Grouse Flat Fire Salvage and Reforestation Project CE

Transcription

1 Grouse Flat Fire Salvage and Reforestation Project CE Soils Specialist Report Umatilla National Forest 2016 Pomeroy Ranger District James G. Archuleta 03/14/2016 Name Date James G Archuleta Forest Soil Scientist

2 Project Area Location The Grouse Flat Fire Salvage and Reforestation Project lies within the Lower Crooked Creek, Bear Creek-Hunt Spring, and the Dry Gulch-Wenaha subwatersheds. The Wenaha Watershed is dissected by the Washington/Oregon border and is part of the Lower Grande Ronde Sub-Basin. Crooked Creek flows into the Wenaha River and then into the Grande Ronde River in Oregon. Streams that flow through the project area are intermittent. Legal Location: Township 6N - Ranges 42E Watersheds: Wenaha River watershed Crooked Creek subwatershed Mapped Soils within the Project Area Soils develop based on the five soil forming factors of Climate, Time, Organisms (Biology), Topography and Parent Material (Geology). When we look at the Grouse Flats area of the newly mapped Blue Mountain Terrestrial Ecosystem Unit Inventory (TEUI) 1, soils mapped offer a picture of soil development for the area. The soils are defined in taxonomic context, then grouped in commonly occurring Mapping Units (MU) of either, complexes (3 or more series), associations (2 series) or consociation (individual series); to simplify the resulting map. By then evaluating the taxonomic names of these soils, we can determine what kinds of environments developed to express the resulting landscapes we see today. Within the project area we see there are three kinds of soil orders defined by the TEUI; Andisol, Entisol and Mollisol. Table 1. Soil orders and developmental conditions within the Grouse Flats area. Soil Order Andisol Entisol Mollisol Kinds of Soil Orders found within Grouse Flats Units Developed by Characterizing features High presence of volcanic particles Volcanic deposits on many ecosystem (by percent) types (forest or grass land) Concave surfaces toe slopes or other Poor Soil Development depositional areas Most commonly grassland or forest Fish and Aquatic Life growing on a concave surface 1 Umatilla NF is in unpublished draft

3 When we look at the soil orders present with the Grouse Flats area, the expected soil orders for forested environments are Andisol and Entisols. The most surprising issue is the presence and distribution of Mollisol soils on the broad forested flat topography. While it is possible for Mollisol to form under forest, Mollisols typically develop under forest when topography (concave surfaces) allow for organic accumulations to form high base saturation (>50%) in the soil (Brady, 1999). So both the base saturation of these soils and their flat topography tend to indicate the areas Mollisol were formed under a grass dominated ecosystem. The indication of a grass dominated development for these soils may be an indication of a droughty site; and should be considered for replant to be ion a very wide spacing. Figure 1. Soil Orders Mapped within the Grouse Flats Area Within the project the soil surveys were also examined for a presence of soil with low bearing strength (smectitic minerals or wet soils) or those with high organic content. None of the proposed units were mapped with these properties. Additionally, no soil mapping indicated a condition that may accelerate slope instability, from proposed activities. Soil Conditions within Project Units The presence of system roads and assumed trails were observed within some of the proposed units (units 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 13). Area estimates of DSCs were determined

4 for each unit based on these observations and assumed DSC created by activity methods (Ground Based Harvest 10% and Fire 1%). Table 1 DSC within Proposed Activity Units Unit System Road (ft.) Assumed Trail (ft.) Estimated existing DSC acres (FS Road or existing trail) 2 Unit Acres % DSC within activity area % DSC estimated by proposed activity (=existing + proposed) % 12.9% % 13.8% % 11.0% % 14.0% % 11.0% % 12.5% % 12.9% % 12.5% % 11.3% % 11.0% % 11.0% % 11.0% % 11.3% Grouse Flats Fire Salvage and Reforestation Project-Best Management Practices The practices that the Forest Service uses to maintain soil quality are called Best Management Practices (BMPs). The goal of BMP use is to avoid, minimize, or mitigate impacts to meet soil quality objectives. These BMPs are also used to help ensure that the soil resource can be harvested in a sustainable manner. The 2012 National Core BMP technical guide is located at pdf (project file). 2 Road widths are assumed to be 16ft; trail widths are assumed to be 12ft to estimate acres. 3 Ground based activity is estimated to increase DSC by 11%; 10% for harvest 1% for Fuels treatments.

