Public Scoping Document for French Meadows Project USDA Forest Service American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest Placer County, California

Transcription

1 Background Public Scoping Document for Project USDA Forest Service American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest Placer County, California The Forest Service is initiating public scoping on the proposed Project. The Tahoe National Forest is working with partners to expedite and advance the restoration of National Forest System (NFS) lands in proximity to Reservoir. The Forest Service is proposing this project to improve forest and watershed health and resilience, to enhance wildlife habitat, and to reduce the risk of uncharacteristic, high-severity wildland fire, consistent with management direction in the Tahoe National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP 1990) as amended by the Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment Record of Decision (SNFPA ROD 2004), collectively referred to as the Forest Plan. The Project is bounded by Red Star Ridge to the northwest, Mildred Ridge to the east, and the Tahoe National Forest boundary to the south. Reservoir is located within the headwaters of the Middle Fork American River, approximately 20 miles northeast of Foresthill, California. Elevations in the project area range from 5,200 to 7,300 feet. The Figure 1 map shows the general location of the Project area. Several landowners and other stakeholders interested in the Middle Fork American River headwaters are partnering and working with the Forest Service to improve ecological and watershed conditions in this important headwaters area. The American River Conservancy (ARC) is the largest private landowner within the Middle Fork American River headwaters. ARC is managing its lands to protect and restore ecological values, promote forest and watershed health, reduce the risk of uncharacteristic, high-severity wildfire, and allow public recreation consistent with these values. Sierra Nevada Conservancy (SNC) has partnered with the Forest Service to increase the pace and scale of ecological restoration in the Middle Fork American River headwaters as part of a comprehensive, coordinated watershed improvement program. Placer County Water Agency (PCWA) owns and operates Reservoir for public water supply, hydroelectric power generation, and recreation. These stakeholders, along with The Nature Conservancy (TNC), Sierra Nevada Research Institute (SNRI), and Placer County, have identified an imperative need to manage the land to improve ecological conditions and watershed health while reducing the potential for severe wildfire impacts like those experienced in areas burned in the nearby King Fire in These stakeholders are collaborating with the Forest Service to take this opportunity to promote ecologically-based, landscape-scale management and develop an all lands approach to enhance the health and resiliency of the upper Middle Fork American River watershed. The Forest Service identified the Dolly Creek-Middle Fork American River watershed as a high priority watershed for ecological restoration on the American River Ranger District. Forests in the upper watershed are overly dense with brush and small trees and are at risk of uncharacteristic, highseverity wildfire and other disturbances, such as insects and disease, that could adversely affect the forest, associated wildlife habitat, recreation and watershed health. Overcrowded and unhealthy forest conditions exist within the project area that can be improved through a strategic, watershed level approach of ecological restoration.

2 Tahoe National Forest Figure 1. Vicinity Map 2

3 June 26, 2017 Purpose and Need A field assessment, initiated in the summer of 2016, helped identify opportunities to move the landscape toward desired conditions, utilizing the principles of ecologically-based forest management. This section describes the purpose and need for actions for the Project. 1) Action is needed to reduce stand density, increase tree species diversity and enhance stand structural diversity to develop healthy forest stands that will be resilient to environmental stresses and disturbances. Areas considered for treatment have substantially departed from their natural structure and tree species composition. These conditions are primarily due to fire suppression and historic logging practices, which, during the Gold Rush era, removed the largest, most accessible trees and more recently resulted in even-aged plantations. Historically, canopy cover was lower on average compared to current canopy cover and forest structure was more heterogeneous due to frequent small and low intensity fires. Across the landscape, the percentage of conifers in the 4- to 11- inch size class has increased compared to historical conditions. The existing condition of overly dense stands of trees, with a high component of shade tolerant white fir growing very closely together particularly in the lower diameter classes, compete for soil nutrients and water and become weakened. This condition creates greater demands for these resources than the ecosystem can supply and puts them at risk of insect infestation, pathogens, and drought-induced tree mortality. In addition, dense stands of small trees are vulnerable to uncharacteristic, high-severity wildfire. Nor are these kinds of stands as resilient to uncharacteristically severe disturbances, such as wildfire, as a result of the recent severe drought and beetle-infestation resulting in high fuel loads. Stands would be managed towards the heterogeneous conditions generally described by North et al. (2009, 2012). This would include reducing tree densities to levels where large, full crowned pines and hardwoods can develop intermixed with multiple age classes of mixed-conifer species. Most of the younger plantations in the project area were planted 11 to 30 years ago. These plantations are excessively stocked with relatively small conifers up to 11 inches diameter at breast height (dbh) and are at risk of loss due to high-intensity wildfire. Action is needed to accelerate the growth of the trees in these plantations by reducing tree densities and to reduce the fire hazard by reducing surface and ladder fuels, thereby increasing stand heterogeneity and resilience. A purpose of this project is to promote long-term forest health, resiliency, and sustainability while maintaining important habitat for wildlife, including the California spotted owl. The Forest Plan directs managers to develop, maintain, and restore forests to make them healthier and more resilient to drought, insects, diseases, air pollution, and catastrophic wildfire (SNFPA ROD, pg. 6, pp ). Vegetation management actions are guided by standards and guidelines that ensure important habitat for old forest associated species, including the California spotted owl, is maintained (SNFPA ROD, pg. 5, pp , and pp ). SNFPA ROD management intents and objectives emphasize retaining habitat in California spotted owl protected activity centers (PACs, SNFPA ROD pp. 7 and 45) as well as using active forest management to develop and restore habitat in home range core areas (HRCAs), old forest emphasis areas, and general forest (SNFPA ROD, pp. 6-7, and pp. 46 and 48). 2) Action is needed to modify and reduce existing high levels of forest fuels. Large portions of nearby National Forest System lands have burned at high severity in the recent past, including from the 2014 King Fire. However, as a result of decades of fire suppression, forests in the project area have an abundance of dense smaller trees, thick undergrowth and a high level of contiguous surface fuels. These fuel conditions create conditions for more intense fires, including a 3

