fine slash, etc. (BMP 1.17, pg. 64). Where roads will be used during wet weather, install silt fences at culvert outlets and remove when operations are completed. Roads will be cleared and graded, as necessary, to allow log truck and equipment access. Road maintenance will be confined to the existing road surface and roads will not be made wider during maintenance. If hauling is performed outside the normal operating season, the placement of aggregate base course may be required to provide a stable running surface and prevent rutting and potential erosion. If operations occur with snow on the ground, snow berms on roads will be removed or drains installed to avoid channelization of melt water to minimize potential for damage to the road and to protect water quality. If the road surface is damaged, lost surface material shall be replaced, and damaged structures repaired. Roads that become rutted or otherwise damaged by operator during hauling operations shall be spot-rocked or otherwise suitably repaired. Drainage structures shall be protected or repaired as necessary (BMP 1.21, pg. 69). In areas with Naturally Occurring Asbestos, wet road surfaces with water trucks using sprinklers to reduce dust, and reduce driving speeds to reduce dust (31N22, 31N42, 31N51). To make the roads safe for users, dead and dying trees that pose a risk of falling into or rolling onto roads will be felled. Requirements along Forest Service System roads for Hazard Trees include: trees must be within one and a half tree lengths from the road; trees must have a lean that will cause tree to fall onto the road; when trees fall they may roll down slope and enter onto the road. Stafford Fire Salvage and Restoration Project MIS Report 9

10 When operations are complete, outslope and wing subsoil (to an estimated 18 inches in depth), mulch or use available organic material to achieve a cover rate of 2 tons/acre, all temporary roads used in timber-harvest activities (BMP 1.16, pg. 63). Dedicate no more that 15% of a harvest unit to roads, primary skid trails and landings. Reuse existing primary skid trails and landings whenever possible. Only create new landings as absolutely necessary for operational efficiency, but old landings in mechanical units will be fit into the harvest system (BMP 1.12, pg. 59). New landings will not be constructed within Riparian Reserves. Existing landings in Riparian Reserves can be reused, to the extent that the disturbed area will not increase (BMP 1.12, pg. 59). To aid soil and vegetative recovery, all reused landings in Riparian Reserves and constructed landings that are not needed for future projects will be restored after use. Restoration comprises ripping with a winged subsoiler to depth of 18, mulching (weed free rice straw, wood chips, or onsite organic material) to 2 tons/acre, and reforestation of woody species appropriate for the site. When a landing is to be retained, mulch or use available organic material (rice straw or wood chips) to achieve 1 ton/acre of cover (2 to 4 inches) and seed an appropriate seed mix at a rate of 6 to 10 lbs/acre (BMP 1.16, pg. 63). Following completion of all management activities, rip (subsoil to 18 inches) all landings, temporary roads and main skid trails (200 feet entering landing) on finetextured Holland soils with a winged-subsoiler (salvage units 54, 57, 58, 61, 99, 99A, 100). Tillage/sub-soiling will be completed outside of the tree drip-line so as not to impact root systems (BMP 1.16, pg. 63). Minimize soil erosion by water-barring skid trails and cable corridors, mulching with weed free straw or fine slash (achieve 75%+ cover) the last 50 feet of main skid trails where they enter landings (BMP 1.11, pg. 58). Install waterbars at major breaks in slope and regular intervals along the skid-trails on contour along with requiring breaches in downhill side berms and when possible spread available slash across corridor to minimize erosion. Upon completion of operations, skid trails that intersect Forest Service System Roads will be blocked (for instance by available large wood or boulders). For all ground-based operations, skid trails will average 150 feet from center to center, except where converging (within direct proximity of intersections, width may be greater in a limited area). All material will be skidded with the leading end clear of the ground. Avoid soil displacement; do not blade topsoil from skid trails and landings if possible. To protect water quality by reducing erosion and sedimentation from skid trails, skid trail erosion control work will be kept current during implementation (BMP 1.17, pg. 64). Erosion control and drainage of skid trails will be complete prior to shutting down operations due to wet weather. Limit off-trail traffic to less than 3 passes on fine-textured soils with severe compaction ratings (salvage units 54, 57, 58, 61, 99, 99A, 100). To reduce soil displacement and enhance drainage, skid-trails, when possible, will be located on ridge tops, flat benches, or existing skid trails. When not possible, postoperational reduction in soil bulk density (subsoiling) may be required. Stafford Fire Salvage and Restoration Project MIS Report 10

