Logo Department Name Agency Organization Organization Address Information Petersburg Ranger District P.O. Box 1328 Agriculture

Transcription

1 Logo Department Name Agency Organization Organization Address Information United States Forest Tongass National Forest Petersburg Ranger District Department of Service Alaska Region P.O. Box 1328 Agriculture Petersburg, AK File Code: 1950 Date: August 30, 2016 PUBLIC SCOPING LETTER SOUTH FORK SAGINAW CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT Introduction The Petersburg Ranger District of the Tongass National Forest proposes implementing instream and riparian restoration on approximately 0.6 miles of South Fork Saginaw Creek and up to 0.4 miles of Shorty Creek, a medium-sized tributary to Rowan Creek on Kuiu Island. These streams support populations of pink salmon (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha), chum salmon (O. keta), coho salmon (O. kitsuch), steelhead (O. mykiss), coastal cutthroat trout (O. clarki clarki), and Dolly Varden char (Salvolinus malma). Project Area Restoration Site The South Fork Saginaw Creek Restoration project area is located on the northern portion of Kuiu Island, approximately 12 air miles southeast from the town of Kake and 39 miles northwest of Petersburg, Alaska. The project area includes the instream and floodplain restoration areas, as well as the wood collection and access areas for both streams (Figure 1; Figure 2; Figure 3). South Fork Saginaw Creek is located within the 8,386-acre 6 th HUC Saginaw Creek watershed (# ), and Shorty Creek is within the 13,543-acre 6 th HUC Rowan Bay watershed (# ). These areas are managed according to prescriptions defined for the Timber Production Land Use Designation (LUD) in the Forest Plan (USDA Forest Service 2008). Wood collection for South Fork Saginaw Creek would occur adjacent to the stream within the young-growth stand to the east, while wood for Shorty Creek would be sourced a short distance north of the stream site, along roads FS 6402 and FS (Figure 1; Figure 2; Figure 3). Caring for the Land and Serving People Printed on Recycled Paper

2 Figure 1. South Fork Saginaw Creek vicinity map. 2

3 Figure 2. Shorty Creek vicinity map 3

4 Figure 3. Shorty Creek restoration sites and access location 4

5 5 Wood Collection The wood necessary to complete this project includes whole trees with rootwads still attached, cut logs, and cull wood (slash, pieces left on the ground or low value trees from previously harvested timber units). Whole trees would be harvested according to guidelines established for similar projects in which excavators are used to push targeted trees over in order to maintain the rootwad (Landwehr 2009). Trees with rootwads still attached have many benefits when used for instream restoration, primarily by increasing structure stability, but also result in improved pool formation, cover, and bank stability due to the greater surface area provided by the root fan. Wood collection for the South Fork Saginaw Creek site would occur within the young-growth stand adjacent to the stream on the east bank (Figure 1). This stand was harvested in 1970 and has trees of sufficient size for use in building instream structures. Approximately 250 whole trees (rootwads attached), equivalent to approximately 136 MBF (thousand board feet) would be sourced primarily from the Riparian Management Area (RMA). A silvicultural prescription would be developed for thinning the RMA to a wider spacing more typical of old-growth stand conditions, while promoting growth of the largest trees within the RMA. The trees removed from the RMA would be used either for building instream structures or as puncheon material for heavy equipment access trails. In locations along the stream where sufficiently large younggrowth trees are not available within the RMA under the conditions of the prescription, trees would be sourced in the same stand outside the RMA, within future timber harvest units further upslope from the stream. Sourcing wood from the proposed stand would be less expensive, result in a smaller environmental footprint by minimizing transport distance onsite and within the stream, and benefit floodplain condition in the long-term by growing large trees faster as a result of thinning. These large floodplain trees will ultimately be the source of material providing habitat benefits to the stream and floodplain as they die and are recruited into these environments. Wood collection for the Shorty Creek site would occur in stands adjacent to roads FS 6402 and FS (Figure 2). These stands are located in the Timber Production LUD and were eliminated as potential timber harvest units in future sales since they are comprised primarily of low value, high-defect hemlock. Approximately 200 trees (~ 109 MBF) would be harvested from these locations and would be a combination of cut logs and whole trees. Most of these trees would be harvested from the road prism in these locations. If other sources of nearby wood becomes available (e.g. cull wood from a nearby harvest unit) these sources would be considered for use in this project. The goals and objectives for the particular Land Use Designation (LUD) in which the wood is located would be met, the Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines for resource protection would be applied, and the Project Design Features (see section below) for wood collection activities would be implemented.

