United States Department of Agriculture. Lowell WUI Project. Decision Memo

Transcription

1 United States Department of Agriculture Lowell WUI Project Decision Memo Forest Service Nez Perce-Clearwater National Forests Lochsa-Powell and Moose Creek Ranger Districts September 2017

2 Decision Memo Lowell WUI U.S. Forest Service Lochsa-Powell and Moose Creek Ranger Districts Nez Perce-Clearwater National Forests Idaho County, Idaho Table of Contents Background and Purpose & Need... 1 Hazardous Fuels Reduction... 1 Vegetation Management... 1 Decision... 3 Project Activities... 3 Mitigation Measures/Design Features... 8 Decision Rationale Considerations Based on Collaborative Input, Interdisciplinary Project Development, and/or Scoping Extraordinary Circumstances Collaboration, Scoping and Public Involvement Collaboration Scoping & Public Involvement Tribal Government Consultation Applicable Categorical Exclusion Background Insect & Disease Infestation Categorical Exclusion Findings Related To Other Laws and Regulations National Forest Management Act Nez Perce and Clearwater Forest Plans Endangered Species Act Migratory Bird Treaty Act Wild and Scenic Rivers Act Idaho Water Quality Standards and Clean Water Act National Historic Preservation Act Environmental Justice Executive Order Administrative Review Opportunities Implementation Date Contact... 31

3 BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE & NEED The purpose of the Lowell WUI project is to reduce future tree mortality from root disease and improve resilience to insect infestation. Forest Service specialists have reviewed the area and identified root disease and insect attacks which are resulting in increased tree mortality across the area (Silviculture report, project file). The resultant fuel loadings have created conditions that can contribute to uncontrollable fire behavior (Fuels report, project file). Hazardous Fuels Reduction Purpose: Reduce hazardous fuels within designated Wildland Urban Interface lands. Need: There is a need to enhance wildfire suppression capability by reducing fuel loads and the potential for crown fire adjacent to the community of Lowell, Idaho and associated private lands and structures within close proximity to Lowell. This will increase public and firefighter safety in the event of a wildfire and minimize the risk and cost of large fires threatening resources, life and property. Above the community of Lowell, slopes have continuous forest cover from the river to the ridgetop. Insect activity has created heavy fuel loadings in many places. Besides for the Coolwater Road, there are few geographic or man-made features that would be effective in slowing or stopping fire spread. Downhill and cross-slope fire spread are common in this area, particularly at the Selway and Lochsa Rivers confluence where terrain can create strong wind eddies. In 2014 and 2015, residents were evacuated due to wildfire threat. At the present time, the Coolwater Complex fires are threatening Lowell and the Lochsa/Selway rivers near the town. Vegetation Management Purpose: Improve forest health. Need: There is a need to manage for forest vegetative conditions that are more resilient to insects, disease and fire. This can be accomplished by: (a) reducing vegetative density to allow for increased tree vitality by reducing competition; (b) focusing on a tree species mix to retain the largest, most healthy ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir and western red cedar while reducing the grand fir and smaller Douglas-fir component and (c) maintaining the more fire and disease resistant tree species on this landscape. The project encompasses approximately 166 acres of National Forest System land in the Community Protection Zone of Lowell, Idaho (Figure 3) on the Lochsa-Powell and Moose Creek Ranger Districts of the Nez Perce-Clearwater National Forests. Management Direction for the area is set by the Nez Perce Forest Plan and Clearwater Forest Plan, respectively. The residences and private properties in the community of Lowell, Idaho are surrounded by dense forested slopes. Tree mortality from insects and diseases is resulting in heavy fuel loadings conditions that can contribute to uncontrollable fire behavior. These same conditions affected fire behavior in the 2014 Johnson Bar fire which burned over 13,000 acres directly across the Selway River from the project area, the 2015 Slide and Wash fires, and the 2017 Andy s Hump fire (Coolwater Page 1 of 32

4 Complex fires) up the Selway River from the project area. The Lowell WUI project is located in Idaho County, Idaho approximately ½ mile east of the Community of Lowell, Idaho. Lowell is a Federal Register listed community at risk (Federal Register, Volume 66, Number 3, pages ). The project occurs within National Forest System lands in T 32 N, R 7 E, sections, 4 and 9, Boise Meridian. Access to the project area is via Forest Road #317 (Coolwater). A portion of the proposed project (93 acres) occurs within the Rackliff-Gedney Idaho Roadless Area (IRA). Project activities occur within the Backcountry Restoration theme of this IRA. There is no harvest proposed within the Middle Fork Clearwater Lochsa-Selway Wild and Scenic River System (WSR); however, some unit border upon and lay adjacent to the scenic corridor. This river segment within the project area is classified as recreational. Figure 1. Landscape view of Lowell WUI project area in 1934 and again in Note continuous forested conditions of current day. Page 2 of 32

5 Figure 2. Douglas-fir beetle mortality with the Lowell WUI project area. DECISION Project Activities I have decided to authorize timber harvest and associated activities to meet the purpose and need. Variable retention regeneration harvest will be implemented using a ground based loader system referred to as shovel logging (7%), helicopter (16%) and skyline/cable (77%) harvest systems Page 3 of 32