11 Landings should be constructed to adequately drain with crowned surface, and directed drainage with catchment structures (rock armoring and/or silt fences with weed-free straw bales may be used as necessary). All new landing fill slopes and access road fill slopes (>100 sq. ft.) will be mulched initially, and the mulch will be maintained throughout the life of the project; mulch may be weed-free straw, weedfree rice straw, or landing slash (BMP 1.16, pg. 63). When constructing landings, pull organic materials out of fill slope of landings if necessary to prevent collapse. Logs will be fully suspended when being yarded across stream channels (BMP 2.8, pg. 111). In units 33 and 45, no new landings or temporary roads will be located inside unstable areas. Drainage from landings, temporary roads and skid roads will not direct water on to unstable areas. Forest Earth Scientists, Sale administrators, and Engineers would maintain contact after the sale is sold so that final locations of landings and temporary roads could be evaluated in the field if necessary. Coordination would also be established between the earth science and the fuels shop concerning burning activities. The project geologist would be available for consultation during implementation. Equipment Refueling and Maintenance Refueling and maintenance of project motorized equipment will occur at least 200 feet away from any stream channel (BMP 2.12, pgs ). BMP 2.12 will guide all fueling and lubricating actions and, in particular, fuel containment systems will be in place on landings as necessary (BMP 2.12, pgs ). 4. Environmental Baseline and Effects of Project The Project is located at intersection of the Upper and Lower Hayfork Creek 5 th field watersheds. The Duncan Gulch-Hayfork Creek and Carrier Gulch-Hayfork Creek 7 th field watersheds are nested within the Upper Hayfork Creek 5 th field watershed and the Kingsbury Gulch-Hayfork Creek 7 th field watershed is nested within the Lower Hayfork Creek 5 th field watershed. The 5 th and 7 th -field watershed name and hydrologic unit code (HUC) where Project activities would occur are shown in Table 4-1 below. TABLE 4-1. STAFFORD SALVAGE AND RESTORATION PROJECT 5 TH AND 7 TH -FIELD WATERSHEDS, HYDROLOGIC UNIT CODES (HUCS) AND STAFFORD FIRE ACRES WITHIN THEIR RESPECTIVE HUCS. Watershed Acres Stafford Fire Watershed HUC Acres in HUC Lower Hayfork Creek (5 th ) ,014 3,834 Upper Hayfork Creek (5 th ) , Duncan Gulch-Hayfork Creek (7 th ) ,442 2,181 Carrier Gulch-Hayfork Creek(7 th ) ,916 1,168 Stafford Fire Salvage and Restoration Project MIS Report 11

12 Kingsbury Gulch-Kellogg Gulch (7 th ) , Environmental Baseline Habitat Information on existing conditions in the analysis area and project area watersheds is contained in the BA/BE prepared for the Stafford Salvage and Restoration Project as well as within the following watershed assessments, and is incorporated herein by reference: Upper Hayfork Creek Watershed Assessment (USDA STNF 2000) Middle Hayfork and Salt Creek Watershed Assessment (URS Greiner Woodward Clyde 2000) Lower Hayfork Creek Watershed Assessment (USDA STNF 1998) In addition, further information on existing conditions for sediment and water temperature is contained in the following water quality management plans (or Total Maximum Daily Loads) (TMDLs) developed and approved by EPA, and is incorporated herein by reference: South Fork Trinity River and Hayfork Creek Sediment Total Maximum Daily Loads (EPA 1998). Tables in the Project BA/BE document habitat conditions for anadromous salmonids in the project area. Steelhead habitat requirements include cool water, clean gravel for spawning, cobble and boulder substrate for velocity refuge and cover, large woody debris for cover and habitat complexity, and other diverse habitat elements including deep pools, riffles, cascades and side channel habitat. These habitat elements provide adult and juvenile fish with cover and protection from predators, oxygenate flows, provide juvenile rearing and foraging habitat and adult holding and foraging habitat, and provide spawning habitat that is critical to sustain healthy populations of both species. Steelhead Steelhead within the Hayfork Creek watershed is included in the Klamath Mountain Province (KMP) Steelhead Distinct Population Segment. Refer to the Project BA/BE for information on the biological requirements and life history of KMP steelhead. NMFS (2001a) reported that the overall trend data for summer steelhead in the KMP steelhead ESU is mixed. In tributaries to the Klamath River, summer steelhead numbers remained low in the 1990s but increased in Survey data for summer steelhead in Trinity River tributaries indicate that this trend is continuing (Figure 4-1). Summer steelhead abundance on the New River and North Fork Trinity River appears to be increasing and robust. Stafford Fire Salvage and Restoration Project MIS Report 12

