Chapter 2 Alternatives, Including the Proposed Action 1...

Environmental Assessment Dinkey North Restoration Project 2‐1

September 2010ICF J&S 00468.09

Chapter 2 Alternatives, Including the Proposed Action

This chapter describes the alternatives considered for the Dinkey North Restoration Project, including the proposed action.

Alternative 1 (No Action) Alternative 1 authorizes no new actions. All previously approved management activities would continue to be implemented. See Table 3‐1 for a list of the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions that are considered in this environmental assessment.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)—Fire Severity, Restoration, and Habitat

The proposed action for the Dinkey North Restoration Project is based on a landscape strategy presented in An Ecosystem Strategy for Sierran Mixed Conifer Forests by North et al. (2009), which emphasizes ecological restoration as a guide for forest management treatments. The goal of this strategy is to restore heterogeneity (i.e., diversity in plant size, type, and density) at the landscape scale to approximate but not strictly impose a historical condition and to create a mosaic of density and structure based on ecological processes influenced by aspect, slope position, site productivity, tree species, and unusual micro‐site conditions. The most important of these historical processes is fire (North et al. 2009). The proposed action includes using prescribed fire both for restoration purposes and to reduce existing fuels and fuels created from previous treatments; tree removal is also proposed to approximate the tree numbers and growing space density specified in the desired condition.

Emphasis Areas and Treatment Stands The proposed action would restore tree species composition and vegetation structure and would reintroduce fire consistent with conditions that had occurred historically within the Southern Sierra Nevada forests. Specific forest needs would be addressed through proposed forest restoration and controlled fire activities that give priority to one of the following emphasis areas:

public and firefighter safety through reductions in ground/surface, ladder, and crown fuels to reduce the potential for crown fire;

key Pacific fisher habitat and restoration of forest structures; and

California spotted owl habitat.

The proposed action would implement restoration activities for 20 stands according to emphasis area. The treatment stands and emphasis areas are shown in Figure 2‐1.

Emphasis areas were determined based upon land allocation and habitat considerations as shown in Figure 2‐1 and discussed below.

USDA Forest Service Chapter 2

Alternatives, Including the Proposed Action



Land allocation in the wildland urban interface (WUI). The Dinkey North project area is located within the WUI, which describes an area where human habitation is mixed with areas of flammable wildland vegetation. Dinkey Creek, located in the project area, is identified as a community at high risk from wildfire (Federal Register, August 17, 2001 [Volume 66, Number 160], p. 43388). The 2004 Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment (USDA Forest Service 2004a) identifies the following three land allocation zones for the WUI:

Defense Core Zone: The WUI Defense Core Zone includes all treatment stands that contain an urban core (i.e., a community or inhabited structures and immediate environs). The density criteria from the 2004 Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment were used to identify urban core areas in the Dinkey North project area. The Defense Core Zone is located in the Defense Zone and has the highest risk from wildfire.

Defense Zone: The WUI Defense Zone is a buffer in closest proximity to communities and human infrastructure. WUI Defense Zones generally extend from the structures in a community out roughly 0.25 mile. Fire control is the primary objective in this zone.

Threat Zone: The WUI Threat Zone extends approximately 1.25 miles from the outer edge of the Defense Zone. The objective for this area is to reduce wildfire spread and intensity and to maintain habitat functionality.

It should be noted that the width of WUI zones is adjusted based on the distribution of developments, likely rates of fire spread, strategic landscape features such as roads, distribution of fuels types, and topography.

The public and firefighter safety emphasis was given to all stands located in the Defense Core Zone. Owl habitat considerations within the remaining project area were used to identify stands with priorities for spotted owl. See Figure 2‐1 for locations of the urban core area and structures to be protected.

Land allocation for California spotted owl habitat. Over the last 100 years or so, selective logging and fire suppression have reduced the number of large trees, increased the density of smaller diameter classes, and shifted composition toward shade tolerant fir and cedar. These changes are at the heart of the concerns about California spotted owl habitats as outlined by Verner et al. (1992). These authors recommended an interim management approach that has been adopted most recently in the 2004 Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment (USDA Forest Service 2004a). Along with an emphasis on reducing the risk of wildfire, the amendment identifies two land allocation units that maintain important habitats.

Protection Activity Center (PAC): A PAC is a delineated land allocation comprising the best available 300 acres of spotted owl habitat, which is managed specifically for sustaining nesting habitat for the purpose of maintaining viable populations of spotted owls.

Home Range Core Area (HRCA): An HRCA comprises approximately 700 acres (including the PAC) of the best available spotted owl habitat for the purpose of providing foraging habitat.

California spotted owl emphasis was given to treatment stands that contain PACs. The remaining stands were identified for restoration and Pacific fisher treatments consistent with meeting objectives to reduce hazardous fuels conditions.

Table 2‐1 below identifies the number of stands by land allocation and emphasis, and Table 2‐2 shows the acreages.

125129

150154

170

188 189190

197217

225 227

237

245 259

275

288 296

388

1037

Figure 2-1

Proposed Treatments

Dinkey North

k :\ir

vin e

\gi s

\pro

ject

s\us

fs\ d

inke

y\00

468_

09\m

apdo

c\en

v_as

sess

men

t\2 0

10m

ay\ f

ig2 _

1_pr

opos

ed_t

rtm

nts_

dn.m

xd S

M (

05-0

4-10

)

Legend

Dinkey North Project Area

Treatment Stands

Proposed Emphasis Areas

Owl Emphasis

Public and FirefighterSafety Emphasis

Restoration andPacific Fisher Emphasis

Barren (rock)

Urban

Meadow

Canyons - Habitat Linkages

Streamside Management Zone

Structures Source: ESRI StreetMap North America (2008)

0 1,000 2,000

Feet

# ##





Table 2‐1. Land Allocation and Emphasis—Number of Stands

Wildland Urban Interface Land Allocation

Spotted Owl Land Allocation

Public and Firefighter Safety Emphasis

Restoration and Pacific Fisher Emphasis

California Spotted Owl Emphasis Total

Defense Zone Not PAC or HRCA 0 2 0 2 HRCA 0 3 0 3

PAC (maintain above 50% canopy cover)

0 0 2 2

Defense Core Zone

Not PAC or HRCA 5 0 0 5

HRCA 1 0 1 Threat Zone Not PAC or HRCA 0 4* 0 4 HRCA 0 0 0

PAC (fuel ladders and ground fuels only)

0 0 3 3

Total 6 9 5 20

Notes: PAC=protected activity center HRCA=home range core area *One stand is dominated by rock and would receive no tree removal treatment

Table 2‐2. Land Allocation and Emphasis—Acres

Wildland Urban Interface Land Allocation

Spotted Owl Land Allocation



California Spotted Owl Emphasis Stands Total

Defense Zone Not PAC or HRCA 0 156 0 156 HRCA 0 330 0 330

PAC (maintain above 50% canopy cover)

0 0 154 154

Defense Core Zone

Not PAC or HRCA 403 0 0 403

HRCA 75 0 0 75 Threat Zone Not PAC or HRCA 0 279* 0 279 HRCA 0 0 0 0

PAC (fuel ladders and ground fuels only)

0 0 220 220

Total 478 765 374 1617

Notes: PAC=protected activity center HRCA=home range core area *One stand or 118 acres is dominated by rock and would receive no tree removal treatment





As shown in Table 2‐1, the proposed action includes restoration treatments on 9 of the 20 stands within the project area. Of the other 11 stands, 6 within the Defense Core Zone are identified for public and firefighter safety emphasis, and 5 are in California spotted owl PACs. These 5 also provide important denning and resting habitat for Pacific fisher.

Treatment activities for the three emphasis areas and activities common to all emphasis areas are discussed in “Treatment Activities” below. Design criteria and best management practices (BMPs) are also discussed below.

Treatment Activities Proposed treatments for the 16 stands would be prioritized according to emphasis area; however, stands could be treated to meet the objectives of multiple emphases. Table 2‐3 provides an overview of treatment activities for each emphasis area, and the discussion that follows provides more detail. A complete discussion of proposed treatments, equipment, and methods is found in Appendix G. Trees would be removed from the stands by conventional ground‐based machinery such as tractors or rubber‐tired skidders, and then hauled to processing sites using trucks. Fuels treatments would involve the use of tractors and hand crews to prepare the area for the prescribed burning, including the use of firelines constructed by hand crews and machines to help control prescribed fire operations. Proposed treatment stands are illustrated in Figure 2‐1.

Table 2‐3. Summary of Proposed Restoration Treatments for Dinkey North

Emphasis Area

# of Stands Proposed Treatment Activities

Public and Firefighter Safety

6 • reduce ground fuels to reduce flame length • reduce tree density to decrease potential for crown fires and torching • limit tree removal to diameters <30 inches at breast height • remove all hazard trees adjacent to structures and other physical improvements

California Spotted Owl

5 • maintain 50% canopy cover in Defense Zone PACs • limit treatment to ground and ladder fuels in Threat Zone PACs • focus removals on intermediate fir and incense cedar and suppressed trees of all species

• apply public and firefighter safety and restoration and Pacific fisher treatments when consistent with PAC desired conditions

Restoration and Pacific Fisher

9 • retain key large tree structures needed by Pacific fisher • reduce hazardous fuels • promote heterogeneity and allocate growing space consistent with historical stand structures

• emphasize open stand conditions with densities based on aspect and slope position

• apply public and firefighter safety treatments consistent with restoration and Pacific fisher desired conditions

The proposed action would occur over the next 15 years. Tree removals (commercial harvests, small tree thinning), planting, conifer release, and burning are all proposed to take place between the years 2010 and 2014. Additional prescribed fire would take place between years 2015 and 2025. Planted areas would be evaluated for additional release and replanting in years 2015 to 2018. This





range in treatment timing reflects uncertainty from weather and burning conditions. The timing also reflects conformance with air quality emission standards.

Both the proposed action and fire severity alternative include a similar treatment schedule. The alternatives differ in the intensity of tree removals and the planting of openings. Table 2‐4 reflects the schedule of treatments for the proposed action and Alternative 3.

Table 2‐4. Treatment Activity Schedule for Each Alternative

Alternative 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015–2018*

2015–2025

No Action Unplanned events such as insect attack, drought, and severe fire create changes – baseline conditions for analysis.

Proposed Action

Commercial harvests occur (trees 10” to 30” dbh).

Small trees < 10” dbh are removed and small diseased trees cleaned. Hand piling occurs in campground, along visually sensitive roads, and near power lines. Removal of slash occurs in recreation residence areas.

Slash from logging are tractor piled and hand piled.

Burning of slash piles occurs. Underburn occurs.

Planting regeneration openings, hand and chemical release occur. Burning of slash piles occurs.