6 on approximately 166 acres (Figure 3). Harvest units will exceed 40 acres. Figure 3. Lowell WUI units including logging systems Page 4 of 32

7 The variable retention treatment prescription focuses on retaining legacy trees (trees that survived past fires, such as large ponderosa pine) as well as clumps or individual large diameter trees (Figure 4). At both the unit and landscape scale, irregular tree retention provides edge habitat for wildlife species, maintains woody debris for nutrient cycling and breaks up the visual effects of the harvest. The Forests have been utilizing this method of harvest for many years and it bears little resemblance to past clearcutting practices that left little or no structure within harvested areas. Stand exams have verified there is no old growth or step down old growth within harvest units. Figure 4. Landscape view example of variable retention harvest units on the nearby Brick Timber Sale, 2008 Page 5 of 32

8 Figure 5. Examples of retained clumps Page 6 of 32

9 Figure 6. Marked leave tree clump in Lowell WUI project Harvest units would be reforested by planting early seral species such as ponderosa pine, western larch, and western white pine (Figure 7). Activity generated fuels (slash) will be treated primarily by prescribed fire. Some excavator piling may be used in units 4B and 5 to abate the activity fuels. Hand pruning and piling of non-merchantable material may occur along the road within the project area. Page 7 of 32

10 Figure 7. Example of variable retention regeneration harvest unit that has been planted with western larch in the nearby Clear Creek drainage, approximately 15 years following harvest. Mitigation Measures/Design Features The project was designed to avoid undesirable cause-effect relationships and potential effects to resource conditions; and ensure that these projects are consistent with the Nez Perce and Clearwater National Forest Land and Resource Management Plans, including the 1995 PACFISH amendment; and all laws, regulations, and policies such as Idaho Forest Practices Act, Clean Water Act, and Idaho State Water Quality Standards (IDEQ 2017). These mitigation measures were developed from past projects, have been verified by field surveys, and will be used to limit possible adverse effects to soils, water quality, fish and wildlife habitat, scenic quality, and culturally significant areas. The following mitigation measures or design features are included in my decision: Forest Vegetation 1. The project will not harvest any verified old growth stands. Page 8 of 32

11 2. Commercial timber harvest would use variable retention regeneration silvicultural prescriptions using ground based tractor, helicopter, and skyline logging systems. 3. Harvest would strive to retain legacy trees (trees that survived the last fire event) as well as mature, healthy early seral species such as ponderosa pine, western white pine and larch (Figure 4, Figure 5, and Figure 6). 4. Harvest would retain trees per acre distributed in clumps for future snag and woody debris recruitment for soil productivity, maintenance of scenic quality values, and wildlife habitat (Figure 5). Tree retention would favor the largest and healthiest trees, as appropriate for the site (Figure 6). 5. Harvested areas would be replanted with ponderosa pine, western larch and western white pine (Figure 7). Reforestation would occur at lighter stocking rates ( trees per acre) in order to preserve fuel reduction benefits while still transitioning future forests towards more resilient tree species. 6. Activity generated fuels (slash) would be treated through prescribed fire or mechanically through mastication and/or excavator piling followed by prescribed fire. Hand pruning and piling of non-merchantable material may occur along the road within the project area. No prescribed fire ignitions would occur within riparian areas (RHCA s) however fire would be allowed to back into these areas. Heritage 7. One prehistoric/historic trail exists within the project area. A 50 buffer will be employed on either side of this trail. This mitigation measure will protect the linear site and any associated features. 8. Halt ground-disturbing activities if cultural resources are discovered until an Archaeologist can properly evaluate and document the resources in compliance with 36 CFR 800. Aquatics (Water, Fish, and Amphibians) & Soils 9. PACFISH Buffers: No-harvest buffers would be implemented in the project area (150 feet on non-fish bearing perennial, and 100 on intermittent streams and verified landslide prone areas). There are about 15 acres of modeled landslide areas. These areas will be field checked and any verified landslide prone areas will receive buffers. All vegetation and woody debris will be left intact in these areas. 10. Best Management Practices (BMPs): BMPs will be followed for all action alternatives as stipulated by the Idaho Forest Practices Act. Idaho water quality standards regulate nonpoint source pollution from timber management activities through the application of BMPs. A copy of the guide can be found at: Page 9 of 32