4 Tahoe National Forest higher potential for uncharacteristically severe, stand-replacing wildland fire; higher mortality of vegetation; and damage to soils, watershed, wildlife habitat and recreational values. Action is needed to create forest stand conditions where the reintroduction of frequent, low intensity fires that maintain open, fire resilient stands of trees is possible. Without ecologically-based thinning and controlled burning to reduce fuel loads and promote healthier, more resilient forest conditions, these watersheds will be vulnerable to high-intensity, stand-replacing wildland fires that are expensive and difficult to control under typical summer weather conditions, and that contribute to watershed damage and degradation. The watershed degradation caused by the recent King Fire (2014) is evidenced in the adjacent Hell Hole Reservoir by the deposition of tons of sediment and burned logs following the burning and subsequent erosion of the Rubicon River canyon. Reducing fuel loadings and developing forest stands that are more resilient to wildfire impacts in the Middle Fork American River headwaters, a critical component of the Placer County water and hydropower municipal watershed, is an important step toward protecting watershed health. A purpose of this project is to protect forest resources and infrastructure improvements within the project area and beyond from potential severe wildfire effects. The Forest Plan s goals for fire and fuels management are to treat fuels in a manner that reduces wildland fire intensity and rate of spread and to actively restore fire-adapted ecosystems (SNFPA ROD, pg. 34). Fuels treatments are to be placed and designed to modify wildland fire behavior, remove sufficient material in treated areas to reduce potential wildfire intensity and rate of spread, and consider cost-efficiency (SNFPA ROD, pg. 34). Desired conditions, management intents, and management objectives as well as standards and guidelines for fuels treatments guide managers to design effective fuels treatments while incorporating needs for retaining key habitat elements for Forest Service Sensitive species, including the California spotted owl (SNFPA ROD, pg. 34, pp , pp , pp , and pp ). 3) Action is needed to restore declining meadows and increase the vigor and spatial extent of aspen and cottonwood stands. The area s meadows and aspen and cottonwood stands are at high risk of being lost as conifers encroach on these ecologically rich areas. This encroachment has suppressed natural regeneration of aspen and other meadow-specific species, thus reducing diversity and habitat quality. These benefits are threatened or impaired under current conditions because increased water use by conifers decreases the water available for riparian vegetation. This encroachment decreases meadow size and ability to store water. In addition, shading inhibits regeneration and growth of the remnant patches of aspen and cottonwoods. Action is needed to restore declining meadows and increase the vigor and spatial extent of aspen and cottonwood stands. Action is also needed to address other factors that are impacting meadows in the project area, including alterations in local hydrology and absence of fire. A purpose of this project is to promote healthy meadows and riparian areas to support important wildlife and plant habitats and water storage and filtration. The Forest Plan s riparian conservation objectives are aimed at restoring the geomorphic and biological characteristics of meadows, wetlands, springs, and other riparian areas as well as restoring meadows and wetlands to provide the ecological conditions and processes needed to recover or enhance the viability of species that rely on these areas (SNFPA ROD, pg. 33). Forest Plan riparian conservation objectives also include identifying and implementing restoration actions to maintain, restore or enhance habitat for riparian species (SNFPA ROD, pg. 34). 4