6 6 Table 1. Anticipated location of wood collection for the South Fork Saginaw Creek Restoration project Watershed 6 th HUC# / Name LUD Wood Description Location # / Saginaw Creek Timber Production Young-growth / Whole tree Young-growth stand adjacent to South Fork Saginaw Creek # / Rowan Bay Site Access Timber Production Old-Growth / Low value, high-defect / Cut logs & whole tree ~ 0.5 miles (Road FS 6402) & 1.8 miles (FS 46094) north of Shorty Creek on FS 6402 Both streams would be accessed using old, closed temporary roads. The access on South Fork Saginaw Creek is an old spur road constructed of shot-rock during the original harvest in The spur begins on road FS 6413 and ends at the stream where an old bridge was removed, then continues on the opposite (east) bank and roughly parallels Stone Creek (Figure 1). This would be the primary access for heavy equipment to the stream. The young-growth trees required to build structures within the South Fork Saginaw reach would be accessed using constructed puncheon trails, primarily from the stream corridor, but also from the spur road paralleling Stone Creek. The portion of Shorty Creek downstream of the existing bridge on road FS 6402 would also be accessed using an old spur trail, constructed during the original harvest in A short (approximately 200 feet) puncheon trail would be constructed for access from the end of the spur to the stream. The portion of Shorty Creek upstream of the bridge would be accessed from the bridge site to the stream, using the old shot-rock surface created during bridge construction. All upstream sites would be accessed via the stream channel. Need for the Proposal The riparian areas of a number of streams on Kuiu Island were harvested in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, prior to the 1990 Tongass Timber Reform Act (TTRA), which subsequently provided stream buffer protection for all fish-bearing streams. A recent national Watershed Condition Framework assessment categorized the Saginaw Creek watershed as functioning at risk (USDA Forest Service 2011). The Tongass National Forest identified this as a priority restoration watershed in 2011 based on current habitat conditions, known management history, and status as a salmon and steelhead producer. Watershed conditions indicators associated with the national assessment highlighted concerns for long-term health and function of aquatic and riparian habitat in this watershed. Relatively high harvest levels in the past (29 percent cumulative), as well as RMAs harvested to the streambanks (about 6 percent) prior to the TTRA were primarily responsible for this rating. In 2014, a large-scale restoration project was implemented along approximately 1.5 miles of West Fork Saginaw and Mainstem Saginaw Creeks. While South Fork Saginaw Creek has a similar harvest history, restoration has not yet occurred along this reach.

7 7 Rowan Bay, the watershed in which Shorty Creek is located, was not identified as a Tongass priority watershed. However, specific stream restoration sites are found both within and outside of these watersheds. Shorty Creek would be considered a medium-scale restoration project on a site with degraded habitat resulting from previous riparian harvest. The negative effects of removing large wood from streams are well-known, and scientific literature continues to highlight the benefits of wood within streams and floodplains. Large wood helps stabilize and regulate the storage and routing of sediment, particulate organic matter and nutrients; improves water quality by stabilizing streambanks; dampens high flow events by providing structure within the floodplain; regulates water temperature by increasing residence time and exchange with hyporheic flow (surface/groundwater mixing); creates deep pools thereby maintaining rearing and overwintering habitats fish use for cover and overwintering; and increases the biotic diversity of a system by serving as substrate for aquatic insect production (Bryant 1983; Bilby 1984; Bilby and Ward 1989; Murphy and Meehan 1991; Jones et al. 2014). Restoration projects which add large wood to streams have shown improved physical habitat characteristics such as favorable changes in substrate, increased pools, cover and habitat complexity (Carah et al. 2014; Roni et al. 2015). Additionally, most studies on the response of salmonids to wood additions have shown an increase in fish numbers following wood placement (Roni et al. 2015). Other studies have shown increases in overwintering rearing capacity for juvenile coho, and that breeding site selection is strongly influenced by proximity to pool-tail crests and deeper water (Clark et al. 2014; Jones et al. 2014; Roni and Quinn 2001; Roni et al. 2015). This project focuses on restoring processes that improve watershed function and long-term health, and is consistent with management direction for the Timber Production LUD in which the project area is located by applying Fish, Riparian, and Soil & Water Standards and Guidelines, among others. One of the primary objectives of these Standards and Guidelines is to Maintain riparian areas in mostly natural conditions for fish, other aquatic life, old-growth and riparianassociated plant and wildlife species, water-related recreation, and provide for ecosystem processes, including important aquatic and land interactions (USDA Forest Service 2008). Preliminary Alternatives Alternative 1 No Action Under the No Action alternative, no trees would be harvested for the remediation of the project area, structures would not be installed in the stream channels, and large wood would not be placed within the floodplain. Stream habitat condition would decline with time as the existing legacy wood in the streams decays and / or mobilizes downstream without a natural source of replacement within the floodplains. As a result of the loss of quality spawning and rearing habitat, fish production would decline within these reaches. Replacement of a natural source of wood recruitment would take many decades, and habitat quality would remain diminished. Nearby management activities including harvest of the nearby young-growth stands would continue as these stands become viable. Forest Service spur roads 6413_0.123L and 6402_12.91R would remain closed until needed for management of the young-growth stands adjacent to these roads, at which time they would be reconstructed.