12 Noxious Weeds 11. Equipment will be washed of loose dirt and debris prior to entering the project area to prevent New Invader weed establishment. 12. Exposed soils on landings, skid trails, and cut slopes will be revegetated with certified weed free feed seed and using only certified weed free straw as mulch. Wildlife 13. Maintain a minimum 40-acre yearlong no-treatment buffer around recently occupied goshawk nest trees. No ground disturbing activities would be allowed inside occupied post-fledgling goshawk areas (minimum distance of 440 acres around the nest stand) around recently occupied nests from April 15 to August 15. Scenic Quality The following will be used to reduce the visual impact of the harvest areas: 14. Location of skyline corridors and skid trails will be designed to reduce short-term visual impacts. Reduce the number of skyline corridors in visually sensitive areas and select skyline systems with lateral yarding capabilities. 15. Retention of vertical structure within the harvest units and edge treatments that emulate natural openings in areas visible from critical viewpoints and travel corridors, where such mitigation does not reduce the potential to meet the purpose and need. Harvest units will be designed so that the edges of the unit emulate natural edge patterns with a minimum of geometric lines. Unit boundaries will be shaped and feathered to reduce any unnatural geometric shapes or straight edges that appear as a man-made feature on the landscape where possible. 16. Clumps of trees retained in the variable retention prescription will be grouped to emulate the existing fire mosaic vegetative patterns found in the immediate foreground viewshed of the Selway River road adjacent to the project. This viewshed now includes numerous openings caused by wildfire and insect and disease affected areas. DECISION RATIONALE Considerations Based on Collaborative Input, Interdisciplinary Project Development, and/or Scoping My decision to proceed with the removal of insect and disease infected and susceptible trees to mitigate hazardous fuel loadings in the community protection zone of Lowell incorporates feedback from community meetings, public scoping, and other collaborative participants. I have also included concerns from citizens and organizations that have not participated in the collaborative processes that we have set up. Resource concerns identified through collaborative Page 10 of 32

13 process, individual discussions and internal meetings with resource specialists were addressed through project design criteria and mitigation measures listed above. I believe my decision best addresses the purpose and need for the project while protecting forest resources, Wild and Scenic outstandingly remarkable values (ORVs), and meeting Forest Plan standards and other regulatory requirements. A number of community members requested that the project be increased in size, especially in response to the Johnson Bar fire and subsequent evacuations caused by that fire; and more recently, at the Andy s Hump fire public meeting community members requested the project be completed on-the-ground within months. During earlier collaboration meetings, some people felt that a larger fuel break was needed to protect the community. While I understand those concerns, the project was designed to reduce fuels and improve forest health in strategic areas surrounding the community. As designed, the Lowell WUI project balances community protection with other resource values in the area (Resource reports, project file). Larger scale fuel reduction and forest health issues are being addressed across the landscape of this area through implementation of the Coolwater and Fenn Face prescribed burn projects. Each of these projects, including Lowell WUI, are independent from one another and will proceed whether or not one or the other is implemented. Both the Coolwater and Fenn Face prescribed burns have remaining units to be treated when conditions allow they have objectives such as wildlife habitat improvement that are not included in the Lowell WUI project. Lowell WUI will proceed whether or not these prescribed burns have or have not been completed. Further, the Lowell WUI project compliments fuel reduction and defensible space activities taken and planned by many landowners within the community, which again, are actions independent from the Lowell WUI project but that will also assist with community protection. The treatment units take advantage of existing terrain features (creeks, ridges, roads) and are designed to facilitate successful fire suppression in the result of a fire moving towards Lowell, in much the same way that the Interface Fuels units were used to successfully defend Syringa during the Woodrat fire of An article detailing the success of the firefighting efforts and fuels reductions was reported on in New methods reduce firefighting danger, Lewiston Morning Tribune, October 12, As is evidenced by the 2014 Johnson Bar and numerous 2015 Nez Perce-Clearwater Fires, it is probable that a large wildfire event above Lowell could trigger potentially resource damaging suppression tactics that would have greater effects to the resources of the area than the 166 acres of proposed harvest activities. Fuel accumulations resulting from increased forest mortality both in and surrounding the project area are similar to those found in areas burned in the Johnson Bar, Slide, and Wash fires. The area has not had significant fire in it since the late 1800 s and the fire ecology of the area indicates that a fire is likely. Page 11 of 32

14 Figure 8. Fuel loading resulting from Douglas-fir beetle mortality. This picture was taken at Hot Point, directly across the Selway river from the Lowell WUI project area, approximately 4 weeks before being burned in the Johnson Bar fire of Modeling was conducted that shows the treatments would provide a barrier to fire spread where none exists currently. Two fire scenarios were modeled (Near Term Fire Behavior module in the Wildland Fire Decision Support System using LANDFIRE data). Figure 9 is no treatment. Figure 10 is the same fire with the proposed harvest unit treatment. Page 12 of 32

15 Figure 9. Black line indicates modeled fire perimeter with no treatment Figure 10. Same fire run with treatment units added. Blue lines indicate treatment areas, black line indicates fire perimeter modeled under same conditions as Figure 8 but with treatment areas applied. Page 13 of 32