5 June 26, ) Action is needed to reduce stand densities and woody fuels immediately surrounding five rust resistant sugar pine (RRSP) trees to promote their health. Five sugar pine trees within the Project area have been identified as being resistant to white pine blister rust, a non-native disease that routinely infects sugar pine and often results in death of young trees. These trees are surrounded by dense stand conditions and high levels of surface and ladder fuels. A purpose of this project is to protect RRSP trees from loss due to wildfire and environmental stresses. Forest plan direction is to promote shade intolerant pines, including sugar pines (SNFPA ROD, pg. 52). The Tahoe National Forest, along with other national forests in the Pacific Southwest Region, carries out management aimed at conserving sugar pines. A critical piece of this work involves identifying and protecting individual sugar pine trees that show natural genetic resistance to the nonnative pathogen that causes white pine blister rust. These identified RRSP trees provide critical genetic resources, specifically supplying grafted materials for seed orchards and/or seed for use in reforestation. 5) Action is needed to assess the impacts of ecologically based forest management and fuels reduction on the forest water balance and related ecosystem services. A forest s water balance is the partitioning of incoming snow and rain between water use by forest vegetation and runoff to streams. This balance depends in large part on the amount of vegetation in a watershed. Reducing the amount of vegetation in a watershed through ecologically-based vegetation and fuels management treatments has the potential to increase the portion of precipitation that ends up as runoff to creeks and streams. However, the magnitude and duration of changes in a forest s water balance also depend on subsurface water storage, climate variability, vegetation patterns, and subsequent disturbance or management actions. Tools to quantitatively predict and verify changes in the water balance have yet to be rigorously evaluated across a range of forest, climate and geologic conditions. Management actions in the area and contiguous private lands provide an opportunity for researchers to study changes in forest water balance by comparing treated and untreated watersheds. Because of the heterogeneity and variability of different watersheds, accurate assessments and the development of scaling strategies for hydrologic models must be based on site-specific data, rather than general findings from other regions. Vegetation and fuels management in the Project area presents an ideal opportunity to obtain accurate spatial measurements of the inputs and outputs of the local water balance. A purpose of this project is to provide an opportunity for researchers to collect and assess local empirical data on forest water balance that can inform regional (larger scale) hydrologic modeling. The Forest Plan identifies a need for more research on total water yield associated with a variety of management actions in different vegetative zones (LRMP, pg. III-29). 6) Action is needed to manage and maintain the road and trail system in the Project area. The growing recreational use of the area indicates that the public would benefit from additional trails to increase the recreation opportunities. The project area has few non-motorized trails accessed directly from the campgrounds. Action is needed to provide relatively flat, safe, aesthetically pleasing, non-motorized trails to get the recreational hikers and bike riders off the main road. 5

6 Tahoe National Forest An assessment of roads within the Project area identified road management objectives. To meet these objectives, action is needed to ensure that roads are properly maintained or decommissioned to protect forest resources and improve watershed conditions. A purpose of this project is to provide safe and sustainable access for the administration, protection and utilization of National Forest System lands for resource management and public use. The Forest Plan provides management area-specific standards and guidelines (referred to as management practices) for construction of non-motorized trails (LRMP, V-63). These practices are available for the Wabena-Steamboat (#83) and French (#89) Management Areas (LRMP, pp. V-435 and V-460). The Forest Plan provides forestwide standards and guidelines for managing the Tahoe s National Forest Transportation System (LRMP, pp. V-40 through V-41). Managers are directed to restrict road and trail use to the extent necessary to protect threatened, endangered, and sensitive plants or animals; essential wildlife functions; cultural resources; and riparian zones and wetlands. The Transportation System is to be maintained to a standard commensurate with user types and amount of use. Closure of roads and trails is appropriate if the cost for maintenance and resource protection exceeds the financial ability of the Forest to pay for these services. 7) Action is needed to identify and treat existing hazard trees that pose a risk to public safety. Several areas along roads, trails, and recreation facilities in the Project area contain high numbers of hazard trees that pose a risk to public safety as they deteriorate and fall. These are trees that have become weakened, unstable or died due to storm damage, insects, disease, soil erosion, breakage, or die-back and decay. A purpose of this project is to provide for public safety along roads and trails and at recreation facilities. The Chief of the Forest Service and the Pacific Southwest Regional Forester have stressed that the safety of the public and Forest Service employees is the Agency s central concern. In developed recreation areas and within the transportation corridors, hazard tree management is vital to everyone s safety. Line officers are responsible for annual inspection and management of hazard trees in campgrounds and other heavily used recreation areas (Forest Service Manual, FSM 2332). Forest Supervisors have a similar responsibility for the safe operation and management of roads and must to the extent permitted by funding levels, systematically provide for elimination of identified hazards. (FSM c and FSH ). Proposed Action The proposed action within the 29,117 acre project area is to treat overcrowded forest stands and reduce hazardous fuels for forest resiliency to wildfire and other severe disturbances, utilizing a combination of controlled burning, thinning, mastication, and hazard tree removal. In limited areas these treatments would be followed by tree planting and removal of vegetation competing with planted trees using mechanical or hand grubbing techniques (release). In addition, the proposed action includes building non-motorized trails and making road improvements for access and to enhance hydrologic function. In order to respond to the purpose and need of this project, 19 individual treatment units on approximately 12,198 acres within the project area are proposed to have one or more of the following activities: 6