13 Figure 4-1. Similar trends for the South Fork Trinity River and Hayfork Creek also indicate modest increases from the1990s to 2010 and large increases, respectively, in 2010 and (Figure 4-2), although the total number counted remains very low. Stafford Fire Salvage and Restoration Project MIS Report 13

14 Direct Effects of the Project Alternative 1: Preferred Alternative Alternative 1 will have no direct effect on steelhead or their habitat. The proposed actions will not occur in or near live streams. Salvage units are all located outside of RRs and further than 300 feet from fish bearing streams. Fuels treatments are not allowed in RRs. Reforestation will occur within Riparian Reserves of non-fish bearing streams and will have no direct effect on steelhead or their habitat as there are no fish there. Road related activities will not occur where fish are present. RRs will be insignificantly directly affected at the site scale due to very limited hazard tree removal for safety and to protect infrastructure, where no anadromous or resident salmonids or their habitat occurs. Water drafting from streams on USFS lands is not allowed for this project and lacks a causal mechanism by which it can affect water temperature or base flow. Alternative 2: No Action Alternative 2 will have no direct effect on steelhead or their habitat. The no action alternative is not a baseline condition, but rather a description of future circumstances without implementation of the proposed action. The no-action alternative is a continuation of the current conditions. This includes ongoing road maintenance and hazard tree removal, recreation, watershed restoration projects, appropriate management and fire suppression. Alternative 3: Community Protection Alternative Alternative 3 will have no direct effect on steelhead or their habitat. The Community Protection Alternative will not occur in or near live streams with fish. The closest that Project work would occur to where steelhead and their habitat exist is 300 feet from Hayfork Creek. Underburning activities have a discountable probability of escaping containment lines and encroaching on the riparian reserves of Hayfork Creek. Underburning activities also have a discountable probability of escaping containment lines and encroaching on the riparian reserves of Limestone Gulch and McCovey Gulch which do not have fish but are connected to the RRs of Hayfork Creek. Alternative 4: Timber Salvage Alternative Alternative 4 will have no direct effect on steelhead or their habitat. The Timber Salvage Alternative will not occur in or near live streams. Salvage units are all located outside of RRs Stafford Fire Salvage and Restoration Project MIS Report 14

15 and further than 300 feet from fish bearing streams. Fuels treatments would not occur. Reforestation would not occur. Road related activities will not occur where fish are present but will occur within RRs of non-fish bearing streams. RRs will be insignificantly directly affected at the site scale due to very limited hazard tree removal for safety and to protect infrastructure, where no anadromous or resident salmonids or their habitat occurs. Water drafting from streams on USFS lands is not allowed for this project. Conclusions regarding Direct Effects from Alternatives to Steelhead MIS and their Habitat None of the alternatives would have any direct effects on steelhead MIS or their habitat as no work is proposed where they occur. Indirect Effects of the Project Alternative 1: Preferred Alternative Alternative 1 will have insignificant negative and positive effects on steelhead MIS and their habitat. Application of Project Design Standards (PDSs) and Best Management Practices (BMPs) specific to this Project are sufficient to insure that indirect effects at the site scale are insignificant and discountable. This alternative is the only proposed action that incorporates all of the PEs. For PE-1, salvage activities: Sediment and turbidity levels are expected to insignificantly increase in the short-term due to ground disturbance and subsequent precipitation events. Salvage activities will increase the Equivalent Roaded Area (ERA), in the short-term, via the use of heavy equipment and associated ground compaction. The ERA will decrease to below preproject levels as skid trails, landings and temporary roads are remediated by implementing RPMs and BMPs. For PE-2, fuels reduction: There are no short-term effects associated with this PE. No fuel reduction work will occur within RRs. The project area RRs, as well as adjacent RRs, will benefit in the long-term by reducing the fuel loading on a landscape scale and thus reducing the potential for future wildfires in the project area. For PE-3, reforestation: There are no short-term effects associated with this PE and only beneficial effects. Large woody debris recruitment potential to Hayfork Creek, where steelhead MIS and their habitat exists, will be increased in the long-term due to the development of mature trees. Reforestation within RRs would also increase the functional ability of them to trap and store sediment. Reforestation outside of RRs will aid in the long-term soil structure recovery there. For PE-4, road related activities: Through remediation of existing landings and road maintenance it is likely that there will be insignificant long-term positive effects to pool quality. RPMs and BMPs will eliminate or minimize project related sediments from reaching Hayfork Creek in the short-term but these same RPMs and BMPs will continue to minimize road related sediments from reaching Hayfork Creek long after the project is completed. The use of roads, construction of temporary roads and landing use are expected to create compacted soils resulting in insignificant short-term negative effects to peak flow values in Hayfork Creek. The fact that Stafford Fire Salvage and Restoration Project MIS Report 15