Planted openings are evaluated for release and replanting. Underburn occurs.

Second underburn occurs.

Fire Severity

Commercial harvests occur (trees 10” to 16” inches dbh).

Same as above. Same as above.

Same as above.

Burning of slash piles occurs.

No activity.

No activity.

Note: * indicates when severe fire effects are assessed.


Treatment Activities in Core Defense Stands

Six core defense stands are proposed to receive treatments that maximize public and firefighter safety. These stands encompass the Dinkey Creek and Dinkey Bluff Recreation Residence Tracts, the Dinkey Creek Campground, the Dinkey Creek Inn and Store, the Dinkey Creek Ranger Station, and the Dinkey Meadow (Chambers Tract) Recreation Residences.

Treatments in core defense stands are designed to maximize firefighter safety during suppression and keep wildfire on the ground. Treatments would reduce ground fuels so that flame lengths would be less than 4 feet. Tree removal would reduce tree density so that the potential for crown fire and torching would be low or unlikely; tree removal would occur throughout all diameters less than 30 inches at breast height; hazard trees of any diameter adjacent to structures and other physical improvements would be removed. Treatments would be consistent with the recreational character





of the stands. Slash removal would occur within recreation residence and other special use permit areas (e.g., store and cabins) where slash piles would be inconsistent with the recreation character.

Within core defense stands, tree density would not vary according to aspect or slope position. Considerations for unusual micro‐sites and Pacific fisher rest sites and other types of clumps or sites described in “Restoration and Pacific Fisher Emphasis Design Criteria,” below, would be applied where they do not conflict with hazardous fuels reduction or are necessary to meet BMPs described in “General Design Criteria/Best Management Practices.”

The proposed actions would remove sufficient snags to help ensure hazard abatement and adequate fire line efficacy in the Defense Core Zone and along strategic roads. All snags would not be removed. Some are too dangerous to be felled and others are in inaccessible areas. Outside of these areas, snags greater than 15 inches diameter would remain. Logs (downed woody debris) created from snag operations would be removed if they are within 300 feet of structures and/or other improvements, and 100 feet of forest roads that have been determined to be strategic for fire control operations in the event of a wildfire. The following roads are strategic fire control roads: 10S13, 11S040, FRE2240, 10S24, 10S40, and 10S24C.


Nine stands are proposed to receive treatments that emphasize ecological restoration as guided by the general technical report, An Ecosystem Strategy for Sierran Mixed Conifer Forests by North et al. (2009) and that maintain key Pacific fisher habitat and forest structures. The proposed action would implement restoration treatments that:

retain key large tree structures needed by Pacific fisher,

reduce hazardous fuels, and

promote and maintain heterogeneity.

Restoration treatments would allocate growing space consistent with historical stand structures that had generally flat tree distributions (North et al. 2004, Taylor 2004).

In addition in these stands, public and firefighter safety would be promoted through reduced tree density, ground/surface fuels, and ladder and crown fuels consistent with restoration and Pacific fisher desired conditions. Consequently, treatments would create varying stand density and structure influenced by aspect, slope position, site productivity, tree species, and unusual micro‐site conditions. Specifically, the proposed action would emphasize open stand conditions by employing the lowest, lower, and moderate residual basal area per acre targets in Table 2‐6 in “Proposed Action Design Criteria,” on southerly slopes and ridge tops. Dense to moderately dense stand conditions would be emphasized by employing the high, higher, and highest residual basal area per acre targets in Table 2‐6 on northerly slopes, in canyons, and in areas with Pacific fisher rest and lower quality dense sites. Tree removal would occur throughout all diameters, up to 30 inches dbh, consistent with the desired condition. Reductions in hazardous fuels and the resulting fire behavior and severity would be consistent with the goals and objectives of the Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment (USDA Forest Service 2004a).

One application of prescribed fire (underburning) is proposed in the next 10‐year period as a second treatment after hand or tractor piling and burning of the piles to reintroduce fire in some stands that are away from structures. Underburns would have average flame lengths less than 4 feet.





California Spotted Owl Habitat

Five stands are proposed to receive treatments that emphasize protecting California spotted owl habitat. The proposed action would implement treatments that:

maintain above 50% canopy cover within PACs in the Defense Zone (Stands 227 and 275), and

limit treatment to ground and ladder fuels within PACs in the Threat Zone (Stands 129, 170, and 197).

Treatments within PACs would maintain late seral forest structures and large trees with diameters over 30 inches at breast height, which are needed for nesting habitat (North et al. 2009). High and moderate quality Pacific fisher rest sites located in owl emphasis areas would receive no treatments.

Tree removals and prescribed fire in all PACs and HRCAs would be designed to reduce ground and ladder fuels by focusing removals on the intermediate fir and incense cedar trees and suppressed trees of all species. Restoration and public and firefighter safety treatments described above would be implemented when consistent with PAC and HRCA desired conditions.

Ground Fuels Management throughout All Emphasis Areas

Treatments proposed for all emphasis areas would result in the creation of ground fuels. The proposed action would treat existing and treatment‐created fuels through the use of prescribed fire (burning hand piles and machine piles) or complete removal in special use permit areas (recreation residences, store, or structures) where hand piles are inconsistent with the recreation character. Underburning as a second treatment is proposed to accomplish restoration objectives and to reintroduce the process of frequent fire. Ecosystem strategies suggested by North et al. (2009) emphasize the use of prescribed fire both as a fuel treatment and as a tool for restoring natural processes. Table 2‐5 lists the acres covered by proposed prescribed fire and fuels treatments. Proposed fuels and prescribed fire treatments are shown in Figures 2‐2 and 2‐3. Hand and machine lines would be constructed to contain prescribed fire.

Table 2‐5. Fuels and Prescribed Fire Treatments

Treatments Acres Affected Fuels Treatment Initial Treatment

Lop and scatter only 0 Lop and scatter and underburn 0 Mastication and underburn 0 Underburn only 0 Hand pile and burn piles or removal 178 Tractor pile and burn piles 1004 No fuels treatments 435 Total 1617

Underburn Second Treatment 865





Restoration of Native Species Composition throughout All Emphasis Areas

Restoration of native species composition is proposed through the regeneration of pine species; the retention of existing shrubs, pine, and oaks consistent with the desired condition; the enhancement of growing conditions of existing pine; and the eradication of noxious weed species. Both younger shrub age classes and pine regeneration are proposed for restoration in existing openings. The proposed action emphasizes maintenance of small brush openings (up to 10% of project area) consistent with historic conditions. Pine would be regenerated in areas with existing openings in parts of stands dominated by pine and in excess of the 10% needed to meet shrub expectations, or in parts of stands dominated by white fir.

Treatment Activities

Pine regeneration would occur through mechanical site preparation (e.g., tractor piling), thinning of larger trees from the southeast to southwest edges of existing openings to increase sunlight received, planting seedlings, and spraying Accord® herbicide (glyphosate) or hand releasing following planting to control vegetation that competes with seedlings for soil moisture and nutrients as specified by the Release Decision Tree in the Dinkey North and Dinkey South Treatment Priorities document provided in Appendix B of the Vegetation and Silvicultural Specialist Report for the Dinkey North Restoration Project (USDA Forest Service 2010a).

Other specific treatment activities that would restore native species composition would include the following:

Existing younger pine regeneration would be promoted through thinning and reorientation of openings.

Marking guidelines would emphasize retaining pine and oak species and enhancing growing conditions for both species.

Tree removals would focus on incense cedar and white fir.

Patches of forest (5–30 acres) currently dominated by pine would be thinned to promote the growth of pine species.

Eradication of noxious weeds would occur on 4.7 acres. Treatments for noxious weed eradication include hand pulling on 0.9 acre and directed herbicide spray on 3.8 acres (Accord and R‐11). The following noxious weed infestations would be eradicated:

an infestation of lens‐podded hoary cress located near the Dinkey Pack Station,

one infestation each of bull thistle and cheat grass,

two bull thistle infestations near streams, and

a woolly mullein occurrence across from the Dinkey Pack Station.

Transportation Access (Roads)

The proposed activities listed above would not require any new road construction. The following maintenance, reconstruction, and temporary roads are needed:

125129

150154

170

188 189190

197217

225 227

237

245 259

275

288 296

388

1037

Figure 2-2

Proposed Fuel Treatments &

Burning of Fuels First Entry

Dinkey North

k :\ir

vin e

\gi s

\pro

ject

s\us

fs\ d

inke

y\00

468_

09\m

apdo

c\en

v_as

sess

men

t\2 0

10m

ay\ f

ig2 _

2_fu

el_t

rtm

nts_

dn.m

xd S

M (

05-0

4-10

)

Legend


Treatment Stands


Owl Emphasis



Fuel Treatments, First Burning

Hand Pile, Burn Piles

Tractor Pile, Burn Piles

No Treatment, No Burn Source: ESRI StreetMap North America (2008)

0 1,000 2,000

Feet

# ##

125129

150154

170

188 189190

197217

225 227

237

245 259

275

288 296

388

1037

Figure 2-3

Proposed Burning of Fuels Second Entry

(5 to 15 Years after Entry 1)

Dinkey North

k :\ir

vin e

\gi s

\pro

ject

s\us

fs\ d

inke

y\00

468_

09\m

apdo

c\en

v_as

sess

men

t\2 0

10m

ay\ f

ig2 _

3_se

cond

_trt

mn t

_dn .

mxd

SM

(05

-04-

10)

Legend


Treatment Stands


Owl Emphasis



Underburn

No Burn Source: ESRI StreetMap North America (2008)

0 1,000 2,000

Feet

# ##





Road Maintenance 12.1 miles Road Reconstruction 2.8 miles Temporary Road Construction 4.5 miles

The temporary roads would be restored to conditions prior to their use to the greatest extent practicable, in order to avoid adverse effects from disrupted drainage patters or potential soil erosion. See Appendix E for a table listing the roads associated with the project implementation.

Proposed Action Design Criteria The following design criteria have been developed for the proposed action and further define proposed treatment activities for emphasis areas. General design criteria and BMPs that would be applied throughout all stands are also provided.


Design criteria related only to the public and firefighter safety emphasis are as follows:

SAF‐1 Within core defense stands, remove fuel ladders, treat ground and surface fuels, and open crown canopy. Remove trees throughout diameter classes and emphasize removal of 80% of trees with diameters of 0–10 inches at breast height, 40% of trees 10–20 inches at breast height, and 20% of trees 20–30 inches at breast height.

Design criteria related to restoration and Pacific fisher treatments described in “Treatment Activities,” would be implemented when consistent with public and firefighter safety desired conditions.

Design criteria related to all emphases to improve public and firefighter safety are as follows:

SAF‐2 Conduct treatments to reduce ground fuels, ladder fuels, and crown density consistent with the aspect, slope position, site productivity, tree species, and unusual micro‐site conditions described above in “Treatment Activities,” for Pacific fisher, California spotted owl, and restoration objectives.