7 June 26, 2017 Reduce Stand Density and Fuels Ground-Based Mechanical Thinning (Commercial Thin) Thin approximately 2,245 acres of forest stands with ground-based equipment, generally consistent with the ecological principles described by North et al. (2009, 2012). Thinning would be focused on suppressed and intermediate sized trees primarily in the 4 to 24 inch dbh size classes. All live conifers 30 inches dbh and larger would be retained within the treatment units (SNFPA ROD, pg. 50). Stands would be generally thinned from below to a stand density index (SDI) below 230, with residual basal areas ranging from 140 to 180 square feet of basal area per acre outside of California Spotted Owl Home Range Core Areas (HRCAs) and 180 to 240 square feet per acre within HRCAs. Consistent with Forest Plan direction, mechanical thinning treatments in mature forest habitat would retain generally the largest trees to maintain a minimum of 40 percent basal area and 40 to 50 percent canopy cover on a treatment unit average (SNFPA ROD, pp ). Residual canopy closures would be the highest within California spotted owl home range core areas and protected activity centers (PACs). Within PACs, the proposed action would only remove material less than 6 inches dbh. Thinning would favor retention of ponderosa pine, Jeffrey pine, sugar pine, and Douglas-fir. Small openings and areas of dense cover would be dispersed in the unit. Selected insect or disease affected trees would be removed, consistent with Forest Plan standards and guidelines (SNFPA ROD, pp ). Smaller trees (generally less than 10 inches dbh) would be burned at the landing or removed from the landing to be utilized for biomass. Whole tree, ground based-yarding is proposed on slopes generally less than 35 percent and on short pitches less than 150 feet long on slopes up to 50 percent. Areas not meeting this description would be excluded from equipment entry unless agreed upon during site-specific consultation with a soil scientist or hydrologist. Rust-Resistant Sugar Pine Thinning and Fuels Treatments Protect five rust-resistant sugar pines by radial thinning within 150 to 300 feet around each sugar pine tree and reducing surface and ladder fuels within the vicinity of the protected sugar pine trees. Three of the five trees are within the ground-based mechanical thinning units and two are within prescribed underburn units. The range of treatments may include fire line construction, shrub cutting, piling of slash and brush, pile burning, chipping, and removal of trees from sapling size up to 30 inches dbh. Ground based equipment may be used where slopes and other conditions permit. At a minimum, density reduction would occur within 150 feet of each tree with the potential to treat vegetation up to 300 feet (between approximately 1.6 to 6.5 acres of vegetation treatments) around each RRSP. Additionally, removal of all trees less than 30 inches dbh within 25 feet of the drip line would also occur. The extent of the thinned area would vary by individual tree given species composition, slope position and aspect, and applicable resource protection measures. Post-treatment Stand Density Index (SDI) will vary with the stand composition surrounding each RRSP. Finally, heavy duff and litter accumulations within two to three feet of the base of each tree would be raked away. Meadow, Aspen, and Cottonwood Stand Restoration Vegetation treatments designed to restore aspen and meadow communities would include (1) conifer removal to reduce conifer encroachment, (2) aspen removal to promote root stimulation and stand regeneration, (3) aspen root separation, or (4) prescribed fire. To avoid overstressing aspen stands, no more than one of the following will be conducted in the same season and footprint: aspen removal, root separation, or prescribed fire. Units 5, 11, 12, 13 and 17 have isolated pockets of meadows, aspens and cottonwoods that may be treated within the different thinning treatments. Approximately 70 acres are identified for meadow restoration. Meadow edge extent would be identified by soil type and historic photos and determined by a riparian specialist. Encroaching 7