16 these sites will be remediated following use will restore them to a better condition than they are currently in and provide insignificant long-term positive effects. The temporary roads will be closed and remediated after use and do not occur near Steelhead MIS or their habitat. Salvage activities will increase the Equivalent Roaded Area (ERA), in the short-term, via the use of heavy equipment and associated ground compaction. The ERA will decrease as skid trails, landings and temporary roads are remediated by implementing RPMs and BMPs. Alternative 2: No Action Alternative 2 would have indirect negative effects on steelhead MIS and their habitat. The no action alternative is not a baseline condition, but rather a description of future circumstances without implementation of the proposed action. The no-action alternative is a continuation of the current conditions. This includes ongoing road maintenance and hazard tree removal, recreation, watershed restoration projects, appropriate management and fire suppression. The cost of implementing watershed restoration projects, without the monetary return associated with timber harvest, make it highly unlikely that the Stafford Fire area would be fully treated as in Alternative 1. Fine sediment and turbidity levels in Hayfork Creek would most likely remain elevated above pre-fire levels for an undetermined length of time as the soil structure naturally recovers in the high and moderate intensity burn areas. The increased fine sediment levels would likely have negative impacts to pool habitats as it settles and accumulates in them. The recruitment potential of large woody debris would also be delayed as natural reforestation would take longer to grow suitable sized trees to contribute to versus planting trees. Peak flows, following precipitation, would remain higher than normal due to the increased runoff potential within moderate and high severity burn areas. There is a likely probability that the drainage network would be increased as overland runoff within the burned areas would create new rills and gullies due to a lack of vegetative cover. Riparian reserves would be among the most negatively affected habitat elements if no action were taken. Although no fish occur within the project area RRs, failing to reforest them would prevent them from functioning properly for a longer period of time versus planting them. The effects, such as trapping and storing sediment and regulating nutrient levels would be translated to downstream areas in Hayfork Creek and would negatively impact steelhead MIS and their habitat. The fuel loading within the project area would not be reduced if Alternative 2 were chosen and would pose a substantial risk to the RRs that are still functioning due to an increased risk of future fires. Alternative 3: Community Protection Alternative Alternative 3 would have both negative and positive effects to steelhead MIS and their habitat within Hayfork Creek. This alternative only incorporates fuels treatments (PE-2) and road related activities (PE-4). Fuels treatments in the project area would occur over less area but would be more intensive than Alternative 1. Also, Alternative 3 utilizes heavy equipment to accomplish fuels reductions while Alternative 1 does not. Road related activities in Alternative 3 would be reduced because; new landings would not be created and existing landings would only be used to burn excess fuels, roads would not be utilized to haul on and no temporary roads would be created. For Alternative 3, fine sediment and turbidity levels would most likely be increased for a longer time period than in Alternative 1 because reforestation would not occur within the project area Stafford Fire Salvage and Restoration Project MIS Report 16