16 Current Wildfire Activity On August 30, 2017 the Andy s Hump fire started by lightning approximately 5 miles east of Lowell. This area is of concern because it is heavily timbered and has not had fire in it since the 1880 s and is directly above Lowell. At the time of this decision, the Andy s Hump fire is over 1,500 acres and has made significant runs to the northwest and is backing down toward private residences in the Lowell area. Fuels are abnormally dry, fire behavior is high to extreme with single and group torching observed in the heavy, north face timber. Modelling predicts that the fire would reach Lowell within a week if suppression actions are not taken. There are two other fires, Old Man and Glover, which also have the potential to affect the private residences and businesses around Lowell. These fires are being managed as the Coolwater Complex. I called a Type 2 Incident Management Team in to assist the Forests due to the complexity and risks associated with such dense timber, intense burning conditions, and close proximity to a town with private residences and important commercial properties in Idaho County that does not have adequate defensible space. Fire managers have determined that the strategy with the highest probability of success and moderate risk exposure to fire fighters is to focus suppression work in the Lowell area. They have built fire lines to slow the spread of the fire and to protect residences, private properties, and commercial businesses in two of the units of the Lowell WUI project. These lines were located within the Lowell WUI units; from this project we had analysis to predict effectiveness and effects of those emergency actions (Lowell WUI project file, Glover WFDSS and Coolwater Complex Fire File). Effects of the fire and the suppression have been evaluated by affected resources and is included in the effects analysis in the project file. I met with the interdisciplinary team prior to signing this decision and heard from each resource specialist regarding impacts of the fire and suppression activities on their analysis and resource. All of them affirmed that their effects analysis would not change since the suppression lines are largely within units analyzed. Negative effects from suppression activities would also be rehabilitated (Project File Specialist Reports, Meeting Notes Sept 12, 2017). The suppression line is a short term solution to the present fires, with only a moderate probability of success, whereas the treatments in this project are a longer term solution for future events that would have a higher probability of success, less exposure to hazards for public and fire fighters, and provide more options for suppression tactics. The Coolwater Complex fires have not ended the fuels accumulation in the stands surrounding the town either therefore the need for the project still remains. Whether the trees are live or dead, the fuel hazard needs to be addressed. A public meeting for the Andy s Hump fire was held on September 8, 2017 at the Fenn Ranger Station to inform the local residents and other attendees of the current fire situation. Residents were concerned about possible evacuation notices as well as the status of the Lowell WUI project. Area residents made it clear that they wanted the Forest to be more proactive in community protection and fuels management projects. Several attendees brought up the Lowell WUI project and urged the Forest Service to complete the project as well as expressing dismay that it was not completed prior to the fire season. There was continued, broad support for this project in a recent Clearwater Basin Collaborative discussion as well. The current fires have solidified the public's interest in seeing the Forest complete the Lowell WUI project. Page 14 of 32

17 Timber harvest within the Rackliff-Gendey Idaho Roadless Area Timber harvest within the Rackliff-Gedney Idaho Roadless Area (IRA) was examined in detail with the public during the development of the project. The Idaho Roadless Rule does not preclude either activity, but rather specifically permits harvest when it is done to reduce hazardous fuel conditions within the Community Protection Zone (CPZ) and large trees are retained as appropriate to the site. The Interdisciplinary Team and Responsible Official considered several options for the IRA portion including no harvest and prescribed fire. Eliminating harvest within the IRA portion of the project would result in an incomplete and less effective treatment surrounding the community as most of the northern half of the units in Figure 9 above would not be applied and would result in less of a fire barrier to Lowell. Use of prescribed fire was eliminated from consideration because the nature and location of fuels adjacent to private property creates an unacceptable risk of escaped fire. Further, concerns over the production of smoke adjacent to the community were expressed by many of the local residents. For these reasons, timber harvest was brought forward as the proposed action. The interdisciplinary team examined use of helicopter harvest and/or temporary road construction to access unit 1. Timber values have risen to the point where helicopter yarding would be cost effective compared to building a temporary road to access the approximately 27 acres at the western end of unit 1. Temporary road construction was dropped from the proposed action. Ultimately, after considering the relevant social, ecological and economic factors I determined that in this situation, helicopter logging instead of temporary road construction is a reasonable method of implementing the proposed activities within the IRA. A previous project in this general area was of much larger scope, different design, and larger scale therefore the rationale for how that decision, from thirty years ago, may have affected roadless characteristics is not applicable to this decision. That was also well prior to the Idaho Roadless Rule. The more recent decision on the Orogrande Community Protection Project, is similar to Lowell WUI although the Orogrande project is larger, has a more open silvicultural prescription, and included a temporary road. In that decision, the Federal District Court upheld my determination of no significant impact to roadless characteristics from the commercial timber harvest in the CPZ. The Lowell WUI project is smaller, adjacent to the private residences, has more retention of forested characteristics and no temporary road and will not significantly impact roadless characteristics. Variable Retention Harvest and Visual Sensitivity Several commenters submitted scoping comments expressing concern that the proposed activities and clearcutting are not consistent with the visual character of the area. It is important to note that the term clearcut is a silvicultural term for a regeneration harvest prescription and does not necessarily constitute a treeless harvest (Figure 4, Figure 5, Figure 6, and Figure 7). As described in the project activities section above, the timber harvest would be a variable retention regeneration harvest that maintains considerably more trees, woody debris, and structure on the Page 15 of 32