8 Tahoe National Forest conifers up to 30 inches dbh would be removed from the meadow surface and within 25 feet of the meadow edge. Within 25 to 100 feet of the meadow edge, trees would be thinned to a range of 30 to 60 percent canopy cover. Riparian vegetation would be retained. Trees larger than 30 inches dbh and snags and coarse woody debris would be retained except when removal is within the meadow for meadow restoration purposes. Clumping retention trees, retaining pockets of dense small-diameter trees, and individual tree culturing to produce a large, full crown branching structure will be used to meet structural objectives. Machinery would be used for the removal and material would be either commercially utilized, or piled and burned or masticated depending on the specified follow-up treatment. In areas where meadow soils are wet during operations, equipment would be limited to the edge of the meadow, and conifers within the meadow would be hand felled and removed. Small (less than 1 acre) stands of aspen are present in the project area. Where aspen patches are located within proposed commercial thinning units, remove all conifers less than 30 inches dbh within a distance up to one and one-half times the height of the tallest aspen (the lateral root extent). In proposed pre-commercial thinning, or hand thinning units outside of PACs remove all conifers less than 11 inches dbh within a distance up to one and one-half times the height of the tallest aspen. In hand thinning units within PACs remove all conifers within a distance up to one and one-half times the height of the tallest aspen that are less than 6 inches dbh. The aspen treatment footprint is approximately 100 acres within proposed thinning units. Mechanical or hand treatment would be used depending on the surrounding treatment type and resource protection measures. Vegetation treatments would occur by hand or mechanically using feller-bunchers, skidders, endlining, shovel-yarding, or cut to length equipment. Treatments may extend beyond the perimeter of an aspen stand or meadow the distance: (1) up to one and one-half times the height of aspen trees in the stand (the maximum extent of lateral aspen roots), (2) to prevent remaining, adjacent conifers from shading the aspen stand, or (3) up to 100 feet (to conduct treatments or process treatment byproducts), whichever is greater. The additional spatial extent of vegetation treatments will allow more sunlight to reach the forest floor, stimulate aspen and meadow regeneration, promote expansion of aspen stands and meadows, and provide space to operate and process materials. Aspen removal is a valuable tool in late seral stands with healthy root systems, but lacking regeneration, where conifer removal or other treatment methods are unlikely to result in substantial aspen regeneration. Treatments may remove a small amount of the existing basal area of aspen trees within a stand to promote root stimulation and stand regeneration; however, this would be an exception rather than the rule. Aspen removal would be accomplished in the same way as described for conifer removal. Temporary fences up to eight feet tall may be installed within treatment areas to prevent browsing damage to existing aspen or to facilitate the growth of aspen suckers. While these restoration actions are similar to actions that may occur under the Riparian Restoration Project, a Decision Memo that is analyzing a smaller footprint in the same area, these are separate actions that have independent utility. Remove conifers less than 30 inches dbh from within approximately 20 feet of the drip-line of cottonwoods. Within stream zones, trees would be thinned to a range of 30 to 60 percent canopy cover. Riparian vegetation would be retained. Hazard Tree Removal Remove hazard trees along roads, designated trails and recreation facilities within the project area. Hazard tree treatments along Forest Service roads would be limited to trees that could impact the road and threaten public safety if they failed (generally within 200 feet of the road), and would utilize the Forest Service Pacific Southwest Region s Hazard Tree Marking Guidelines (Angwin et al 2012) to identify hazard trees. Identified hazard trees would be felled and left in place, piled and burned, or 8

9 June 26, 2017 felled and removed if commercially viable. In the case of tree removal, felled trees would be yarded and/or endlined to the road. Ground-based equipment would not operate on slopes greater than 30 percent for hazard tree removal operations. Where roadside hazard trees are located in California spotted owl PACs, the district wildlife biologist would be consulted prior to falling and removal. Root Disease Prevention When cutting trees in recreation areas, treat all conifer stumps greater than 3 inches in diameter with a registered borate compound (FSM R5 Supplement modified by FSH R5 Supplement ) to reduce the probability of infection by Heterobasidion occidentale and H. irregular, the causal agents of Heterobasidion root disease (formerly referred to as annosus root disease). In all other areas, treat conifer stumps greater than 14 inches in diameter. Pre-commercial Thinning and Mastication Mechanical Thin - Plantations and Natural Stands In pre-commercial stands (stands with trees less than 11 inches dbh), mechanically thin approximately 93 acres of plantations and 1,553 acres of natural stands. Typically stands have been selectively harvested before and contain some scattered over story trees larger than 30 inches dbh. Where small pockets of trees less than 10 acres in size occur, all saw log sized trees (larger than 12 inches dbh) would remain, unless they are adjacent to a meadow in which case trees up to 30 inches dbh may be removed. Trees less than 11 inches dbh would be cut, skidded and burned at the landing or utilized for biomass. Canopy levels would be reduced to average 40-50% over the unit unless the unit is within a HRCA in which case 50 to 70 percent would be retained. Post-harvest basal area would be between 130 to 160 square feet per acre for areas outside HRCAs and 160 to 200 square feet within HRCAs. Thinning would favor removal of smaller size classes present in the stand and would result in and increased average stand diameter. Thinning would favor retention of Ponderosa Pine, Jeffrey Pine, Sugar Pine, and Douglas-fir. Small openings and dense cover areas would be distributed throughout the unit. Mastication Thin - Plantations and Natural Stands Mastication thin approximately 714 acres of plantations and 561 acres of natural stands. Trees generally 4 to 8 inches in dbh would be cut with a masticator and ground-up along with surface fuels and shrubs. An occasional tree, less than 16 inches dbh, may be masticated or left as large down woody material to achieve the desired future condition of the stand. In areas primarily composed of trees less than 12 inches dbh and in areas with planted trees, post treatment stocking would range from 100 to 200 trees per acre, depending on the size of the dominant trees. In areas with trees mostly larger than 12 inches dbh, post treatment basal area would be reduced by 20 percent on average. This treatment was favored over mechanical thinning in areas with smaller size class planted stands and stands where mechanical thinning operations would be difficult due to poor access. Surface fuels would be treated concurrently with tree thinning resulting in surface fuel configuration similar to follow-up mastication. Hand Thinning, Pile and Burn Up to 378 acres are proposed for hand thinning. In areas near campgrounds, thin small trees up to approximately 11 inches dbh. Use hand thinning in areas where operation of equipment would be difficult due to proximity to recreation infrastructure or wildlife protection constraints. Use mechanical thinning in areas where recreation infrastructure and wildlife are not a concern in units 3, 5 and 17. Chip or remove material. Hand-piling and burning could be used away from recreation areas. Within California spotted owl protected activity centers (PACs) (approximately 106 acres of the 378 acres), hand thin small trees up to approximately 6 inches dbh and follow with hand-piling and 9