SAF‐3 Treat existing and treatment‐created ground/surface fuels to reduce their volume to desired conditions. Treatments would include hand piling or removal of slash, tractor piling slash, underburning, and burning piled slash.

SAF‐4 Protect structures outside defense core by treating a 200‐foot buffer feathered to 300 feet around structures to reduce ground fuels, ladder fuels, and separate crown fuels. This treatment emphasizes fuels reductions over maintaining dense canopy conditions for Pacific fisher and California spotted owl habitat or restoration objectives.

SAF‐5 Remove hazard trees near structures and developed sites. Leave large trees for downed wood ecological requirements after felling unless fuels standards are triggered.

SAF‐6 Apply the following marking priorities:

a. Reduce fuel ladders.

b. Remove trees that provide fuel ladders to larger trees to create conditions suitable for underburning and reduce the potential for torching.





1) Protect larger trees from underburning to maintain stand structures that would contribute to future habitat diversity.

2) Reduce canopy layering by accentuating age classes (e.g., a 10‐inch–diameter tree among 30‐inch‐diameter trees would be removed to accentuate the 30‐inch–diameter class).

c. Retain pine and black oak for restoration to increase resilience and to reduce wildfire and prescribed fire severity.

1) Ensure that marking priorities emphasize pine and oak retention both in clumps and across aspect/landscape zones.

2) Ensure that restoration treatments emphasize pine and oak growth enhancement though reductions in growing space allocated to fir and incense cedar.

3) Reduce tree density in areas dominated by pine (mixed conifer pine or Jeffrey pine) to improve the growth of residual pine trees.

4) Reduce growing space around vigorous black oaks (no current cavities) to enhance black oak growth. Prioritize retention of black oak over retention of pine species.


Stand‐wide criteria related to the restoration and Pacific fisher emphasis are as follows:

RPF‐1 Remove trees for restoration purposes on nine stands with 765 gross acres consistent with the residual basal areas shown in Table 26 for each zone. Create landscape heterogeneity through:

a. varying residual growing space based upon four aspect and slope zones: northerly, southerly, ridge, and canyon;

b. applying a relative scale of tree density keyed to aspect, slope position, and site productivity that sets the range of basal area per canopy cover for any location from lowest density found on ridge tops to highest density found in canyons; and

c. removing trees throughout all diameter classes up to 30 inches at breast height.

RPF‐2 Pacific Fisher Habitat Linkages. Maintain canopy cover within canyons at the highest relative basal area level. Canyons provide habitat connections and linkages for Pacific fisher along creeks. Canyon linkages, Pacific fisher rest sites across all aspect and slope position zones, dense PAC conditions, and north slopes provide for a diffuse network of linkages with old forest characteristics. In addition, canyons provide protection for riparian vegetation and moderate stream temperatures.

Table 2‐6. Residual Basal Area (Square Feet per Acre) for Slope/Aspect Zones

Slope/Aspect Zone Ridges Southerly Slopes Northerly Slopes Canyon Site Index Forest Type Lowest Lower Moderate High Higher Highest

30 @ 90 years Mixed Conifer Fir 124 138 153 168 183 198 Mixed Conifer Pine 105 118 130 143 155 168 Jeffrey Pine 94 101 108 116 123 131





Slope/Aspect Zone Ridges Southerly Slopes Northerly Slopes Canyon Site Index Forest Type Lowest Lower Moderate High Higher Highest






Percent Remaining Mixed Conifer 50 56 62 68 74 80 Percent Remaining Jeffrey Pine 40 46 52 58 64 70 Notes: Mixed conifer fir <15% pine species Mixed conifer pine >15% pine species Jeffrey pine >50% pine species Site indexes and basal areas are based on Dunning and Rieneke 1933, except for Jeffrey pine basal areas, which are based on Meyers 1938. Site indexes and basal areas are applied at the aspect and slope position zone or smaller scale. Stand level basal area targets are the result of area weighted basal area for each aspect and slope zone.

RPF‐3 Pacific Fisher Rest Sites and Other Types of Clumps or Sites. Vary treatment of tree sites and clumps tied to recognizable topographic conditions (e.g., aspect, canyons, and ridges), micro‐site locations (e.g., meadows and large trees), species composition, site productivity, and tree density conditions to create a fine‐grain (fine‐scale) heterogeneity. The variable treatment of clumps to promote oaks and pine and the variable treatment of dense clumps with snags or suitable Pacific fisher rest sites promote heterogeneity at a fine scale. Clumps or sites will vary in size depending on the particular micro‐site at a scale of 5 trees (high quality Pacific fisher rest sites) to 0.5 acre (other types of clumps or sites). Adhere to the following clump and micro‐site guidelines, listed in order of greatest importance to the restoration and Pacific fisher emphasis, to create this fine‐grained forest structure:

a. High Quality Pacific Fisher Rest Sites. These sites are found rarely across the Dinkey area and tend to be located on steeper slopes and within 300 feet of water. High quality Pacific fisher rest sites are composed of clumps of five or more conifer trees that have





diameters greater than 30 inches at breast height or oaks with diameters greater than 20 inches at breast height. The tree density is greater than 240 square feet per acre, and the sites contain Pacific fisher rest structures (large legacy trees, cavities, and rarely downed logs). These clumps not only have high density, but also have deep canopies. The size of the large trees, deep crowns, location near water, and canopy cover, in addition to rest structure(s) makes these sites particularly useful to Pacific fisher. Canopy is typically split between upper and lower canopy layers.

1) Limit treatments to the edges or to removing limited layering to keep the dense character of these sites.

b. Moderate Quality Pacific Fisher Rest Sites. These sites consist of clumps of dense trees (greater than 240 square feet per acre) with large snags (conifer snags with diameters greater than 35 inches at breast height or oak snags with diameters greater than 25 inches), legacy trees, or suitable large rest structures (snags and damaged or diseased trees with diameters greater than 20 inches at breast height). These rest sites are common across the project area. They are characterized by the density of trees over 240 square feet per acre and the presence of one or more suitable rest structures. A rest structure is typically a large, older legacy tree with large branches or a tree with a deformation that provides rest platforms. Higher value rest sites are found near water. Growing space (leaf area, canopy) is split between an upper and lower canopy layer. Canopy foliage composed of upper and lower layers can be stacked or more often found adjacent.

1) Promote heterogeneity, focusing on retaining and promoting pine. Remove trees around edges to protect from fire and to promote pine growth.

2) Maintain tree densities of 240 square feet per acre or more in most clumps with structure. Leave clumps untreated near streams or meadows. Focus removals on suppressed and intermediate trees, especially near meadow and wet area micro‐sites. Retain integrity of areas adjacent to water by limiting removals to edges. Keep all snags that are not hazards.

c. Lower Quality Dense Sites. These sites consist of high density clumps that are greater than 240 square feet per acre. These clumps are composed of dense single‐layered trees with diameters generally greater than 24 inches at breast height. This single layer of dense canopy is found high above the forest floor. While snags may be found in these clumps, the size of snags or decay class offers few resting platforms. Despite their large size, live trees offer few resting platforms.

1) Retain tree densities of 240 square feet per acre in these clumps, except when clumps have scattered pine. Use decision priority that focuses tree removal on providing growing space for scattered pine.

2) Retain large tree structure and density.

d. Pine Clumps or Sites (areas where 50% or more of the basal area per acre is pine). Maintain and develop pine clumps as small as 0.25 acre by thinning that may result in some pine as well as other species being harvested. Promote growth and health of the pine by thinning through the clumps, using the following ranges:





1) north slope: 60–75% (high‐higher) of normal basal area (for what land can support),

2) canyon: 80% (highest) of normal basal area (for what land can support),

3) south slope: 55–60% (low–moderate) of normal basal area (for what land can support), and

4) ridges: 40–55% (lowest) of normal basal area (for what land can support).

e. Lowest Quality Clumps or Sites. These sites consist of either high density clumps that are greater than 240 square feet per acre and have trees with diameters that are less than 24 inches at breast height, or that are clumps with densities less than 240 square feet per acre. While some clumps are dense, they have few Pacific fisher rest platforms. These clumps are found commonly throughout the project area. Clumps often have poor‐growing fir and incense cedar that dominates clump structure. Pine is found at a low frequency in these clumps. The nature of the tree size and the crown cover found in a single‐canopy layer make these areas of low value regardless of location or proximity to water.

1) Promote heterogeneity among clumps by emphasizing a single canopy layer of the dominant tree type within a clump and by varying the resulting different types of clumps across the stand to create a future multi‐storied stand. Remove intermediate fir trees, incense cedar trees, and poor growing, suppressed trees of all species.

2) Retain all vigorous pine. Increase openness around single pines or small clumps of two or three. In larger clumps, having 50% or more basal area per acre in pine, reduce density to the basal areas specified in Table 2‐6 for Jeffrey pine. Focus removals on fir and incense cedar.

f. Existing Young Pine in Small Areas or Clumps (approximately 8 acres). Promote growth by thinning larger trees from southeast to southwest edges to reorient existing pine regeneration small areas or clumps to increase sunlight received. Thin within the sites to give spacing to small trees.

g. Existing Openings with Good Soil. In forest types dominated by fir, promote the growth of pine species by planting pine seedlings in existing openings greater than 0.25 acre up to 10% of stand acreages. Plant pines with multiple seedlings per spot and space them consistent with site quality to reduce fuels continuity.

1) Prior to planting, prepare the site for planting by tractor piling brush and burning piles. Spray with Accord herbicide (glyphosate) or hand release following planting to control vegetation that competes with seedlings for soil moisture and nutrients as specified by the Release Decision Tree in the Dinkey North and Dinkey South Treatment Priorities document provided in Appendix B of the Vegetation and Silvicultural Specialist Report for the Dinkey North Restoration Project (USDA Forest Service 2010a).

h. Small Canopy Openings with Shrubs and Pine/Oak Regeneration in Forest Types with Mixed Pine. Maintain shrubs as habitat, reduce fire risk associated with shrubs, and promote regeneration of pine. Historically, shrubs likely would have covered 10–25% of the project area. The objective is to have 10% of the mixed pine forest type in





shrubs. Do not create openings or plant shrubs to achieve the 10% coverage goal. Adhere to the following conditions to enhance small openings with shrubs:

1) If a shrub patch is less than 0.25 acre and mostly living, do not treat it.

2) If a shrub patch is less than 0.25 acre and consists of mostly dead branches (roughly greater than 30% is dead), consider burning or masticating to regenerate shrubs.