18 site than what many concerned commenters or critics of the project would suggest. Silvicultural prescriptions and timber marking guides were specifically designed to address visual effects of harvest areas adjacent to the Wild and Scenic River Corridor, thus protecting and enhancing the outstandingly remarkable values of the area (Scenic Quality report, project file). The Forests are experienced with implementing visually sensitive timber harvest units within the Wild and Scenic River corridor as evidenced in the Interface Fuels project; and next to the Wild and Scenic River corridor from the Woodrat Salvage and Johnson Bar Salvage projects. Extraordinary Circumstances I find there are no extraordinary circumstances that would warrant further analysis and documentation in an EA or EIS. I took into account resource conditions identified in agency procedures that should be considered in determining whether extraordinary circumstances might exist: Federally listed threatened or endangered species or designated critical habitat, species proposed for Federal listing or proposed critical habitat, or Forest Service sensitive species Federally Listed Threatened or Endangered Species Wildlife There are no threatened or endangered species or their habitat located in the project area and therefore no effects to species would occur (Wildlife report, project file). Aquatics There are no threatened or endangered fish species within project area streams, and therefore no effects to species would occur (Aquatics report, project file). Threatened steelhead trout and bull trout occur in the Selway and Lochsa Rivers downstream from project area tributaries. No effects to the species are expected in these rivers due to PACFISH buffer retention and other design features that limit potential erosion and subsequent sediment delivery into streams. The project also complies with the 1998 Forest Plan Biological Opinion for Steelhead (Aquatics report, project file). Plants Suitable habitat does not exist for any threatened or endangered plant species within the project area (Botany report, project file). Designated Critical Habitat Wildlife There are no threatened or endangered species or their habitat located in the project area (Wildlife report, project file). Page 16 of 32

19 Aquatics Designated critical habitat for threatened steelhead trout and bull trout occur downstream from project area tributaries in the Lochsa and Selway Rivers. Designated critical habitat for fall chinook habitat occurs in the Selway River. No effects to critical habitat are expected due to PACFISH buffer retention and other design features that limit potential erosion and subsequent sediment delivery into streams or the rivers (Aquatics report, project file). Plants Suitable habitat does not exist for any threatened or endangered plant species within the project area (Botany report, project file). Species Proposed for Listing Wildlife The North American wolverine is a proposed species to be listed as threatened. There are no wolverine or their habitat located in the project area and therefore no effects to species would occur (Wildlife report, project file). In January 2016 the US Fish and Wildlife Service initiated a 12 month status review for the Northern Rockies distinct population segment of the fisher. Fisher habitat occurs in and surrounding the project area. The primary direct effects are habitat loss and project related disturbance leading to avoidance of the area by fisher. The fisher is closely associated with riparian habitats which would not harvested. Habitat outside of the riparian areas (ridgelines) is dry south facing slopes which provide poor yet suitable habitat for fisher. Unharvested riparian areas will provide corridors to ample modeled habitat outside of the project area. As a result, direct indirect and cumulative effects as a result of the project will be negligible and would not affect current population trends. I find that the effects of this project to fisher are not significant nor do they constitute an extraordinary circumstance requiring further review (Wildlife report, project file). Aquatics There are no aquatic species proposed for listing within the project area (Aquatics report, project file). Plants There are no plant species proposed for listing within the project area (Botany report, project file). Sensitive Species Wildlife More detailed descriptions and rationale of the effect determinations presented below can be found in the wildlife report in the project file. Additional species are included in the wildlife report where no habitat is present in the project area; resulting in a no impact effects determination The project may impact the following individuals or their habitat but would not likely contribute to a trend towards federal listing or cause a loss of viability to the population or species. Minor Page 17 of 32

20 habitat loss may occur for: fisher, fringed myotis, long-eared myotis, long-legged myotis, and western toads. No habitat loss is expected for bald eagle or grey wolf; however project activities may affect individuals through noise disturbance. There are no sensitive aquatic species within project area streams, and therefore no effects to species would occur (Aquatics Report, project file). Plants Sensitive plant habitat does exist for Deerfern; Pacific dogwood; Clustered ladyslipper; light hookeria; Naked stem rhizomnium; Mingan moonwort; Lance-leaf moonwort; Northern moonwort; Green bug-on-a-stick and Constance s bittercress within the project area, however none of these species were discovered during field surveys of the project area (Botany report, project file). Flood plains, wetlands, or municipal watersheds There are no extraordinary circumstances associated with the Lowell WUI project because the project is not located within a municipal watershed. Wetlands and floodplains within the project area will not be disturbed and will be sufficiently protected by the design features. Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be followed for the Lowell WUI project as stipulated by the Idaho Forest Practices Act. Idaho water quality standards regulate non-point source pollution from timber management and road reconstruction activities through the application of BMPs. The Clearwater National Forest has an excellent record of successful implementation of BMPs. Between 1990 and 2013, the Forest had a BMP implementation and effectiveness rate of 99% (Connor and Snyder 2016). Many of these reports can be found on the Forests; webpage at: 39). The same BMPs would be applied to the Lowell WUI project and are expected to have similar results (Aquatics report, project file). All management activities since 1995 implemented PACFISH RHCAs and Best Management Practices in order to eliminate or reduce impacts to riparian areas and streams. Various field reviews and monitoring activities on the Clearwater NF have shown a recovery trend forest-wide from past management practices. Suspended sediment concentrations have overall tended to be less in the 2000s and the 1990s than in the 1980s. Much of the recovery has resulted from less land disturbing activities, better application of BMPs, RHCAs, and better road location and design (CNF, 2008; pg. 91). Preliminary monitoring results from the PACFISH/INFISH Biological Opinion (PIBO) monitoring across the Upper Columbia River Basin also indicate improving trends. Improvements have been noted in pool depth, bank stability, large wood frequency and volume, and spawning substrate (<3 diameter) presence (USDA, 2012). Congressionally designated areas such as wilderness, wilderness study areas, or national recreation areas There is no harvest within the Middle Fork Clearwater Lochsa-Selway Wild and Scenic River Page 18 of 32