10 Tahoe National Forest burning. This action is consistent with the Forest Plan direction for PACs because no heavy equipment would be used and surface fuels and a small component of understory trees are targeted for removal. Canopy cover would be retained. Release Mastication Masticate brush on approximately 411 acres in young plantations (unit 10). This practice would release planted trees in previously reforested burn areas where tree densities are light enough to not require extensive tree thinning. The post treatment tree density will depend on current and future survival of planted trees. Reforestation Reforest using a combination of site preparation, conifer planting and release treatments on approximately 102 acres in areas that burned at a high intensity by the King Fire (unit 14) and in occasional patches of concentrated mortality or large openings. The initial site preparation step could involve either mastication or site prep broadcast burning. Following site preparation, plant a variety of tree species including ponderosa pine, sugar pine, Douglas-fir, and incense cedar to a density of 200 trees per acre. Due to the possibility of snow persisting on access routes to the planning site late into the spring, a fall plant in October or November would be preferable. Release for survival by manually grubbing a 5-foot radius around the planted trees until they are established above the competing vegetation, approximately one to two growing seasons following planting. Prescribed Underburn Prescribe understory burning to reduce surface and ladder fuels on approximately 6,120 acres along roads and ridges to create fuelbreaks in areas not proposed for thinning and follow-up treatments. Underburns are proposed within PACs, and areas which are too steep to operate equipment to decrease surface fuels and thin a small component of understory trees. Existing roads and trails may be utilized as fire lines to minimize new ground disturbance, although additional fire lines may be constructed with hand tools. All constructed fire lines would be rehabilitated after implementation following resource-specific management requirements. In areas with excessive fuel loads, conduct a two-step burn where the areas of concentrated fuels are burned first followed by burning the entire unit. In addition to cutting fire lines around the perimeter of the unit, lines would be established around some riparian areas and some planted stands within the burn unit. Approximately 1,542 acres of underburning overlap with PACs. Underburning is consistent with the Forest Plan direction for PACs because no heavy equipment would be used and surface fuels and a small component of understory trees are targeted for consumption. Canopy cover would be retained. Table 1 shows the initial proposed vegetation treatments. Table 1 Initial vegetation treatments by unit Unit Initial Treatments Acres 1 Commercial Thin 117 Pre-commercial Thin - Mastication (Plantation) 17 Pre-commercial Thin - Mechanical (Natural Stand) 33 Underburn Commercial Thin 521 Pre-commercial Thin - Mastication (Plantation) Commercial Thin 136 Hand Thin/Pile/Burn 236 Pre-commercial Thin - Mastication (Natural Stand) 78 4 Commercial Thin 134 Pre-commercial Thin - Mastication (Natural Stand) 56 Pre-commercial Thin - Mastication (Plantation)

11 June 26, 2017 Unit Initial Treatments Acres Underburn 42 5 Commercial Thin 191 Hand Thin/Pile/Burn 19 Pre-commercial Thin - Mastication (Natural Stand) 18 Pre-commercial Thin - Mastication (Plantation) 48 Pre-commercial Thin - Mechanical (Natural Stand) 70 6 Commercial Thin 213 Pre-commercial Thin - Mastication (Natural Stand) 117 Pre-commercial Thin - Mastication (Plantation) 8 Pre-commercial Thin - Mechanical (Natural Stand) 51 Underburn Commercial Thin 58 Pre-commercial Thin - Mechanical (Natural Stand) Commercial Thin 306 Pre-commercial Thin - Mastication (Plantation) 16 Pre-commercial Thin - Mechanical (Natural Stand) 137 Pre-commercial Thin - Mechanical (Plantation) 86 9 Commercial Thin 64 Pre-commercial Thin - Mastication (Natural Stand) 51 Pre-commercial Thin - Mastication (Plantation) 88 Pre-commercial Thin - Mechanical (Natural Stand) 18 Underburn Pre-commercial Thin - Mastication (Plantation) 7 Release Mastication 411 Underburn Commercial Thin 290 Pre-commercial Thin - Mastication (Plantation) 79 Pre-commercial Thin - Mechanical (Natural Stand) 51 Underburn Pre-commercial Thin - Mechanical (Natural Stand) Pre-commercial Thin - Mastication (Plantation) 9 Pre-commercial Thin - Mechanical (Natural Stand) Reforestation Pre-commercial Thin - Mastication (Natural Stand) 241 Pre-commercial Thin - Mastication (Plantation) 60 Underburn 1, Commercial Thin 97 Pre-commercial Thin - Mastication (Plantation) 82 Pre-commercial Thin - Mechanical (Natural Stand) Commercial Thin 118 Hand Thin/Pile/Burn 123 Pre-commercial Thin - Mechanical (Natural Stand) 102 Pre-commercial Thin - Mechanical (Plantation) 6 18 Underburn Underburn 1,986 Total 12,178 Follow-Up Treatments Three types of follow-up treatments would occur on 4,225 acres within portions of the previously described ground-based mechanical thinning (2,245 acres) and the pre-commercial thinning and mastication areas (2,912 acres). Refer to Table 2 for unit by unit breakdown of proposed follow-up treatments. These treatments overlap existing treatments and do not increase the overall 12,178-acre treatment area of the 29,117-acre project area. Table 2 shows the proposed vegetation follow-up treatments. 11