3) If a shrub patch is greater than 0.25 acre but the shrubs are less than 10% of the treatment area, then do not treat the living shrubs and consider burning or masticating shrubs composed mostly of dead branches (roughly greater than 30% is dead).

4) If a shrub patch is greater than 0.25 acre and the shrubs are more than 10% of the unit area, remove shrubs and plant pine if the slope position is favorable to pine. If the slope position is unfavorable to pine, then consider burning or masticating the shrubs for regeneration.

5) Prior to planting, prepare the site for planting by tractor piling brush and burning piles. Spray with Accord herbicide (glyphosate) or hand release following planting to control vegetation that competes with seedlings for soil moisture and nutrients as specified by the Release Decision Tree in the Dinkey North and Dinkey South Treatment Priorities document provided in Appendix B of the Vegetation and Silvicultural Specialist Report for the Dinkey North Restoration Project (USDA Forest Service 2010a).

RPF‐4 Large Trees. Increase the proportion of large trees by retaining trees with diameters larger than 30 inches at breast height (with the exception of hazardous trees) and removing trees mostly having diameters less than 10 inches at breast height.

RPF‐5 Plantations. Maintain tree vigor and growth and retain shrubs in areas currently managed as plantations by masticating stands to reduce shrub volume and tree densities to 150–250 trees per acre while maintaining 15% of the area in shrubs. Shrubs should be clumped. Following mastication, treat 85% of the plantation to control vegetation that competes with trees for soil moisture and nutrients as specified by the Release Decision Tree in the Dinkey North and Dinkey South Treatment Priorities document provided in Appendix B of the Vegetation and Silvicultural Specialist Report for the Dinkey North Restoration Project (USDA Forest Service 2010a).

RPF‐6 Black Oak MicroSites. Reduce tree densities around oak micro‐sites to less than 100 square feet per acre, consistent with objectives for Pacific fisher and California spotted owl.

California Spotted Owl Emphasis

Stand‐wide criteria related to the California spotted owl emphasis are as follows:

OWL‐1 Protect key California spotted owl habitat by maintaining post treatment canopy density above 50% in PACs in the Defense Zone (two stands).

OWL‐2 Limit treatment to ground and ladder fuels within the PACs in the Threat Zone (three stands). Increase crown base height to 15 feet.

OWL‐3 Within HRCAs, implement design criteria related to restoration and Pacific fisher treatments described in “Treatment Activities.”





OWL‐4 Use the upper end of the residual basal area ranges in Table 2‐6 (moderate or higher relative density)to maximize canopy cover in stands within HRCAs that are in the restoration and Pacific fisher emphasis area and all PACs for the purpose of increasing Pacific fisher habitat over time.

OWL‐5 Within all PACs, prioritize maintaining canopy cover over restoration treatments. Conduct restoration and Pacific fisher treatments described in “Treatment Activities,” when they are consistent with maintaining PAC objectives of canopy cover and protecting the nest site buffer.

General Design Criteria/Best Management Practices General design criteria implement BMPs that:

limit or eliminate adverse effects on water, air, soil, wildlife breeding, introduction of noxious weeds, and disturbance of heritage sites;

reduce erosion from roads and the effects of heavy equipment used during treatments; and

limit the amount and duration of smoke and particulate matter produced with prescribed fire.

Botanical Resources

The following project design measures protect threatened, endangered, and sensitive plant species and prevent the introduction and spread of noxious weeds. Rock outcrops and associated gravel soils are included in these measures.

BIO‐1 Identify, flag, and avoid areas with sensitive plants prior to performing mechanical treatments.

BIO‐2 Avoid falling trees or driving equipment or vehicles on rock outcrops or on thin, sandy, or gravelly soils.

BIO‐3 Avoid hand thinning of shrubs on rock outcrops or associated gravelly soils between mid‐February and July.

BIO‐4 Follow noxious weed management goals identified in Forest Service Manual (FSM) 2081.2, which include the following:

a. Prevent the introduction of new invaders.

b. Conduct early treatment of new infestations.

c. Contain and control established infestations.

d. Clean all equipment of soil and plant parts before bringing onto the National Forest or beginning work in a new management unit to reduce the potential spread of noxious weeds.

e. Survey disturbed areas for noxious weeds for 2 years after vegetation treatments occur in a unit.

f. Promptly remove any weeds found to stop seed set.

g. Continue treatment for as long as necessary to eradicate any occurrences.

h. Coordinate with botanist prior to layout of final road locations.





i. Treat known noxious weed sites as described in unit descriptions before treating these areas or beginning road construction or reconstruction.

BIO‐5 Follow herbicide use design measures when herbicides are used in pine regeneration areas or noxious weed eradication. Design measures include the following:

a. Do not apply glyphosate within streamside management zones (SMZs) of flowing streams to protect water quality.

b. Apply glyphosate by hand within 5 feet of dry stream channels.

c. Do not apply glyphosate between the first frontal storm system after October 15 (i.e., a system that results in greater than 0.25 inch of rainfall) and April 15 to minimize impacts on amphibian species.

d. When using glyphosate, avoid plants of significance to Native Americans (such as deergrass, sourberry, redbud, elderberry, and willow). Consult local Native Americans regarding the protection of additional specific plants or areas from treatment.

e. Follow all applicable pesticide laws and label restrictions to ensure human health and safety. Follow all applicable BMPs (Appendix A). Cease application of glyphosate when wind speed exceeds 5 miles per hour or as soon as drift is visually observed (BMP 5.13) to avoid affecting non‐target plants and aquatic habitats. Install signs at all areas treated with glyphosate, warning that herbicide has been applied and that products should not be gathered for food or medicine for 30 days to help ensure that no effects would occur to human health and safety.

Protection of Wildlife Habitat Elements in Proposed Treatment Areas WLD‐1 Within PACs, maintain a limited operating period, prohibiting vegetation treatments within

approximately 0.25 mile of the activity center during the breeding season for California spotted owl, great grey owl, and northern goshawk, unless surveys confirm that birds are not nesting. If the location of the nest site or activity center is uncertain conduct surveys to establish or confirm the location of the nest or activity center before implementing activities within or adjacent to PACs or goshawk territories (USDA Forest Service 2004b:60, 61).

WLD‐2 Include contract clause C(T)6.25—Protection of Habitat of Endangered Species or similar contract language, with a limited operating period being implemented within 0.25 mile and for a time period that would depend on the needs of the species in question. Limited operating periods are:

a. California spotted owl: March 1–August 15,

b. northern goshawk: February 15–September 15, and

c. great gray owl: March 1–August 15.

The limited operating periods may be waived for vegetation treatments of limited scope and duration when a biological evaluation determines that such projects are unlikely to result in breeding disturbance, considering their intensity, duration, timing, and specific location. Where a biological evaluation concludes that a nest site would be shielded from planned activities by topographic features that would minimize disturbance, the limited operating period buffer distance may be reduced (USDA Forest Service 2004b:60).





WLD‐3 Allow mechanical treatments in California spotted owl PACs located in WUI Defense and Threat Zones, but prohibit such treatments within a 500‐foot‐radius buffer around a California spotted owl activity center (50 acres surrounding a nest) within the designated PAC. Instead, conduct prescribed fire within the 500‐foot radius buffer. Prior to burning, conduct hand treatments, including hand line construction, tree pruning, and cutting of small trees (with diameters of less than 6 inches at breast height) as needed to protect important elements of owl habitat. For treatments in the remainder of the PAC, use the forest‐wide standards and guidelines for mechanical thinning.

WLD‐4 Pacific Fisher:

a. The Pacific Fisher protection measures listed below would be followed:

1) Increase retention of stands with greater than 60% canopy cover following treatment.

2) Protect important habitat structures such as large diameter snags and oaks, patches of dense large trees (typically 0.25–2 acres), large trees with cavities for nesting, and coarse woody material.

3) Use firing patterns or place fire lines around snags and large logs to minimize effects of underburning.

4) Use the Fisher and Priority Sites Marking Guide—Kings River Project to identify the most suitable individual trees and groups of trees for retention.

5) Retain all oaks unless they are a hazard to operations.

b. Establish 700‐acre buffers around occupied or discovered Pacific fisher den sites.

c. Allow prescribed fire and pile burning during the limited operating period for mechanical activities within the den buffer (March 15 to June 15). Prescribed fire treatments would result in low intensity underburns.

1) Proposed treatments of low intensity and duration such as planting, hand release, hand thinning, and hand piling can occur during the limited operating period.

WLD‐5 Goshawk: Conduct surveys when activities are planned within or adjacent to a PAC.

Use of Heavy Equipment HQ‐1 Use conventional tractor methods to remove logs on 1,034 acres.

HQ‐2 Apply and secure encroachment permit prior to operating within county easements.

HQ‐3 Apply contract clauses to protect young pine and oak regeneration. For logging activities, avoid damage to designated existing pine regeneration during felling, skidding, and landing operations. During logging operations, employ techniques such as falling to the lead, stage falling, using designated skid trails, and advanced flagging of pine regeneration needing protection.

Cultural Resources

Site specific design criteria is described in Dinkey North Restoration Project, Cultural Resource Inventory Report, High Sierra Ranger District, Sierra National Forest, R2010051552017 (Marsh 2009).





CR‐1 Avoid historic properties during ground‐disturbing activities (i.e., the use of ground‐based mechanical equipment, planting, piling, fire‐line construction, etc.). (Typical implementation of the Standard Protection Measures is the practice of “flag‐and‐avoid.”)

CR‐2 Allow certain non–ground‐disturbing activities within site boundaries. Certain proposed activities lack the potential to adversely affect the character of historic properties. Implementation of these activities would help reduce the isolation of a site from its surroundings and is consistent with the regional programmatic agreement (PA) (USDA 2001a):

a. Archaeological resources may not be resources of interest for prescribed fire (in accordance with the provisions of the Interim Protocol for Non‐Intensive Inventory Strategies for Hazardous Fuels and Vegetation Reduction Projects [USDA 2001a]). The standard resource protection measures of the Interim Protocol would be applied only to those historic properties defined as “at‐risk” from the use of prescribed fire treatments.

b. Mechanical shredding or removal of fuels inside of site boundaries with an articulated boom shredder/harvester would not affect the archaeological materials, provided the tracked or wheeled equipment stays outside of the delineated site boundary and the machine head does not contact the ground surface or site features (Interim protocol, Measure V.B.11). Removal of fuels by hand (manual thinning with chainsaws) would not affect archaeological materials (Attachment A, II.C) (USDA 2001a).

c. Chemical applications for reforestation (treatment of vegetation for site preparation and release) and noxious weed control would not affect historic properties where the application meets the intent of the Regional PA Stipulation III.E, specifically Attachment A, II.E, Application of Pesticides That Do Not Have the Potential to Affect Access to or Use of Resources by Native Americans (USDA 2001a).

d. When hazard trees are located within sites, ensure that they are felled away from significant features. Then remove the trees by rubber‐tired loaders with full suspension where openings are large enough to accommodate this type of equipment. Where openings are smaller, use rubber tire heelboom loaders or leave the trees in place with no further action to remove them. Conduct this activity under the direct supervision of a forest heritage resource specialist.