21 System (WSR). Portions of proposed harvest border upon and lay adjacent to and/or are visible from the designated boundaries of the Middle Fork Clearwater Lochsa-Selway Wild and Scenic River corridor (Scenic Quality report). The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act requires that the designated river be managed to protect and enhance its free-flowing, water quality, and the outstandingly remarkable values (ORVs). The ORVs of the Middle Fork Clearwater River are stated in the Middle Fork River Resource Assessment and Lochsa River Resource Assessment (both February 14, 2002) as Scenery, Recreation, Fish, Water Quality, Wildlife, Vegetation/Botany, Prehistory, History, and Traditional Use, Cultural. Lowell WUI resource reports evaluate the effects to the ORVs identified above and document that no harvest activities will take place within the designated Middle Fork Clearwater River Wild and Scenic corridor. Although there will be project activities that border upon, or lay adjacent to the designated corridor that will be visible from within the Wild and Scenic boundary, this project will serve to protect and enhance the values for which this river was included in the Wild and Scenic River System. The proposed action will not unreasonably diminish the scenic, recreational, fish or wildlife values and will protect and enhance the ORVs as a result of the proposed activities (Project Design Features and no effects as documented in this Decision Memo and in corresponding resource reports). The Lowell WUI project will have no adverse effect on the conditions of free-flow or on the ORVs in the Middle Fork Clearwater Wild and Scenic River. Scenery: Design measures to reduce the visual impact of the harvest would be used to maintain the landscape character in the area. The vegetation will have a more open appearance, but it will emulate the open character of the hillside in this section of the Wild and Scenic River, so that the man-made openings will appear similar natural openings in the corridor. The harvesting in the Partial Retention area will be visible but will not dominate the landscape character of the Selway and Lochsa River corridors (Scenic Quality specialist report). Recreation: The action alternative is consistent with the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act as it would have negligible effects to recreation on the Selway River or Lochsa River. Recreation attractions and activities occurring on lands adjacent to the corridor would be protected through design features and BMP implementation; thus protecting and enhancing the outstandingly remarkable value of recreation. Fish: There are no threatened or sensitive fish species in the project area; however they do occur in the Lochsa and Selway Rivers. No effects to these species or measurable water quality effects are expected due to PACFISH buffer retention, therefore there would be no effects the Fish ORV in either the Lochsa or Selway Rivers. The Fish ORV will therefore be protected and enhanced (Aquatics report, project file). Water Quality: The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act has found that the water quality of the Lochsa and Selway Rivers are exceptional and provides a variety of beneficial uses. There are no dams in these Rivers and all water is free flowing. The Lochsa and Selway Rivers provide exceptionally clear and clean water, where the primary impacts to water quality are sedimentation resulting from natural events such as landslides and fire. No project activities that will directly alter within-channel conditions or existing hydrologic or biologic processes are proposed within the Wild and Scenic River corridor. There are no treatments proposed that will alter riparian or floodplain areas of the Lochsa or Selway Wild and Scenic River corridors. Both the location of proposed project activities and the design of implementation will limit sedimentation into project area streams and the low levels of sedimentation will not degrade Page 19 of 32

22 water quality at the site-scale. Sedimentation into headwater tributaries at the site scale, will not impact water quality of the Lochsa and Selway Rivers (Watershed report, project file). Wildlife: The Lowell WUI project will comply with the criteria for the Wildlife ORV because there is no harvest activities that will occur within the corridor and those activities that border the corridor will either improve forage opportunities for elk, mountain lion, and black bear; or will not affect habitat for the duck, salamander, or otter. This project will protect and enhance the Wildlife ORV (Wildlife report, project file). Vegetation: The vegetation outstanding and remarkable values of the project area are for the coastal disjunct species of the northern aspects across the river from the Lowell WUI project area. The action alternative would promote early seral species. Reserve trees would be left to protect wild and scenic visuals. Reserve trees would be intermixed with younger trees from reforestation to maintain a forested cover. Reforestation would enhance the corridor in a condition that is more resilient to the agents of change. The Lowell WUI project area is located on drier aspects with an understory that is dominated by ninebark, wild rose and ocean spray. Ninebark is a fire-adapted species that would be resilient to wildfire; the project would maintain ninebark, wild rose and ocean spray on the landscape, while increasing fire adapted tree species; thus protecting and enhancing the vegetation ORV (Silviculture report, project file). Prehistory/History/Traditional Use, Cultural: There is one known NRHP unevaluated cultural resource site located within harvest units. Mitigation measures have been developed in consultation with the Idaho State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) in order to protect this site. Project design features would protect any that are found during project implementation. The Nez Perce Tribe has provided no subsequent information about their traditional uses or use sites along the Selway and Lochsa Rivers in relation the Lowell WUI project area. The outstanding remarkable values (ORV) for prehistory, history, and traditional use, cultural will be protected and enhanced (Heritage report, project file). Inventoried roadless areas or potential wilderness areas Approximately 93 acres of timber harvest will take place in the Rackliff-Gedney Idaho Roadless Area (IRA). As discussed in the Decision Rationale section above and Roadless report in the project file, timber harvest is a permitted activity within Backcountry Restoration themed IRA s where they occur within community protection zones (36 CFR (c)(1)(i)). The project would affect approximately 0.1% of the greater roadless expanse and occur in the already developed boundary area of the IRA. Project activities authorized by this decision are a discrete, one time activity within a community protection zone and within a half mile of a Federal Register listed Community-at-Risk. There are no other Federal Register listed communities adjacent to or near the Rackliff-Gedney IRA and thus this decision does not set a precedent capable of replication that would lead to the incremental development of the Rackliff-Gedney IRA. Fuel reduction activities within community protection zones were analyzed as part of the Idaho Roadless Rule FEIS and Final Record of Decision and are incorporated by reference. The current fireline for the Andy s Hump fire is within a portion of this IRA. Further, the decision does not preclude future wilderness designation of the Rackliff-Gedney IRA because project activities are concentrated along the already developed boundary areas and existing road and will have no effect to the wilderness characteristics where they do occur to the north and east Page 20 of 32