17 uplands or RRs. These negative effects would be translated downstream into Hayfork Creek and could impact steelhead MIS spawning habitat. This same effect may reduce pool volume in Hayfork Creek if enough substrate is mobilized. The fuelbreaks that would be constructed along the northern portion of the project boundary, adjacent to Hayfork Creek, would protect the RRs of Hayfork Creek by reducing the probability of wildfire impinging on them from the south. Road related activities for Alternative 3 are reduced relative to Alternative 1 but would still have short-term negative and long-term positive indirect effects. No landings would be utilized but soil compaction would still occur due to mechanical treatment methods of fuels. This would result in increased peak flows in the short-term. RPMs and BMPs would treat the compacted areas and peak flows would be expected to return to pre-project levels following implementation. The reduced area that would be treated under Alternative 3 also increases the risk of rills and gullies forming outside of treatment areas within the project boundary thus increasing the drainage network. Alternative 4: Timber Salvage Alternative Alternative 4 would have both negative and positive effects to steelhead MIS and their habitat within Hayfork Creek. This alternative incorporates salvage (PE-1) and road related activities (PE-4). The salvage component is reduced versus Alternative 1 and only cable and tractor methods would be utilized to salvage the trees. This would likely result in fine sediment and turbidity levels being increased in Hayfork Creek and could impact steelhead MIS and their habitat in Hayfork Creek. Rills and gullies outside of treatment areas would also likely occur due to a lack of reforestation treatment there. The exclusion of fuel treatments and reforestation in this alternative would have negative effects to steelhead MIS and their habitat. Fuels treatments would reduce the probability of future wildfires impinging on RRs where steelhead MIS and their habitat occur. Reforestation within RRs would increase their ability to provide LWD to downstream areas where steelhead MIS and their habitat occurs. Conclusions Regarding Indirect Effects from Alternatives to steelhead MIS and their habitat Alternative 1 would have the most beneficial indirect effects to steelhead MIS and their habitat relative to the other alternatives. While there are negative indirect effects associated with Alternative 1, these are offset by reforestation and fuels treatments that would also occur. Taking no action would result in more negative indirect effects than all the other alternatives due to the intensity of the Stafford Fire. The project area would not recover as quickly as in Alternative 1 and would have a much more likely chance of burning again in the future versus Alternatives 3 or 4. Alternative 3 would reduce the probability of future fires impinging on the RRs of Hayfork Creek in the northern area of the project area but would leave a much larger portion of the project area fuels untreated versus Alternative 1. Alternative 4 would only salvage burned trees and over a smaller area than in Alternative 1. By leaving PE-2 and PE-3 out of Alternative 4 it is likely that there will be increased fine sediment and turbidity levels in Hayfork Creek for a longer duration of time as well as an increased probability of wildfire impinging on RRs of Hayfork Creek. In summary, Alternative 1would provide the most beneficial indirect effects while negatively impacting steelhead MIS and their habitat the least by incorporating all of the PEs. RPMs and Stafford Fire Salvage and Restoration Project MIS Report 17

18 BMPs for each of the alternatives are incorporated into the proposed action but all of the PEs work holistically and the exclusion of any of them would result in greater negative impacts to steelhead MIS and their habitat. Cumulative Effects of the Project Alternative 1: Preferred Alternative There are no expected long-term cumulative effects to habitat or populations. It is expected that habitat quality will be improved in the long-term as a result of implementation of the Project as Riparian Reserve stand vigor is improved and high fuel loading reduces the chance of wildfire. Alternative 2: No Action There are expected long-term cumulative effects to habitat or populations. It is expected that habitat quality will be degraded in the long-term as a result of taking no action. Riparian Reserve stand vigor would not be improved. High fuel loading would also still occur and the chance of wildfire would remain high.. Alternative 3: Community Protection Alternative There are expected long-term cumulative effects to habitat or populations. It is expected that habitat quality will be degraded in the long-term as a result of implementing Alternative 3. Riparian Reserve stand vigor would not be improved through reforestation. High fuel loading across much of the project area would also still occur and the chance of wildfire would remain high. Alternative 4: Timber Salvage Alternative There are expected long-term cumulative effects to habitat or populations. It is expected that habitat quality will be degraded in the long-term as a result of implementing Alternative 4. Riparian Reserve stand vigor would not be improved through reforestation. High fuel loading across much of the project area would also still occur and the chance of wildfire would remain high. MIS Viability: Over-all, implementation of Alternative 1 would have minimal effect at the site, 7 th and 5 th field watershed scales on MIS assemblages, steelhead MIS and their habitat. Alternative 1 would reduce the risk of wildfire as well as improve project area RR stand vigor. None of the other alternatives would accomplish these objectives to the extent that Alternative 1 would. Alternative 2 would not accomplish any of the objectives Eric Wiseman June 21, 2013 Fishery Biologist South Fork Management Units Shasta-Trinity National Forest Stafford Fire Salvage and Restoration Project MIS Report 18