CR‐3 Non‐Archaeological Heritage Resources: Traditional cultural properties, locations of contemporary Native American gathering, and other such cultural resources identified through consultation with Native American tribes and individuals would be protected through avoidance by project activity or managed through project implementation and consultation to enhance the resource. For example, planned prescribed fire can have positive effects to regenerate growth in certain plant species used by Native Americans in basketry or traditional food preparation.

a. In the event of inadvertent effects or new discovery during implementation, comply with the stipulations of the regional PA (V) (USDA 2001a).

Riparian Conservation Areas and Aquatic Species Habitat Protection

Canyon zones, perennial creek streamside management zones, meadow, and seep buffers emphasize retention of tree density and soil cover. Pacific fisher rest sites that receive no or little treatment are emphasized in riparian conservation areas. Tree removals would occur within riparian conservation





areas (RCAs), meadow buffers, and SMZs. These tree removals would retain density closest to water, would retain erosion filter strips, and would maintain density higher than adjacent restoration emphasis areas. RCAs are defined in Table 2‐7.

Table 2‐7. Riparian Conservation Area (RCA) Widths and Definitions

Stream Type RCA Width Perennial streams 300 feet on each side of the stream, measured from the

bank full edge of the stream Seasonally flowing streams (includes ephemeral streams)

150 feet on each side of stream, measured from the bank full edge of the stream

Streams in Inner Gorge Top of inner gorge Special aquatic features 300 feet from edge of feature or riparian vegetation,

whichever width is greater Perennial streams with riparian conditions extending more than 150 feet from edge of stream bank

300 feet from edge of feature or riparian vegetation, whichever width is greater

Seasonally flowing streams with riparian conditions extending more than 50 feet from edge of stream bank

300 feet from edge of feature or riparian vegetation, whichever width is greater

Other hydrological or topographic depressions without a defined channel

RCA width and protection measures determined through project‐level analysis

General aquatic species and riparian habitat protection measures within all RCAs are as follows:

ASH‐1 Do not allow mechanical equipment within 100 feet of meadows or other special aquatic features.

ASH‐2 To protect bank stability, do not cut streambank trees (trees with dripline extending to or over edge of stream bank).

ASH‐3 For water drafting, use a screened intake device and pumps with low entry velocity to minimize removal of aquatic species—including juvenile fish, amphibian egg masses, and tadpoles—from aquatic habitats. Hydrologist and/or aquatic biologist will approve water‐drafting sites.

ASH‐4 When lighting slash piles, start burn from one end only to allow escape route for any species inhabiting piles.

ASH‐5 Within canyons maintain highest relative canopy density to contribute to maintaining water temperature. Maintain highest relative density to contribute to future large woody debris.

ASH‐6 Maintain all non‐hazardous snags and downed logs within SMZs, including perennial creeks, to contribute to current and future large woody debris except within 300 feet of a public and firefighter safety zone.

ASH‐7 Along perennial creeks (100‐foot SMZ) leave 50 feet closest to the water’s edge untreated. This will contribute to maintaining both stream temperature and future large woody debris.

ASH‐8 Limit application of herbicides to methods described in herbicide design criteria to maintain consistency with RCA objectives.





ASH‐9 Report any discovery of amphibians (frogs or salamanders) or reptiles (turtles) during sale preparation or implementation to the district fisheries/aquatic biologist.

ASH‐10 Employ the following protection measures for the species and habitat of relictual slender salamander, mountain yellow‐legged frog, and Yosemite toad (Forest Service Sensitive Species):

a. Do not ignite fires within SMZs that are habitat (fires are allowed to creep into SMZs).

b. Do not remove any riparian vegetation within RCAs.

c. Do not store petroleum products within RCAs.

d. Use only water for dust abatement within RCAs that are habitat.

ASH‐11 Follow all applicable aquatic wildlife species and riparian habitat standards and guidelines from the following:

a. 2004 Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment and Record of Decision (USDA Forest Service 2004b),

b. existing Sierra National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan direction (USDA Forest Service 1992),

c. Forest Service Handbook (FSH) 2509.22 Sierra Supplement #1 for Treatments within Streamside Management Zones (SMZ) (USDA 1990), and

d. BMPs (Appendix A), and other applicable laws and regulations (USDA 2000a).

Riparian Conservation Areas and Watershed Protection WTR‐1 BMPs. Include BMPs in project contract specifications and maps and adhere to them during

project implementation. These measures are required to meet State of California water quality standards.

WTR‐2 GroundDisturbing Impacts (e.g., soil compaction, vegetation disturbance). Reduce ground‐disturbing impacts as much as possible within RCAs. If BMP prescriptions fail to work as planned within a reasonable time, consult Forest Service specialists—including a botanist, soil scientist, and/or hydrologist—to determine follow‐up treatments. Temporary roads within the SMZ would be removed and re‐vegetated wherever feasible.

WTR‐3 Hazardous Materials. Locate refueling sites and oil and fuel storage outside of RCAs except as specifically approved by the district ranger.

Air Quality (Fuels)

The following are best available control measures (BACMs) for prescribed fire as required under Section 190 of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) developed implementation strategies and BACM for areas that are designated serious non‐attainment for particulate matter less than 10 microns (PM10) in 1992. Specific techniques to reduce fire emissions include the following:

AQ‐1 Employ commonly used reduction techniques such as burning units after harvest before new live fuels appear, burning in the springtime prior to “green‐up,” burning when 1,000‐hour fuels (woody debris larger than 3 inches in diameter) moistures are high, and burning when the duff is wet (after fall precipitation, or during winter and spring).





AQ‐2 Employ avoidance techniques such as burning on cloudy days when the plume and residual smoke cannot be seen, burning during periods of atmospheric instability for better smoke dispersal, and burning during periods of low visitor use.

AQ‐3 Employ techniques to optimize flaming combustion, including burning piled fuels rather than broadcast burning, reducing the amount of soil in piles, and employing rapid ignition to create a high intensity fire.

AQ‐4 Ensure that all activities conform to the State Implementation Plan (SIP).

AQ‐5 Conduct a full conformity analysis, as required by the Clean Air Act and the SIP to assess whether the proposed action produces less than de minimis emissions. (For full determination, refer to the Kings River Project Air Determination, available in the project record.)

Roads RD‐1 Design new or replacement culverts to accommodate the 100‐year storm. Design and

implement BMPs to meet state water quality standards. Maintain BMPs to ensure their effectiveness consistent with operational requirements and contract specifications.

RD‐2 Conduct dust abatement practices as a preventative measure during project activities with the objective of promoting safe use of roads. Minimize loss of road material and fugitive dust. Use water or other dust palliatives to accomplish dust abatement. Adhere to design measures identified in the “Riparian Conservation Areas and Aquatic Species Habitat Protection” section above.

RD‐3 Acquire legal access before using any road through private lands.

RD‐4 From engineering, obtain site‐specific recommendations for reconstruction or extraordinary maintenance.

Reforestation Stocking Standards and Insect Prevention FOR‐1 Ensure that reforestation stocking meets standards described in the Sierra National Forest

Land and Resource Management Plan direction (USDA Forest Service 1992) and that the release of existing plantations meets growth and stocking standards outlined in growth and yield tables (Oliver and Powers 1978).

FOR‐2 Limit thinning in plantations to periods when slash would be less likely to provide bark beetle species habitat (July to November) to reduce the potential from insect attacks.

Soils SOI‐1 Mechanical Treatments. Leave a 100‐foot wide buffer of 100% soil cover below large rock

outcrops. These areas have a high potential to generate runoff that can cause accelerated erosion on soils downslope. During prescribed burns, employ firing patterns to minimize impacts on soil cover in these areas.

SOI‐2 TractorPiling and Logging Operations. Conduct operations when soil is sufficiently dry in the top 12 inches to prevent unacceptable loss of soil porosity (compaction). Conduct field checking to determine if operations could continue under wet soil conditions.





SOI‐3 Protection of Roads. Subsoil roads and trails in areas where soils are compacted from management activities.

SOI‐4 Limitation of Slope. Limit tractor piling to slopes that are less than 35%.

SOI‐5 Treatment Areas. Maintain well‐distributed soil cover of 50% over treatment areas. Attempt crushing before piling where shrub species predominate to create small woody fragments left scattered over the site for soil cover and erosion protection.

SOI‐6 This design measure has been developed to address the lack of large woody debris (LWD) and/or snags in the following treatment stands: 150, 197, 225, 227, 275, and 288. These stands were found not to meet the LWD soil or snag standard and guideline. This design measure is intended to sustain LWD both in the short and long term. Any cull logs from the proposed treatments would be left in the stands as large woody debris except in the Defense Zone and Defense Core Zone of WUI areas. Cull logs would be targeted where past logging has damaged the cambium layer of white fir trees and has led to extensive tree rot. Tractor piling of slash will minimize the inclusion of large woody debris, consistent with fuels management objectives. Subsequent burning will minimize burning of large woody debris. LWD will be a minimum of 12 inches in diameter and 10 feet long.

Recreation and Scenic Quality

Recreation—General

REC‐1 Limit the use of heavy equipment and chain saws within 0.25 mile of developed recreation sites, cabins, special use permittee facilities, and private land facilities to after 7 a.m.

REC‐2 Conduct prescribed and pile burning during the low use recreation season.

Visual Resources

VIS‐1 Construct temporary roads in a manner that closely duplicates the existing lines, forms, colors, and textures of the surrounding landscape character. Avoid straight linear road construction so that linear roads will not be highly visible from key viewing points or from the main arterial roads. Use BMPs and avoid rock outcrops or sensitive areas. Previously constructed temporary roads would be re‐opened if practical. Upon completion of the fuel treatment work, these temporary roads would be closed and restored using BMPs.

VIS‐2 Modify the fuels treatment prescription for the 3.8 acres of identified high visual impact from Dinkey Creek in Stand 259. This area has been identified in The Dinky North and South Projects Potential Impacts on the Visual Quality of Dinky Creek (2009) prepared by the High Sierra Ranger District (ICF Jones & Stokes 2010g:Appendix C). This modification requires the Landscape Architect and the Fuels Manager to make on‐the ground changes, which would result in a medium visual impact and accomplish both visual and fuels management objectives.

VIS‐3 Where practical, site pile burning locations along the Dinky Creek and McKinley Grove Roads in areas where ash piles would not be highly visible.