5 Project Description The purpose and need for the Grouse Flat Fire Salvage and Reforestation Project is to salvage fire-killed and fire-injured trees resulting from the Grizzly Bear Complex fire. Burning at varying intensities, the Grizzly Fire resulted in creating a mosaic of low, moderate, and high tree mortality. Similarly the Soil Burn Severity of the Grizzly Fire burned in a mosaic pattern. Approximately 900 acres of potentially salvageable ground have been identified. Fire-killed and fire-injured trees would be removed on approximately 250 acres within the project area. Should the tree be within 150 feet of a road that is maintenance level 2 or 3, and meets the danger tree guidelines, it would be removed for public and employee safety reasons. All harvest units would be yarded by conventional logging systems. Existing landings and/or constructed landings will be used. Danger trees which could affect these landings will be removed. There will not be a need to construct any new system roads for this project. Existing system roads will be used and maintained for material hauling and access to the project. Old skid trails will be used in conjunction with temporary roads during the skidding process. Temporary roads used for this project would be obliterated after their use (LRMP Umatilla NF). Project Effects The 2015 Grizzly fire burned over 83,000 acres on the Walla Walla and Pomeroy Ranger Districts. Most of those acres are within the Wenaha-Tucannon Wilderness. Table 2 Resource Indicators and Measures for Grouse Flats Units Resource Element Resource Indicator Measure Acres 1. Soil Stability Soil Mass Wasting No active areas identified Soil Productivity Erosion Activity unit acres modeled >0.03t/ac Water quantity Sediment Activity units that may produce >0.03t/ac Detrimental Soil Conditions (DSC) Change or absence in vegetation growth Total Disturbance 26.5 Approximately 16,000 acres burned outside of the Wilderness, with around 900 acres on the Pomeroy Ranger District which is the planning area for the Grouse Flat Savage and Reforestation project area. Soil Stability (Mass Movement)

6 The presence of inherent soil instability which may be accelerated by proposed activates were not detected. It is therefore assumed this project will not contribute to slope failures. Soil Productivity (Erosion) The presence of conditions that might reduce soil productivity from erosion were evaluated in the Grizzly Fire BAER project (USDA ). Extremely low erosion rates (0.08t/ac) were modeled. Thus with appropriate BMPs (table X) implemented this erosion rate should remain within this expected effect. It is therefore assumed this project will not contribute to soil productivity losses from erosion. There can be reductions to soil productivity from harvest activities related to compaction and displacement, but that discussion will be in the Detrimental Soil Conditions (DSC) section to follow. Water Quality (Sediment) The mechanism to produce sediment is the portion of erosion that is transported into waterways or water bodies. This portion is never equal to the erosion produced, since some portion of erosion will fall out and stabilize before reaching a waterway of water body. So since the rates of erosion are expected to be very low, the potential for activities to produce sediment are even lower. It is therefore assumed this project will not contribute elevated amounts of sediment from the non-road surfaces within units. The evaluation of road surfaces is within the hydrology section. Detrimental Soil Conditions (Change in Vegetation) Since this project will be implemented with ground based activities, there will be some increase to Detrimental Soil Conditions (DSC). Depending upon the equipment used and mitigations during implementation DSC will impacted soils; influencing vegetation growth and vigor within that equipment footprint. This change will take place mostly in association with the overlap of legacy trails and temporary roads. Where this overlap occurs it is expected that there will an overall decrease in DSC for that segment of legacy trail; since temporary roads are obliterated following harvest. Within the proposed planning area there are human created trails that measure approximately 26.5 acres of assumed trail (or 6.15 miles).

