Final Environmental Impact Statement

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Vestal Final Environmental Impact Statement Chapter 3 pahasapae) Tawny Crescent (Phycoides batesii) Callused Vertigo (Vertigo arthuri) Mystery Veritgo (Vertigo paradoxa) Frigid Ambersnail (Catinella gelida) 86 Striate Disc (Discus shimekii) Summary of Effects to SOLC and riparian hardwood communities, decreasing forage plants for butterflies. Fire hazard would continue to increase. MPB caused mortality of pine could increase meadow, hardwood, spruce and riparian acreage that would benefit these butterfly species. Would not have adverse cumulative effects. MPB activity could contribute to enhanced butterfly habitat. treatments. Riparian areas not proposed for any mechanical treatments, spruce, hardwoods and open, grassy areas may increase because of MPB killing encroaching conifers. This increase may improve habitat enough to provide the opportunity for a population increase. Noxious weed treatments would positively impact these species by aiding in native plant restoration, however there is potential to harm the species by treating nectar or larval host plants. Rx burning & vegetative treatments have potential for direct mortality to individuals; however positive impacts would be created through pine encroachment by opening up meadows/grasslands. Cumulative Effects Would have beneficial cumulative effects. Improvement of current habitat conditions would offset negative effects from livestock grazing. Would benefit species due to habitat enhancement from past grazing and timber harvest. Summary Both alternatives would improve habitat for these butterflies. Alternative 2 would result in a greater benefit by further enhancing habitat, in particular by removing encroaching pine from hardwoods and meadows, which may be adjacent to riparian areas. The proposed action would meet these objectives, standards and guidelines. The proposed action alternative would contribute toward meeting Forest Objective 221. Both species are likely to persist on the Forest. Alternative 1 No Action Existing forested stands would be expected to become denser as fire suppression continues. However, because of the current MPB epidemic, dense pine stands (SS 3B, 3C, 4B, 4C, and 5) are expected to decrease from existing condition. Canopy would decrease as well as moisture levels for these snail species. MPB risk and wildfire risk would remain or increase. Conifer encroachment would continue in hardwood stands, decreasing deciduous litter. Conversely, hardwoods may increase with MPB activity, which would increase deciduous litter. Direct and Indirect Effects Alternative 2 Proposed Action The proposed action would allow for more riparian and hardwood enhancement and may provide better habitat conditions for these snail species through post-harvest activities. An overall decrease in stand replacing wildfires is expected with this alternative. This alternative retains more acres of dense habitat and increases hardwood acres through treatment. Therefore more habitat for the callused vertigo, mystery vertigo and striate disc snail species would be provided. Rx burning and vegetation treatments would have potential to cause direct mortality to individual snails & potential to impact habitat, negatively. However, opening up forested sites would create more potential habitat for the frigid ambersnail. These same treatments may decrease available habitat for the callused vertigo, mystery vertigo and striate disc snails. MPB & wildfire risk
Vestal Final Environmental Impact Statement Chapter 3 Sharp-shinned Hawk Summary of Effects to SOLC would be reduced. Would not have adverse cumulative effects. Cumulative Effects The trend of forest succession and fire suppression has decreased available water to riparian and mesic hardwood habitat and thus negatively impacted snail habitat. The recent precipitation (past 3 years) may improve this situation. Past and current removal of pine has had beneficial impacts to water yield, hardwood and riparian habitat. Activities such as harvest and prescribed fire may have also negatively impacted snail habitat through eliminating the overstory resulting in drying out of wet sites used by snails. These impacts are site-specific. Timber sales and fuels reduction projects have contributed cumulatively to both the beneficial and negative impacts to snails. Past activities have reduced the area of dense conifer stands while fire suppression has allowed natural succession to occur which has developed dense stands. Past and current off-road motorized traffic has negatively impacted some snail habitat (primarily in riparian areas) through removing plants and cover and compacting soil. Motorized traffic can also cause mortality to snails directly. Livestock grazing and recreational use both have potential for negative impacts to snails and their habitat. These activities would be expected to continue within the project area. Summary The proposed action is expected to increase hardwood acres through hardwood conversion and release treatments and retains more SS 4A. Therefore, all snail species’ habitat would benefit from this alternative. However, this alternative also has the potential to cause the most impact to the snail species and their habitat due to vegetative treatment as well as prescribed burning. The proposed action alternatives would meet Forest Plan standards and guidelines. Therefore the alternatives would contribute toward meeting Objective 221. These species are likely to persist on the Forest. The proposed action would maintain more dense forest conditions than No Action due to MPB caused mortality. Both action alternatives would create a more open pine forest condition. These actions would have potential for both positive and negative impacts on individual snails and habitat. The frigid ambersnail would benefit from opening stands. Vegetative treatments along with prescribed burning would follow Forest Plan Standard 3103, and would not result in cumulative impacts to known snail colonies. Alternative 1 No Action Alternative 2 Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects Pine stands would be expected to Treatments would reduce nesting habitat and 87
Page 1 and 2:
VESTAL PROJECT United States Depart
Page 3 and 4:
Vestal Final Environmental Impact S
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17:
OHV Off Highway Vehicle POL Product
Page 20 and 21:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58: Vestal Final Environmental Impact S
Page 107: Vestal Final Environmental Impact S
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
show all

Final Environmental Impact Statement

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?