12 Tahoe National Forest Follow-up thinning with Mastication Masticate as a follow-up treatment to thinning on approximately 2,030 acres. Masticate surface fuels, slash from thinning operations and trees and brush less than 4 inches dbh. Material would be ground into a mat no deeper than 6 inches. This treatment does not require burning. Follow-up thinning with Tractor Pile and Burn Tractor pile and burn as a follow-up treatment to thinning on approximately 968 acres where surface fuels are piled using a skidder with a brush rake and burned. Use this in areas with gentle slopes (20 percent or less) and areas with higher post-thinning surface fuels to consume and reduce fuel loading with a lower risk of mortality to retained trees than the broadcast burning. Follow-up thinning with Broadcast Burn Broadcast burn is a follow-up treatment that involves burning of surface fuels and logging slash created by thinning on approximately 1,227 acres. The procedure for this treatment is similar to the prescribed underburn primary treatment previously described. This treatment is for fuel consumption and use on steeper slopes. Table 2 Follow-up vegetation treatments by unit Unit Follow-up Treatment Acres 1 Broadcast Burn Broadcast Burn Follow-up Mastication Follow-up Mastication Broadcast Burn Follow-up Mastication 31 5 Follow-up Mastication 61 5 Tractor Pile Burn Broadcast Burn Follow-up Mastication Follow-up Mastication Follow-up Mastication Broadcast Burn Follow-up Mastication Tractor Pile Burn Tractor Pile Burn Follow-up Mastication Follow-up Mastication 220 Total 4,225 Roads and Trails Reconstruct and maintain roads (such as regrading road surfaces and repairing and replacing culverts) on approximately 20.8 miles of roads. Clear vegetation along roadways. Build approximately 2.1 miles of short temporary spur roads where forest products are planned for removal. Decommission temporary roads by soil decompaction and blocking at the end of use in the project. No new permanent road construction is proposed. 12

13 June 26, 2017 Make the following changes to the Tahoe National Forest Transportation System: 1. Decommission approximately 6.1 miles of road as shown in Table 3. Subsoil or rip compacted soil of existing unauthorized routes, landings, main skid trails and temporary roads with equipment such as a winged sub-soiler or other tilling device. 2. Implement gated closure on 9.5 miles of roads not currently available for public motorized use to facilitate enforcement of the existing closure and protect natural resources. 3. Close approximately 0.6 miles of National Forest System (NFS) road 51 to public wheeled motor vehicle travel at mile post 1.9 (at the NFS land and private property line) for resource protection and install a gate at the closure. 4. Close approximately 0.3 miles of NFS road to public wheeled motor vehicle travel for resource protection and install a gate at the closure. Build two trails and add to the Tahoe National Forest Trail System. 1. Use a mechanized trail dozer or mini excavator to construct an 18 to 24-inch-wide nonmotorized trail from the existing Talbot Trailhead and within 600 feet east of and parallel to Talbot Creek. Extend this trail approximately 1 mile to the north to tie into the existing Talbot Creek Trail on private land at the eastern boundary of section Use a mechanized trail dozer to construct approximately 5 miles of four-foot-wide nonmotorized trail on the south-southeast side of Reservoir between the 96 road and closer to the lake than the existing campgrounds and road. Create a looped trail with this route by going around the north portion of the lake and connect to the existing Poppy segment of the Western States Trail on the northwest side of Reservoir near the McGuire boat ramp and picnic area. Place barriers to keep motorized use off this trail system. Table 3 Roads identified for decommissioning Road number Mileage Total miles