23 (Roadless report, project file). I find that there are no potential significant effects due to the design, location, scope and scale of the project. For these reasons, I find that the inclusion of 93 acres of harvest within the Rackliff-Gedney IRA does not constitute an extraordinary circumstance. Research natural areas There are no research natural areas present in the Lowell WUI project area. American Indians and Alaska Native religious or cultural sites There is one Native American culture resource site within the project area. Cultural sites are discussed below and avoidance is included in the mitigation measures. Consultation with the Nez Perce Tribe occurred throughout the development of the project. Archaeological sites, or historic properties or areas Cultural resources are known to be located within the project area and these sites will be excluded from treatment areas, thus avoiding effects to these resources. The Idaho State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) reviewed the project and concurred with the determination of no adverse effect to cultural resources. Mitigation measures are sufficient to protect the site and any associated features and therefore the presence of these resources does not constitute an extraordinary circumstance. COLLABORATION, SCOPING AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Collaboration The Lowell WUI project is within and part of the greater Selway-Middle Fork Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Project landscape. Project activities would carry out activities that support the objectives of the Selway Middle Fork CFLR Proposal, selected in During the development of the Lowell WUI project, The Forests involved multiple interested persons representing diverse interests. Community meetings were well advertised, open to the public, transparent and non-exclusive as required by the Healthy Forest Restoration Act, Section 603(b)(1)(C)(i) and (ii)(i). This project was first introduced at a community meeting held at the Fenn Ranger Station on May 22nd, Approximately 15 community members attended and were supportive of the project. Several even requested that the project size be increased. An additional community meeting to discuss the project was held on Sept 3rd, Approximately 20 people attended and again expressed support for the project. The Forests published a news release on September 9, 2014 announcing another community meeting on September 17 th, 2014 to discuss the proposal and solicit input towards the project. Approximately 15 people attended. The Forests gave a power point presentation about the project and answered questions and Page 21 of 32

24 received comments towards the proposal. There were no issues or concerns brought up at the meeting and everyone in attendance was supportive of the project. A final meeting was held on July 15 th, 2015 to discuss changes to the proposed project. In addition to the Community meetings, the Forests sponsored a field trip to the proposed project area with the Clearwater Basin Collaborative (CBC) on June 18 th, Forests staff have kept the CBC updated on the Lowell WUI project at landscape health subcommittee meetings, including just this month. This project was also brought up in a recent public meeting on the Andy s Hump fire wherein residents requested that the Forest continue with the project and, indeed, were disappointed that it had not been completed already. The project has also been presented to the Idaho Roadless Commission (IRC) since November 7, The IRC agreed that this project falls into the most permissive part of the Idaho Roadless Rule, as the project will harvest in the Rackliff-Gedney Backcountry Restoration themed roadless area. The IRC is supportive of the Lowell WUI project and is also is interested in developing standards across property lines where similar projects on private property adjacent to this project are encouraged. Scoping & Public Involvement This action was originally listed as a proposal on the July 2014 Nez Perce National Forest Schedule of Proposed Actions and updated periodically during the analysis. The Legal Notice was published in the Lewiston Morning Tribune and scoping period initiated on October 1, A scoping letter was sent to individuals, state and county agencies, organizations and the Nez Perce Tribe. Eleven comment letters were received from individuals, including some local to the Lowell area, industry, state agencies, Idaho County, and organizations. Additional collaborative input, discussed above, was received during open houses and community meetings held at the Fenn Ranger Station (see above). Forests staff have informed various interested individuals with project status during the completion of this decision memo. Tribal Government Consultation Legal and Regulatory Framework Trust responsibility arise from the United States' unique legal relationship with Indian tribes. It derives from the Federal Government's consistent promise, in the treaties that it signed, to protect the safety and well-being of the Indian tribes and tribal members. The Federal Indian trust responsibility is now defined as a legally enforceable fiduciary obligation, on the part of the United States, to protect tribal lands, assets, resources, and reserved rights, as well as a duty to carry out the mandates of federal law with respect to American Indian and Alaska Native tribes. This responsibility requires that the Federal Government consider the best interests of the Indian tribes in its dealings with them and when taking actions that may affect them. The trust responsibility includes protection of the sovereignty of each tribal government (FSM b 2). The Forest Service best serves the Federal Government s trust responsibility by: Page 22 of 32