VIS‐4 Restrict pile burning so that residual ash piles (as viewed from the developed sites) would be located in unseen areas or outside the designated boundaries of these developed sites. Slash treatment within developed sites can use either pile burning or removal of slash 3 inches or larger in diameter and 3 feet or longer in length to a disposal site.





Private Lands

LAN‐1 Prior to initiating fuels treatment work near private lands, flag the land lines to ensure that innocent trespass is avoided.

Alternative 3—Fire Severity The Forest Service is including a fire severity alternative (Alternative 3) for the Dinkey North Restoration Project.

While the HFRA allows the Forest Service to analyze one proposed action without other alternatives in areas inside the WUI and within 1.5 miles of the boundary of an at‐risk community, Alternative 3 was developed in response to a judicial order and as a result of analysis of scoping comments.

The goal of Alternative 3 is to reduce potential wildfire severity across the landscape and protect recreation residences, developed campgrounds, private homes, organized camps, and administrative sites found in the Defense Zone of the WUI. It includes using prescribed fire to reduce fuels generated by tree removal. However, in contrast to Alternative 2 (proposed action), fire is not used to restore the function of the forest. Tree removal is limited to removing ladder fuels in response to Judge England’s order and to those less than 16 inches dbh in response to the John Muir Society’s project comments.

Alternative 3 addresses specific forest needs through understory thinning, thinning tree ladder fuels that are less than 16 inches dbh, and prescribed fire activities that would:

promote public and firefighter safety through reductions in ground/surface and ladder fuels to reduce the potential for crown fire across the project area,

maintain key Pacific fisher habitat and forest structures by limiting removals to understory trees and maintaining canopy density across the project area, and

protect California spotted owl habitat by maintaining high canopy cover within PACs above 50%.

Alternative 3 proposes treatments that support the objectives proposed under the 2001 Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment, which focus on the removal of understory and ladder fuels. Under Alternative 3, the need for habitat protection would be accomplished by reducing or eliminating habitat impacts in the short term. This alternative is different than the proposed action, which has the objective of restoring forest structure in the long term and accepting some loss in Pacific fisher habitat to achieve restoration. Another key difference between Alternative 3 and the proposed action involves the treatment of California spotted owl PACs and HRCAs. Alternative 3 would limit thinning to ladder fuels that are less than 16 inches dbh. The proposed action would limit treatments in PACs and WUI Threat Zones to trees generally less than 12 inches dbh. The proposed action would allow removal of ladder fuels and suppressed and intermediate trees that contribute to crown torching up to 30 inches. In addition, Alternative 3 would maintain current Pacific fisher resting sites by prohibiting removal of high and moderate quality rest sites, thus retaining trees typically used for resting (i.e., trees greater than 24 inches dbh). Alternative 3 would meet the need for protecting spotted owl habitat through maintaining high canopy cover (greater than 50%) in California spotted owl PACs and across the project area. The removal of trees 10 to 16 inches dbh is intended and necessary to meet the fuels reduction purpose and need.





Alternative 3 has only one emphasis area, public and fire fighter safety. This emphasis is accomplished through project‐wide reductions in ground/surface and ladder fuels. Design criteria for Alternative 3 would also meet the need of protecting nesting and resting structures important to wildlife. Unlike the proposed action, this alternative does not directly address the need for density‐related forest health.

Alternative 3 is proposed to take place over the next 4 to 10 years. Tree removals (commercial harvests, small tree thinning) and burning are proposed to take place between the years 2010 and 2014. This schedule could be delayed by weather. This range in time reflects uncertainty from weather and burning conditions. Table 2‐4 reflects the schedule of treatments for Alternative 3.

Emphasis Area and Treatment Stands Alternative 3 would include the same treatment stands as the proposed action. They are shown in Figure 2‐1. The land allocations and acres of treatment also are the same; however, there is only one emphasis area to the alternative, public and firefighter safety. Table 2‐8 identifies the number of stands by land allocation and emphasis area, and Table 2‐9 shows the acreages.

Table 2‐8. Land Allocation and Emphasis—Number of Stands (Alternative 3)

Wildland Urban Interface Land Allocation Spotted Owl Land Allocation


Defense Zone Not PAC or HRCA 2 HRCA 3

PAC (maintain above 50% canopy cover) 2

Defense Core Zone Not PAC or HRCA 5 HRCA 1 Threat Zone Not PAC or HRCA 4* HRCA 0

PAC 3

Total 20






Table 2‐9. Land Allocation and Emphasis—Acres (Alternative 3)

Wildland Urban Interface Land Allocation Spotted Owl Land Allocation


Defense Zone Not PAC or HRCA 156 HRCA 330

PAC (maintain above 50% canopy cover) 154

Defense Core Zone Not PAC or HRCA 403 HRCA 75 Threat Zone Not PAC or HRCA 279* HRCA 0 PAC 220 Total 1,617


Treatment activities and design criteria for the project area and the purpose and need are discussed below.

Treatment Activities Under Alternative 3, the public and firefighter safety need was identified for all stands (WUI, PACs, and HRCAs). California spotted owl habitat need was identified for all stands that contain PACs. All stands were also identified for Pacific fisher needs consistent with meeting the goal to reduce fire severity and protect recreation developments. No restoration needs are addressed by this alternative. While tree removal would be limited to ladder fuels below 16 inches dbh, existing and treatment‐created ground/surface fuels would be treated to reduce fire severity and torching. The timing of the activities is expected to be the same as under the proposed action, as would the use of heavy equipment for removal of thinned trees and follow‐up prescribed fire activities. These would include construction of hand firelines, temporary roads, and heavy equipment and trucks.


Public and firefighter safety treatment activities would be conducted throughout all stands in the WUI Defense and Threat Zones. Stands within California spotted owl PACs in both Defense and Threat Zones also would be thinned by removing ladder fuels that are less than 16 inches dbh. Treatments would reduce ground fuels so that flame lengths would be less than 4 feet and crown base height would be maintained above 15 feet. Tree removal would reduce tree density by treating understory fuels and ladder fuels only. Understory trees less than 16 inches dbh and in the most subordinate position would be removed. Hazard trees of any diameter adjacent to structures and other physical improvements would be removed. Felled snags greater than 15 inches dbh would remain on the ground. Fuels treatments would focus on raising crown base height. Treatments would be consistent with the recreational character of the stands and would maintain screening.






While some restoration needs may be met by Alternative 3, the focus of treatments would be on reducing fire severity by removing ground/surface and ladder fuels. The restoration treatments in the proposed action seek to promote longer term restoration needs while reducing short‐term impacts on Pacific fisher habitat. Alternative 3 seeks to eliminate short‐term impacts on Pacific fisher habitat and aggressively treat fuels while leaving upper tree canopy density intact and minimizing removal of any trees with the potential for Pacific fisher resting. Restoration is not a goal of the alternative. Habitat linkages would be provided across the project area through maintenance of dense tree canopy cover where it currently exists. The needs for Pacific fisher would be achieved through:

retaining all key large tree structures needed by Pacific fisher,

retaining all trees larger than 12 inches dbh within high and moderate quality fisher rest sites,

reducing hazardous ladder fuels,

retaining snags that are not hazardous to recreation developments and leaving felled snags larger than 15 inches dbh on the ground, and

maintaining high tree canopy density across the project area.

In addition, in these stands, public and firefighter safety would be promoted through:

a reduction in understory tree density, and

a reduction of ground/surface fuels and ladder fuels.

Tree removal would occur throughout all diameter classes up to 16 inches in areas outside of high and moderate quality Pacific fisher rest sites and California spotted owl nest site buffers, consistent with the goal of the alternative. Reductions in hazardous fuels and the resulting fire behavior and severity would be consistent with the goals and objectives of the 2001 Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment.

One application of prescribed fire (underburning) is proposed in the next 10‐year period as a second treatment after hand or tractor piling and burning of the piles to reintroduce fire in some stands that are away from structures. Underburns would have average flame lengths less than 4 feet.


Treatments that emphasize protecting California spotted owl habitat under Alternative 3 seek to reduce ground and ladder fuels while maintaining canopy cover density. Canopy density would be maintained inside and outside California spotted owl PACs. The needs for spotted owl would be achieved through:

maintaining greater than 50% canopy cover in PACs in the Defense Zone (Stands 227 and 275),

limiting treatment to ground and ladder fuels within the PACs, and

limiting treatments to hand cutting and hand piling within nest site buffers.

High and moderate quality Pacific fisher rest sites would receive similar treatments as those found across the PAC; however, thinning would be limited to ladder fuels less than 12 inches dbh.





PACs within both the Defense and Threat Zones would also have intermediate and suppressed trees of all species with diameters at breast height up to 16 inches removed.

Treatments throughout All Stands

Proposed treatment throughout all stands would include maintaining the greater of 200 square feet or 80% of existing basal area per acre. This objective would maintain canopy cover above 50% or approximately 200 square feet of basal area where it currently exists. In areas below 50% canopy cover, the treatment would reduce current basal area by up to 20%. Tree removals would occur in trees less than 16 inches dbh that are ladder fuels. Thinning from below would occur in each stand. In a thin from below treatment, trees in the most subordinate position would be cut first until the objective is achieved.

Across all stands, public and firefighter safety would be addressed through both ground/surface and ladder fuel reduction.

Treatments proposed for all stands would result in the creation of ground fuels. The proposed action would treat existing and treatment‐created fuels through the use of prescribed fire (burning hand piles and machine piles) or removal near recreation residences or other special use permit areas. These treatments would be the same as for the proposed action. There would be no underburning as a second treatment. Table 2‐10 displays the acres of proposed prescribed fire and fuels treatments. Proposed fuels and prescribed fire treatments are shown in Figures 2‐2 and 2‐3.

Hand and machine lines would be constructed to contain prescribed fire.

Table 2‐10. Fuels and Prescribed Fire Treatments

Treatments Acres Affected Fuels Treatment Initial Treatment

Lop and scatter only 0 Lop and scatter and underburn 0 Mastication and underburn 0 Underburn only 0 Hand pile and burn piles or removal 178 Tractor pile and burn piles 1004 No fuels treatments 435 Total 1,617

Underburn Second Treatment 0

Restoration of Native Species Composition throughout All Stands

While restoration is not a goal of this alternative, some design criteria would address restoration needs. Restoration of native species composition would be incidentally promoted through the retention of existing pine, and oaks consistent with the goal of the alternative. Pine species would be retained when consistent with the goal to reduce fire severity and protect recreation developments. Noxious weeds would be treated with hand pulling only when practical.





Treatment Activities

Other specific activities that incidentally promote native species composition would include the following:

Marking guidelines would emphasize retaining pine and oak species.

Tree removals would focus on incense cedar and white fir.

Treatments for noxious weed eradication would include hand pulling on 0.9 acre to eradicate the following noxious weed infestations:

one infestation each of bull thistle and cheat grass, and

two bull thistle infestations near streams.