7 Of the legacy trails mapped in the project area, some measure of the road obliterated. Actual mileage of obliteration is dependent upon the amount of temporary road and legacy DSC overlap. Soil mass movement was not identified in the area or as a risk that should play a role in any of the proposed activity units, therefore, it is assumed that mass movement will not influence the proposed alternative in the recent past, nor will it play a role in this alternative or the foreseeable future. Even with the additional acres of DSC from the effects of skidding, with current and expected levels of DSC, this alternative does not exceed 20% DSC criteria (LRMP). Summary of Effects to Soil Resource Indicators and Measures While there is a measureable effect to direct, indirect or cumulative effects for the soil resource in the Grouse Flat Project. These effects are within current forest Standards and Guidelines for the Umatilla NF (LRMP, 1990). This project may proceed with the following BMPs and project design criteria. Soil - Best Management Practices (BMPs) and Project Design Criteria Table 3 BMPs and Project Design Criteria SL1 SL2 SL3 SL4 Label Measure Timber Sale Contract? Design and locate skid trails and skidding operations to minimize soil disturbance to the extent practicable. Designate skid trails to the extent practicable to limit site disturbance. Locate skid trails outside of the RHCA to the extent practicable. Locate skid trails to avoid concentrating runoff and provide breaks in grade. Limit the grade of constructed skid trails on geologically unstable, saturated, highly erodible, or easily compacted soils. Avoid long runs on steep slopes Ground based harvest equipment will not be permitted on native surface trails and temporary roads when soils reach field capacity (heightened moisture content), as described in the Forest Plan, or if ruts greater than 6 inches occur. Haul will only be permitted on dry or frozen roads. Within harvest units, no heavy equipment will leave designated roads or trails, to limit potential detrimental soil disturbance. Grapple piling equipment off roads or designated trials, equipment will be required to travel over slash being collected, and/or utilize designated trails. Once the equipment reaches a starting point it will back out of the unit riding on material being piled LRMP S&Gs, PACFISH S&Gs and Eastside Screens? BMP National Core Technical Guide (2012)? Yes Forest Plan p Veg-4, p. 134 Veg-8, p. 138 Yes Forest Plan p. 4-77, Water SG s; Forest Plan p. 4-80, Soil Productivity SG s; PACFISH RF-2, C5, p. C11 Veg-4, p. 134 Veg-8, p. 138 Yes N/A Veg-8, p. 138 Yes N/A Veg-8, p. 138 SL5 Conduct machine piling of slash in such a manner to leave topsoil Yes N/A Veg-8, p. 139

8 SL6 SL7 in place and to avoid displacing soil into piles. All temporary roads (legacy or new) that are used for this project would be rehabilitated (obliterated). These roads will be either scarified or subsoiled where possible depending upon the soil depth and slash will be placed over the surface. See subsoiling prescription below. Locate landings to minimize the number of required skid roads. Re-use existing landings where their location is compatible with management objectives and water quality protection Yes Forest Plan p.4-86 Transportation Goal Road-1, p.107 Road-5, p.114 Road-6, p.116 Yes N/A Veg-6, p References Amaranthus M.P., Page-Dumroese, D., Harvey, A., Cazares, E. and Bednar, L.F Soil Compaction and Organic Matter Affect Conifer Seedling Nonmycorrhizal and Ectomycorrhial Root Tip Abundance and Diversity. PNW-RP-494. Archuleta, J Temporary Road and Landing obliteration within Skyline Logging Units. In proceedings of: THE INTERNATIONAL MOUNTAIN LOGGING AND 13TH PACIFIC NORTHWEST SKYLINE SYMPOSIUM, At Corvallis, OR, Volume: 1 Archuleta JG, Baxter ES Subsoiling promotes native plant establishment on compacted forest sites. Native Plants Journal 9(2): Arocena, J. M. "Cations in Solution from Forest Soils Subjected to Forest Floor Removal and Compaction Treatments." <i>forest Ecology and Management</i> (2000): Web. Brady, N. C., and R. R. Weil. "The nature and properties of soil 12th ed." (1999). Figure 3.4 Bulmer, C.E. and Simpson, D.G Soil Compaction Reduced the Growth of Lodgepole Pine and Douglas-fir Seedlings in Raised Beds after Two Growing Seasons. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. 74: doi: /sssaj Bustos, O and A. Egan 2011 A Comparison of Soil Compaction Associated with Four Ground- Based Harvesting Systems. NORTH. J. APPL. FOR. 28(4) 2011 Forest Service, National best management practices for water quality management on national forest system lands, volume 1: National core BMP guide. 164p.

9 Mciver, J.D. and L. Starr, Environmental effects of post-fire logging: Literature review and annotated bibliography. Gen.Tech. Report PNW-GTR-486. Portland, OR: Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 78p. Neary, D.G., Ryan, K.C., Deban, L. F., Wildland fire in ecosystems: Effects of fire on soils and water. Gen. Tech. Report RMRS-GTR-42-vol4, Ogden, UT: Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 250p. Reeves, Derrick; Page-Dumroese, Deborah; Coleman, Mark Detrimental soil disturbance associated with timber harvest systems on National Forests in the Northern Region. Res. Pap. RMRS-RP-89 Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 12 p. Robichaud P.R., Beyers, J.L., and Neary, D.G Evaluating the Effectiveness of Postfire Rehabilitation Treatments. RMRS-GTR-63. Siskiyou National Forest, Unpublished report Soil Disturbances from Helicopter Yarding in the Upper Pistol Timber Sale. Southwestern Oregon LRMP -USDA, Forest Service Umatilla National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. Final Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision. USDA , 2015 GRIZZLY FIRE REPORT, Post-fire funding request.