14 Tahoe National Forest Research Water Balance UC Merced is designing a research project to quantitatively evaluate forest management impacts on hydrology (e.g., snow accumulation and melt, soil moisture, streamflow, and evapotranspiration) and forest health (e.g., tree height, growth, mortality, and leaf area index) and apply results from this project to other Sierra Nevada watersheds through modeling. To facilitate this research the Forest Service is proposing to authorize installation (and related site access) of instream pressure transducers, soil moisture sensors down to a maximum depth of 1 meter, snow depth sensors, dendrometers, and sapflux sensors in five sub-basins (BACI design) to collect accurate spatial measurements of the inputs and outputs of the local water balance and integrate into more regional (larger scale), hydrologic modeling of watersheds. The BACI design includes: Before- After-Control-Impacts. Rice 1, Rice 2, Dolly and Chipmunk Creeks are the Impacted sub-basins, and the Control is Rice 3. Rice 1, Rice 2, Rice 3, and Dolly Creek sub-basins have been instrumented with instream pressure transducers (installed on a rebar rod anchored to bedrock) for stream stage measurements since An instrument cluster with ten nodes of snow depth, soil moisture, temperature, and relative humidity sensors has operated there since Two additional instrument clusters may be installed along with dendrometers and sapflux sensors using the BACI design. These instrument clusters will use recent advances in wireless technologies to move data to a base station, minimizing the impact during the site access. Project implementation Project implementation would occur over several years, and could be accomplished through commercial timber sale contracts, stewardship contracts, service contracts, and/or force account labor. Management Direction The Forest Service manages the Tahoe National Forest in accordance with the Tahoe National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP 1990), as amended by the Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment Record of Decision (SNFPA ROD 2004) and other amendments, collectively referred to as the Forest Plan. The Forest Plan sets forth both Forest-wide and area-specific management direction for the Forest. The Project area falls within the 083 Wabena-Steamboat and 089 French management areas and within small portions of 090 Divide and 091 Sunflower management areas as described in the Forest Plan. The proposed action would treat areas in the WUI defense and threat zones, California spotted owl home range core areas (HRCAs), and Protected Activity Centers (PACs), consistent with the desired conditions, management objectives, and management intents for these areas (SNFPA ROD, pp ), using a mix of prescribed burns, mechanical thinning, and hand treatments. Appendix B, Table B-1 shows vegetation treatment acreages by land allocations. The southeast portion of the project area is key summer range for the Blue Canyon Deer Herd. The western portion of the project area is a major deer migration corridor, and a known deer holding area is located northeast of Reservoir (LRMP map titled Fish and Wildlife Element: Fish and Wildlife Habitat (12/1985) and referenced in LRMP standard and guideline #27 (pg. V-30)). The management goal for key deer areas is to provide the following balance in key habitat elements over time: about 25 percent of the acreage will provide predominantly herbaceous forage; about 35 percent of the acres will provide predominantly shrubs for forage and cover; and the remaining 40 percent of the acres will provide trees for thermal hiding and cover (LRMP, pg. V-30). The Chipmunk Grazing Allotment is located east and south of Reservoir and is managed according to the Chipmunk Grazing Allotment Plan. The Chipmunk Allotment is transitory 14

15 June 26, 2017 range, in which grazing occurs in openings, streamsides, meadows, along roads, and on cutover and burned-over land early in the successional life-cycle of the forest. No designated Wilderness areas exist within the project area boundary, although the Granite Chief Wilderness is east of the project boundary. Granite Chief Inventoried Roadless Area (IRA) is excluded from project activities. Underburning for fuels reduction is proposed in a portion of the Duncan Canyon IRA where management will be consistent with the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. All proposed activities are consistent with direction in the Tahoe National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (1990) as amended by the Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment Record of Decision (2004) and the Sierra Nevada National Forests Management Indicator Species Amendment (2007). Responsible Official The Forest Supervisor is the Responsible Official for this proposed action. The project activities are proposed to be documented in an Environmental Assessment (EA). Public Involvement and Information Contact A public meeting may be held in the future. Please notify us if you are interested in attending public meetings or being notified of future developments of this project. For more information regarding this project, contact Karen Walden, Environmental Coordinator for the American River Ranger District at (530) ext

16 Tahoe National Forest Appendix A Maps Map A Vegetation and fuel treatment map

17 Map A -2 June 26, 2017 Vegetation and fuel treatment map 17

18 Tahoe National Forest Map A Vegetation and fuel treatment map

19 June 26, 2017 Appendix B - Land Allocations Table B-1 Initial 1 vegetation treatment acreage within land allocations IRA 2 PAC PAC WDZ PAC WTZ WDZ HRCA HRCA WDZ WTZ OFE GF N-NFS Total Commercial Thin Units , Hand Thin/Pile/Burn Units Pre-commercial Thin - Mastication (Natural Stand) Units Pre-commercial Thin - Mastication (Plantation) Units Pre-commercial Thin - Mechanical , ,553 (Natural Stand) Units

20 Tahoe National Forest IRA 2 PAC PAC WDZ PAC WTZ WDZ HRCA HRCA WDZ WTZ OFE GF N-NFS Total Pre-commercial Thin - Mechanical (Plantation) Units Reforestation Units Release Mastication Units Underburn Units 2, , , , ,986 Total Acres 2, , , ,885 3, , Some of these treatment receive follow-up treatments as shown in Table 2. 2 Note: IRA = Inventoried Roadless Area; PAC = Protected Activity Center; PAC WDZ = Protected Activity Center in WUI (Wildland Urban Intermix) Defense Zone; PAC WTZ = Protected Activity Center in WUI Threat Zone; WDZ = WUI Defense Zone; HRCA = Home Range Core Area; HRCA WDZ = Home Range Core Area in WUI Defense Zone; WTZ = WUI Threat Zone; OFE =Old Forest Emphasis; GF = General Forest; N-NFS = Non-National Forest System land. 3 Numbers are approximate acres and do not add due to rounding and errors in data. 20