Fire Severity Alternative Design Criteria The following design criteria have been developed for Alternative 3 and further define proposed treatment activities for need areas. General design criteria and BMPs that would be applied throughout all stands are the same as those listed for the proposed action.

Public and Firefighter Safety Design criteria related to all stands to improve public and firefighter safety are as follows:

SAF‐7 Within all stands except within high and moderate quality Pacific fisher rest sites and California spotted owl nest buffers, remove fuels ladders and treat ground and surface fuels. Remove trees that are ladder fuels throughout all diameter classes up to 16 inches and emphasize retention of the larger of 200 square feet of basal area or 80% of existing basal area per acre.

SAF‐8 Treat existing and treatment‐created ground/surface fuels by hand piling slash, tractor piling slash, underburning, and burning piled slash.

SAF‐9 Remove trees hazardous to recreation developments but leave felled snags larger than 15 inches dbh on the ground.

Pacific Fisher Design criteria related to all stands to achieve the needs of Pacific fisher are as follows:

RPF‐7 Within high and moderate quality Pacific fisher rest sites, retain dense conditions. Limit removal of trees to those less than 12 inches dbh.

RPF‐8 Within all other types of clumps and sites, reduce ladder fuels and ground/surface fuels consistent with the emphasis on public and firefighter safety, limiting tree removal as specified under public and firefighter design safety criteria.

RPF‐9 Maintain tree vigor and growth and retain shrubs in areas currently managed as plantations by masticating stands to reduce shrub volume and tree densities to 150–250 trees per acre while maintaining 15% of the area in shrubs. Shrubs should be clumped.

California Spotted Owl Protected Activity Center Design criteria to achieve the needs of the California spotted owl are as follows:





OWL‐6 Maintain greater than 50% canopy cover in PACs in the Defense Zone (Stands 227 and 275).

OWL‐7 Within California spotted owl PACS in both Defense and Threat Zones, thin fuels that are less than 16 inches dbh.

OWL‐8 Limit treatments to hand cutting and hand piling within nest site buffers.

Recreation and Scenic Quality

Developed Sites

REC‐1 Cut stumps flush with a 6‐inch maximum height within the designated boundaries of developed sites and cut flush just above ground level in high traffic areas such as campsites, paths to restrooms, and trails to Dinky Creek to prevent accidental tripping injuries.

REC‐2 Restrict pile burning so that residual ash piles (as viewed from the developed sites) would be located in unseen areas or outside the designated boundaries of these developed sites. Slash treatment within developed sites can use either pile burning or removal of slash 3 inches or larger in diameter and 3 feet or longer in length to a disposal site.

REC‐3 Implement fuels treatment work during the low use recreation season (before Memorial Day weekend and after Labor Day weekend) when facilities are closed to public use. Fuels would be treated prior to the next public use season.

REC‐4 Use heavy rubber‐tired equipment on Dinky Creek Road or interior roads where the road design and existing condition would accommodate this use without adversely affecting the pavement’s integrity. Designate and protect equipment crossings and exits on Dinky Creek Road and interior roads to prevent asphalt damage.

REC‐5 Allow landings within developed sites. Remove and dispose at a disposal site landing slashes 2 inches in diameter or greater and longer than 3 feet. Minimize landing sizes and locate in areas away from high public use and not within the foreground view (as designated by the Forest Service).

REC‐6 Repair or replace to their original condition damages to the recreation infrastructure (e.g., roads, structures, water systems, and electrical systems) prior to the next public use season.

REC‐7 Minimize soil displacement by limiting equipment turns within developed sites. Restore soil displacement taller than 12 inches to pre‐project conditions prior to the onset of rain.

REC‐8 Modify the fuels treatment prescription on a site‐specific basis to allow specific understory trees (up to 10 inches in diameter) to remain or be planted where they can provide important screening and privacy between camping or picnicking units. These modifications would also permit an equivalent increase in low level tree removal to offset this prescription modification.

Recreation—General

REC‐9 Limit the use of heavy equipment and chain saws within 0.25 mile of developed recreation sites, cabins, special use permittee facilities, and private land facilities to after 7 a.m.

REC‐10 Conduct prescribed and pile burning during the low use recreation season.





REC‐11 Outside of Defense Zone stands or Defense Core Zones, protect scenic quality within the view area from Dinkey Creek by prohibiting any activities except prescribed fire (piling of surface fuels and underburns).

Visual Resources

VIS‐1 Construct temporary roads in a manner that closely duplicates the existing lines, forms, colors, and textures of the surrounding landscape character. Avoid straight linear road construction so that linear roads will not be highly visible from key viewing points or from the main arterial roads. Use BMPs and avoid rock outcrops or sensitive areas. Previously constructed temporary roads would be re‐opened if practical. Upon completion of the fuel treatment work, these temporary roads would be closed and restored using BMPs.

VIS‐2 Minimize the size of landings in developed recreation sites. Upon completion of the fuels treatment work, plant these areas with native tree species.

VIS‐3 Modify the fuels treatment prescription for the 3.8 acres of identified high visual impact from Dinkey Creek in Stand 259. This area has been identified in The Dinky North and South Projects Potential Impacts on the Visual Quality of Dinky Creek prepared by the High Sierra Ranger District (ICF Jones & Stokes 2010g:Appendix C). This modification requires the Landscape Architect and the Fuels Manager to make on‐the ground changes, which would result in a medium visual impact and accomplish both visual and fuels management objectives. If necessary, other areas can be selected for treatment to offset this modification.

VIS‐4 Where practical, site pile burning locations along the Dinky Creek and McKinley Grove Roads in areas where ash piles would not be highly visible.

Private Lands

LAN‐1 Prior to initiating fuels treatment work near private lands, flag the land lines to ensure that innocent trespass is avoided.

General Design Criteria/Best Management Practices General design criteria and BMPs that would be applied throughout all stands are the same as those listed for the proposed action.

Comparison of Alternatives The following tables provide a comparison of the alternatives:

Table 2‐11 summarizes the strategies and general management approaches for the land allocations and emphases.

Table 2‐12 summarizes treatment acres and methods for the action alternatives by treatments and emphases.

Table 2‐13 summarizes the effects of the alternatives.





Table 2‐11. Comparison of Alternatives—Proposed Strategies by Land Allocations and Emphasis Areas for Dinkey North

Land Allocation Emphasis or Need

No‐Action Alternative (1) Proposed Action Alternative (2) Fire Severity Alternative (3)

All Allocations Southern Sierra

Fisher Conservation Area

Wildland‐Urban Interface

Protected Activity Centers

Home Range Core Areas

Riparian Conservation Areas

Alternative theme for all emphases or needs

Base line for comparison of alternatives

Habitat change is intended to increase long term resilience to wildfire, drought, insects, and disease effects. Alternative 2 restores heterogeneity at the landscape scale to create a mosaic of density and structure based on ecological processes influenced by aspect, slope position, site productivity, tree species, and unusual micro‐site conditions. Emphasis areas address needs by balancing public and fire fighter safety, Pacific fisher habitat, and restoration of forest structures and California spotted owl habitat priorities.

Habitat change is minimized in the short term while reducing the potential for severe fire. Alternative 3 addresses reducing fire severity and fuels reduction through understory thinning, thinning trees that are ladder fuels below 16” diameter and prescribed fire activities. Public and fire fighter safety are balanced with habitat needs by applying a low intensity thin from below designed to retain upper canopy density.

WUI—Defense Zone Not CASO PAC or HRCA

No treatment Restoration and Pacific fisher emphasis; tree removal up to 30" to accomplish restoration and develop heterogeneity in forest structure; retain key large tree structures needed by Pacific fisher; reduce hazardous fuels; residual tree density varies by aspect, slope position, site productivity, tree species, and unusual micro‐site conditions.

Public and firefighter emphasis; reduce ladder and ground/surface fuels by understory thinning, thinning trees that are ladder fuels below 16” diameter and prescribed fire activities; protect high and medium quality fisher rest sites by retaining all trees larger than 12” diameter; maintain the greater of 200 square feet or 80% of existing square feet of basal area per acre and canopy cover of at least 50%.

WUI—Defense Zone CASO HRCA No treatment Same as above. Same as above. WUI—Defense Zone CASO PAC No treatment California spotted owl emphasis, maintain

50% canopy cover in Dinkey North, limit treatment to ground and ladder fuels, suppressed and intermediate trees.

Public and firefighter emphasis, maintain 50% canopy cover in the project area, limit treatment to ground and ladder fuels, remove intermediate and suppressed trees of all species up to 16” diameter.







WUI—Defense Core Zone

Not PAC or HRCA

No treatment Public and firefighter emphasis, treat stands to reduce ground/surface ladder fuels and separate crowns by removing trees throughout diameter classes and emphasizing removal of 80% of tree basal area with diameters of 0–10”, 40% of tree basal area 10–20”, and 20% of tree basal area 20–30”. Restoration objectives are subordinate to public and fire fighter safety objectives.

Public and firefighter emphasis, reduce ladder and ground/surface fuels by understory thinning, thinning trees that are ladder fuels below 16” diameter and prescribed fire activities. Restoration is not a goal of the alternative.

WUI—Defense Core Zone

CASO HRCA No treatment Same as above. Same as above.

WUI—Threat Zone Not PAC or HRCA

No treatment Restoration and Pacific fisher emphasis; tree removal up to 30" to accomplish restoration and develop heterogeneity in forest structure; retain key large tree structures needed by Pacific fisher; reduce hazardous fuels; residual tree density varies by aspect, slope position, site productivity, tree species, and unusual micro‐site conditions.

Public and firefighter emphasis; reduce ladder and ground/surface fuels by understory thinning, thinning trees that are ladder fuels below 16” diameter and prescribed fire activities; protect high and medium quality fisher rest sites by retaining all trees larger than 12” diameter; maintain the greater of 200 square feet or 80% of existing square feet of basal area per acre and canopy cover of at least 50%.

WUI—Threat Zone CASO HRCA No treatment Not applicable. Not applicable. WUI—Threat Zone CASO PAC No treatment California spotted owl emphasis, limit

treatment to ground and ladder fuels, tree removals occur largely in 0–12" diameter.

Public and firefighter emphasis, maintain 50% canopy cover in the project area, limit treatment to ground and ladder fuels, remove intermediate and suppressed trees of all species up to 16” diameter.







Snag Guidelines

Hazard tree abatement program continues.

Snags are removed from Defense Core Zone, along roads for hazard abatement and fire lines. Outside of these areas snags greater than 15” diameter remain. In areas where felled snags do not compromise fuels reduction objectives, logs remain.

Same as the proposed action except all felled snags > 15" remain on the ground.