8 8 Alternative 2 - Proposed Action Alternative 2 proposes the following activities: Harvest and stockpile approximately 450 trees for use in restoring portions of two streams and their floodplain (Figure 1; Figure 2). Wood would include cut logs and whole trees with rootwads attached. The young-growth stand adjacent to South Fork Saginaw would be used for building structures in that stream, while the majority of the old-growth wood used on Shorty Creek would be considered high defect, low value hemlock and would be sourced from roadside locations approximately miles north of the site (Figure 2). Trees would be stockpiled temporarily prior to implementation along open portions of the access roads near the project sites (Figure 1; Figure 2). Whole trees would be harvested according to guidelines established for similar projects (Landwehr 2009). Trees intended for stream placement would be sound and free of rot to maximize longevity. Road maintenance commensurate with impacts from wood collection activities would occur as part of the restoration contract. Construct temporary puncheon trails to access the young-growth stand adjacent to South Fork Saginaw Creek for wood sourcing. Construct a short puncheon trail to access instream restoration sites on Shorty Creek. Trails would be constructed by removing a small number of young-growth conifer and alder trees, and placing these trees in front of a machine to minimize soil disturbance. These trails would be wide enough to accommodate the tracks of an excavator and facilitate the transport of cut trees and rootwads needed for the project (approximately 30 feet wide). An estimated 1.0 acres is expected to be cleared during creation of these access puncheon trails. Trees and other native material along the access route would be used as puncheon to minimize potential damage to the floodplain resulting from excavator passage (Figure 1; Figure 3). Puncheon trails would be rehabilitated, with puncheon material decompacted and scattered once instream structures are placed and access is no longer needed. No rocked roads would be constructed for this project. Restore and stabilize anadromous and resident fish habitat by building wood structures in the active channels of approximately 0.6 miles of South Fork Saginaw Creek and 0.4 miles of Shorty Creek (Figure 1; Figure 3). Approximately 21 structures would be built; 9 in South Fork Saginaw Creek and 12 in Shorty Creek. The purpose of the structures would vary by site, but includes pool creation, bank stabilization, side-channel activation, floodplain connection, and improved channel width-to-depth ratio compared to reference conditions. No cable, rebar, or cement would be used in the construction of structures. Improve floodplain condition by adding logs and whole trees with rootwads attached to the floodplain. If available, a helicopter may be used for staging wood in close proximity to restoration sites and for floodplain placements. Helicopter use would minimize site disturbance. If a helicopter is unavailable, heavy equipment would be used for all transport and placement. Wood placed in the floodplain would improve resilience during flood events by providing structure (roughness), and would provide a stable medium for future conifer growth. By adding large trees and logs to the stream channels and floodplain as described, this alternative would create or maintain quality pools used for cover, feeding, and thermal refugia by salmonids; strategic placements of wood would improve spawning and rearing habitat by metering and sorting sediment and providing access to the floodplain and side channels; and

9 9 floodplain condition would be improved through wood placements which would act as nurse logs for future conifer growth and provide roughness during flooding. The long-term goal of this project is to provide these streams with a dynamic stability through time with placements of large logs and whole trees. The project would provide enough wood for a long enough period of time to enable the trees within the previously-harvested floodplain to naturally recruit into these streams, providing the benefits of wood as described. What are your thoughts about this project? Your input and ideas are important in designing and completing the South Fork Saginaw Creek Restoration project. They will help the interdisciplinary team identify issues important to the public and design a proposed action and alternatives to address issues and concerns. Please your comments to comments-alaska-tongass-petersburg@fs.fed.us with South Fork Saginaw Creek Restoration in the subject line. Comments can also be faxed ( ) or mailed to David Zimmerman, District Ranger, PO Box 1328, Petersburg, AK Please submit your comments within 30 calendar days following the publication of the Opportunity to Comment notice in the Petersburg Pilot for this process. The expected publication date for the notice is September 1, For more information about the project, you can contact Heath Whitacre at (907) or hwhitacre@fs.fed.us. We look forward to your participation. Your input and ideas will help ensure a successful assessment. Sincerely, DAVID ZIMMERMAN District Ranger