25 Ensuring Forest Service actions never diminish the rights of Indian tribes and tribal members; Ensuring Forest Service program benefits reach Indian tribes and tribal communities; Observing and enforcing all laws enacted for the protection of tribal cultural interests; Observing the principles of consultation whenever our policies, decisions, or other actions have tribal implications; and Treating NFS resources as trust resources where tribal legal rights exist. American Indian tribes are afforded special rights under various federal statutes: National Historic Preservation Act; NFMA; Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979; Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990; Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (PL ); and the American Indian Religious Freedom Act of Federal guidelines direct federal agencies to consult with tribal representatives who may have concerns about federal actions that may affect religious practices, other traditional cultural uses, or cultural resource sites and remains associated with tribal ancestors. Any tribe whose aboriginal territory occurs within a project area is afforded the opportunity to voice concerns for issues governed by National Historic Preservation Act, Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, or American Indian Religious Freedom Act. Executive Order Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments; Executive Memo, April 29, 1994 Government-to-Government Relationship; and Executive Memo, September 23, 2004, Government-to-Government Relationship recognize the unique legal relationship between the United States and Indian tribal governments and also direct Federal agencies to have a process to ensure meaningful and timely input by tribal officials. The Lowell WUI project area is located within ceded lands of the Nez Perce Tribe. These ceded lands are federal lands within the historic aboriginal territory of the Nez Perce Tribe which have been ceded to the United States. In Article 3 of the Nez Perce Treaty of 1855, the United States of America and the Nez Perce Tribe mutually agreed that the Nez Perce retain the following rights: taking fish at all usual and accustomed places in common with citizens of the Territory [of Idaho]; and of creating temporary buildings for curing, together with the privilege of hunting, gathering roots and berries, and pasturing horses and cattle Tribal Coordination and Government-to-Government Consultation on this Project The Nez Perce-Clearwater National Forests is committed to fulfilling the Forest Service s trust responsibilities to Native Americans, to honoring rights reserved in the Nez Perce Treaty of 1855, and to strengthening the Forests government-to-government relationship with the Nez Perce Tribe. The Forest Service manages and provides access to ecosystems that support Tribal traditional practices. The Lowell WUI project will maintain and/or enhance these opportunities over the long term by repairing roads, providing for safe travel, and enhancing big game wildlife habitat. In order to ensure early and frequent opportunities for meaningful and timely input by Tribal officials, Forest Service staff began the first formal staff meeting to introduce proposed projects was held communicating with Nez Perce Tribal staff on November 3, As part of the Page 23 of 32

26 collaboration, scoping, and consultation process, the agency presented this proposal to Nez Perce Tribal staff members for comment and discussion on November 3, 2014 and January 22, Additional discussions about the project occurred at the regular quarterly meeting on March 16, 2015 and October 16, On October 1, 2014 I sent a scoping letter to the Nez Perce Tribe and interested public to advertise a 30-day comment period on the proposed action. Although no comments were received in response to scoping, Forests staff kept the Tribal staff informed at the quarterly staff to staff meetings. Nez Perce Tribe staffs asked us to pay particular attention to controlling noxious weed species. Mitigation measures includes features to address noxious weeds. The Lowell WUI project area is in elk winter range so there are no elk analysis units affected by project activities. Resource analysis determined there were no long-term negative impacts on the aquatic and terrestrial species of concern to the Tribe based on conversations from project across the Forests; there would be no negative long-term impacts on treaty-reserved rights. Likewise, any benefits to these resources would be benefits to treaty-reserved rights. The overall result of the project in favoring forested vegetation species that are more resilient and resistant to disturbance such as insects, disease, wildfire, and climate change will benefit treaty-reserved rights. The Nez Perce Tribe did not request formal government-to-government consultation and this has not been a subject of discussion in formal or informal conversations with NPTEC. The staff coordination and subsequent modifications to the project fulfill my obligations of working with the Nez Perce Tribe as a sovereign nation. The cultural resource surveys have been completed for the Lowell WUI project area and has been submitted to the Idaho State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). Concurrence was received on April 3, APPLICABLE CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION Background Section 8204 of the Agriculture Act of 2014 (Public Law ) (also referred to as Farm Bill) amended Title VI of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 (HFRA) (16 U.S.C et seq.) to add Sections 602 and 603 to address qualifying insect and disease infestations on National Forest System lands. The Secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture delegated authority to implement the provisions of the Farm Bill to the Chief of the Forest Service on March 6, Section 602 provides, in part, the opportunity for Governors to request designation to areas in their State that are experiencing, or at risk of, an insect or disease epidemic. The Forest Service received letters from 35 states requesting designations. These requests were reviewed to ensure they met at least one of the following eligibility criteria outlined in the Farm Bill: experiencing forest health decline based on annual forest health surveys; at risk of experiencing substantially increased tree mortality based on the most recent Forest Health Protection Insect and Disease Risk Map; or contains hazard trees that pose an imminent risk to public infrastructure, health, or safety. Upon reviewing the States requests, the Chief designated approximately 45.6 million acres of Page 24 of 32