PAC=protected activity center HRCA=home range core area CASO = California spotted owl





Table 2‐12. Summary of Treatments by Action Alternatives

Acres of Treatment Treatments Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Commercial Harvest – Tractor (sum of below) 1034 1096 California Spotted Owl Emphasis – Ladder Fuel Treatment 158 0 California Spotted Owl Emphasis ‐ Protected Activity Center Maintain Canopy cover above 50%‐ Thinning 115 0

California Spotted Owl Emphasis ‐ Protected Activity Center Maintain Canopy cover above 60%‐thinning 0 0

Restoration and Fisher Emphasis‐ thinning 416 0 Public and Firefighter Safety ‐ Thinning 344 1096 NonCommercial Harvest (sum of below) 125 32 California Spotted Owl nest buffer, <6" dbh hand thin 18 18 Hand Thinning plantations 14 14 Public and Firefighter Safety Emphasis, mechanical thin trees < 10" 11 0 California Spotted Owl Emphasis, mechanical thin trees < 10" 10 0 Restoration and Fisher Emphasis, mechanical thin trees < 10" 45 0 Fuel Reduction Treatments (sum of below) 1,274 1,617 Hand pile and Burn Piles or removal 178 178 Tractor Pile and Burn Piles 1004 1004 Lop & Scatter only 0 0 Lop & Scatter and underburn first entry 0 0 Mastication/Shredding and underburn first entry 191 0 Underburn only first entry 192 192 Fire Re‐Introduction Treatments –Underburn Second Entry 0 0 Fire Line Construction ‐ Machine 1.0 1.0 Pine Regeneration Clumps – Available/Suitable for Pine Regeneration w/Openings (sum of below) 44 0

Mastication/shredding – pine regeneration openings 0 0 Tractor piling – site preparation 36 0 Manual brushing and piling/burn – reforestation group 8 0 Underburn site prep in regeneration groups 0 0 Planting/Reforestation of Pine Regeneration Openings (sum of below) 52 0

Planting Replanting or Interplanting (29 acres of total) 44 0

Natural Regeneration or existing young pine regeneration 8 0 Plantation Maintenance Treatments ‐ Existing Plantations: Hand Brushing within thinning 2 2

Stand Cleaning and Ladder Fuels Treatments (sum of below) 1024 0 Hand cleaning – pine openings 0 0 Ladder fuel thinning – commercial acres tress <10” (post harvest treatment within commercial acres) 1024 1034





Acres of Treatment Treatments Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Release – Pine Regeneration Openings (sum of below) 55 0 One herbicide application + two manual release pine opening 16 0 Two herbicide application pine opening 18 0 Two manual release pine openings 21 0 Noxious Weed Control (sum of below) 4.7 0.9 Herbicide application 3.8 0 Herbicide application and hand pull 0 0 Hand pulling 0.9 0.9 Road Summary (sum of below) 19.4 19.4 Road maintenance (miles) 12.1 12.1 Road reconstruction (miles) 2.8 2.8 New road construction (miles) 0 0 Temporary road construction (miles) 4.5 4.5

Table 2‐13. Summary of Comparison of Effects by Action Alternative

Resource Proposed Action Fire Severity Alternative Vegetation Resources*

Restores heterogeneity at the landscape scale to create a mosaic of density and structure based on ecological processes influenced by aspect, slope position, site productivity, tree species, and unusual micro‐site conditions as suggested in North et al. (2009). The proposed action results in heterogeneous patches of vegetation across the project. Ten years after initial treatments, about 90% of the treated acres are resistant to density induced and insect mortality. The species composition is changed by favoring pine and oak over fir and incense cedar during understory thinning and by locating openings (gaps) and preparing them for the regeneration of pine and oak consistent with the decision priorities or treatment of brush to reduce the age class of brush.

Addresses reducing fire severity and fuels reduction through understory thinning and prescribed fire activities. Does not implement any of the ecological restoration strategies described in North et al. (2009). The fire severity alternative applies one treatment to large areas of the project creating a more homogeneous landscape. Ten years after initial treatments, about 50% of the treated acres are resistant to density induced and insect mortality. Species composition is changed by favoring pine and oak over fir and incense cedar during understory thinning but no regeneration or brush management occurs in openings (gaps).





Resource Proposed Action Fire Severity Alternative Wildlife Habitat The Dinkey North project will not affect

any of the federally listed endangered, threatened, candidate, and proposed terrestrial wildlife species, except the Pacific fisher because the project area is outside the current known range of these species. The project would not affect the following Forest Service sensitive terrestrial wildlife species: willow flycatcher, California wolverine, or Sierra Nevada red fox because the likelihood of their occurrence in the project areas is low. The project may affect individuals but is not likely to cause a trend to federal listing or a loss of viability to the following Forest Service sensitive species: northern goshawk, California spotted owl, great gray owl, Pacific fisher, American marten, pallid bat, or Townsend’s big‐eared bat.

Effects are the same as the proposed action.

Pacific Fisher Habitat

Initially, 17 out of 1277 acres of potential habitat would be lost, but conversion of lower quality fisher reproductive habitat (classes 4P, 4M, 5S, and 5P) to medium and high quality reproductive habitat (classes 4D, 5M, and 5D) would result in a net gain of 340 acres after 20 years and 610 acres after 30 years. The average number of trees per acre >24” dbh would remain the same immediately after project initiation and increase over time by an average of 7 trees per acre to 25 trees per acre after 30 years. Compared to the effects of the no‐action alternative, the proposed action would result in the protection of 723 acres of fisher habitat from being lost to wildfire after 30 years.

Initially, none of the 1277 acres of potential habitat would be lost, and conversion of lower quality fisher reproductive habitat (classes 4P, 4M, 5S, and 5P) to medium and high quality reproductive habitat (classes 4D, 5M, and 5D) would result in a net gain of 179 acres after 20 years and 812 acres after 30 years. The average number of trees per acre >24” dbh would remain the same immediately after project initiation and increase over time by an average of 7 trees per acre to 25 trees per acre after 30 years. Compared to the effects of the no‐action alternative, the proposed action would result in the protection of 723 acres of fisher habitat from being lost to wildfire after 30 years.


Initially, 83 out of 1122 acres of potential habitat would be lost, but after 30 years, these areas are predicted to recover and the amount of high quality habitat (classes 5M and 5D) would increase by 294 acres. Most important is the increase in highly quality habitat of 32 acres in the PAC and 163 acres in the HRCA. Compared to the effects of the no‐action

Initially, none of the 1122 acres of potential habitat would be lost, but after 30 years, these areas are predicted to recover and the amount of high quality habitat (classes 5M and 5D) would increase by 111 acres. Most important is the increase in highly quality habitat of 16 acres in the PAC and 32 acres in the HRCA. Compared to the effects of the no‐





Resource Proposed Action Fire Severity Alternative alternative, the proposed action wouldresult in the protection of 762 acres of spotted owl habitat from being initially lost to wildfire.

action alternative, the proposed action would result in the protection of 737 acres of spotted owl habitat from being initially lost to wildfire.

Fire and Fuels Defense Core Zones

Flame lengths would be reduced to <4’ on 55 of 82 acres.

Proposed treatments return to no‐action levels after 20 years.

Flame lengths would be reduced to <4’ on 30 of 82 acres.

Proposed treatments return to no‐action levels after 15 years.

All Zones (Core, Core Defense, & Threat)

Flame lengths would be reduced to <4’ on 933 of 1,357 acres.

Possibility of any type of crown fire would be reduced to surface fire on 991 of 1,357 acres.

Possibility of moderate and high intensity fire behavior would be reduced to low intensity on 966 of 1,357 acres.

Flame lengths would be reduced to <4’ on 913 of 1,357 acres.

Possibility of any type of crown fire would be reduced to surface fire on 808 of 1,357 acres.

Possibility of moderate and high intensity fire behavior would be reduced to low intensity on 870 of 1,357 acres.

Recreation and Visual Resources

Short‐term, minor effects to visuals near Dinkey Creek complex and recreational facilities and in key viewsheds from burning; long‐term, visual impacts would soften and resources would be better protected from possible effects of wildfire. Conditions would move toward desired conditions of more open and variable stands.

Effects would be slightly less than proposed action due to fewer trees being removed, but effects would be very similar.

Soils and Hydrology

Soil productivity would be protected; no adverse impacts, and no cumulative watershed effects. BMPs and design features ensure meeting of soils quality standards and compliance with Clean Water Act. Over the long‐term, beneficial effects to soils and watershed due to likely reduced fire severity in the event of a wildfire.

Effects would be similar to proposed action.

Botanical Resources

The Dinkey North project would not affect any of the federally listed endangered, threatened, candidate, and proposed plant species because no suitable habitat for any listed species exists within the project. The project may affect individuals but is not likely to cause a trend to federal listing or a loss of viability to the following Forest Service sensitive species: Botrychium ascendens, B. crenulatum, B. manganese, B. montanum, Bruchia bolanderi, Camissonia sierrae ssp. alticola,

Effects would be the same as the proposed action.





Resource Proposed Action Fire Severity Alternative Epilobium howellii, Eriogonum prattenianum var. avium, Hulsea brevifolia, Lewisia disepala, Meesia triquetra and Peltigera hydrothyria because habitat for these species would be protected with the implementation of project design measures. The project would not affect the following Forest Service sensitive species: Botrychium lineare, B. lunaria, Erigeron aequifolius, Delphinium inopinum, Lewisia congdoni, or Streptanthus fenestratus because the project area is outside of their geographic range. Other plant species listed on the Sierra National Forest as sensitive do not have ranges of occurrence within the Dinkey North project, and therefore, would not be impacted by the project.

Aquatic Resources The Dinkey North project would not affect any of the federally listed endangered, threatened, candidate, and proposed aquatic species except the relictual slender salamander and the Sierra Nevada yellow‐legged frog because no suitable habitat for any other listed species exists within the project. The project may affect individuals but is not likely to cause a trend to federal listing or a loss of viability to the relictual slender salamander or Sierra Nevada yellow‐legged frog because the project, other ongoing management activities, and proposed future management activities are expected to impact populations of these species and their habitat.

Effects would be the same as the proposed action.

Air Quality No adverse effects; all prescribed burning would be in compliance with approved Burn Plan; fugitive dust would be minimized by required contract specifications (road watering).

Effects would be similar to proposed action.

Cultural Resources

No impacts; adverse effects to all known sites would be avoided during project implementation

Same as proposed action.

* For more detailed effects by land allocation and emphasis, see Table 2‐11, Comparison of Alternatives—Proposed Strategies by Land Allocations and Emphasis Areas for Dinkey North.

Chapter 2 Alternatives, Including the Proposed Action 1...

Documents

Transcript of Chapter 2 Alternatives, Including the Proposed Action 1...