Final Environmental Impact Statement Rio de los Pinos Vegetation ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Final Environmental Impact Statement Rio de los Pinos Vegetation Management Project however some degree of exposure would be expected under the no action alternative, due to falling dead trees across the landscape. This includes areas along the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail. Alternative 3 – Reduced Salvage Harvest This alternative was designed to harvest trees in a visually sensitive manner while creating openings that mimic the characteristic landscape throughout the Project Area. In addition, there will be an attempt to slow the rate of insects and disease on the remaining canopy in the northern units. This Alternative harvests only Unit #2 through Unit #5. This Alternative will attempt to meet the next lowest Scenic Integrity Objective of “Moderate” through management techniques of harvesting in patches as well as salvage prescriptions. The harvesting techniques take into consideration the whole Rio de Los Pinos Viewshed and were designed to mimic current characteristic openings (either natural meadows or rock outcroppings). The placement of these openings within the landscape allows access to the stands and minimizes the amount of visual impacts. In addition, this Alternative attempts to mimic natural processes on the landscape to blend harvesting activities into the characteristic landscape. This increases the possibility that harvesting activities remain less evident on the overall viewshed. Because Unit #1 would not be harvested, it is expected that this Alternative will have slightly less impacts to the Scenic Resources. This area is highly visible from the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail, Forest Road 118, and general forested lands surrounding the project area. Timber harvesting has taken into consideration the next lowest Scenic Integrity Objective of “Moderate” on the landscape, to allow harvesting activities to take place. For Unit #5 the design criteria of the harvesting activity leaves 38-40 standing dead trees 8” and above per acre to meet the current Forest Plan standards and guidelines. This allows for texture and color on the landscape while the landscape transitions from the previous harvesting and the blowdown in the County Line Area to the contiguous stands of timber in the Rio de Los Pinos Area. This allows for understory trees to remain (with the exception of trees less than 8” or fir trees that will be removed to access larger diameter standing dead trees). As harvesting activities move north from Unit #5 to Units #4 and #3 the trees per acre are increased to 48-50 trees per acre (of standing live and dead trees 8” and above with small openings that mimic characteristic landscape conditions. Unit #2 with 48-50 leave trees per acre, will provide a transition back into the contiguous stand of spruce evident outside the project boundary. Visitors will still see evidence of harvesting activities, but to a lesser extent in Unit #2 than in Unit #5. Cumulative Effects – Alternative 3 As in Alternative 2, it is expected that loss of trees may additionally expose old disturbances from closed roads or may open viewsheds not yet known into previously harvested areas. This has the potential to expose to the visitor more harvesting activities than they may see if the standing trees were alive. This includes areas along the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail. Chapter 3 – Affected Environment & Environmental Consequences Page 3-72
Final Environmental Impact Statement Rio de los Pinos Vegetation Management Project 3.12 Late-successional Forests Scope of Analysis This analysis discusses older forests (termed late-successional forests), including old growth (as defined by Mehl 1992). The analysis area for this particular discussion is defined by two seventh-level watersheds (i.e., 13010005050101 and 13010005050102) encompassing the project boundary. Past Actions that have affected the Existing Condition There have been previous activities within the project boundary. See section 3.5 Timber Management/Silviculture (Chapter 3) under the same heading for more information. Existing Condition The Structure Class for forested cover types provides a sense for how heavily forested (canopy coverage) and how large the trees (diameter at breast height) are in the analysis area. Structure class can also be used to give an approximation for how much late-successional forest exists. The majority of the forested portion of the analysis area is dominated by Structure class 5, which is late-successional forest. Table 3.12-1 shows a summary of the Structure classes by the dominant forested cover type – spruce/fir (Picea engelmannii / Abies bifolia [syn. A. lasiocarpa]) for the two seventh-level watersheds. Table 3.12-1. Structure Class (percent) by dominant forested cover type in the Analysis Area. Cover Structure Class Type 1 2 3 4 5 Total spruce/fir 0.0% 3.6% 2.0% 6.4% 88.1% 100% The majority of the analysis area is dominated by late-successional forest, based on the best available resource data (from the Forest’s R2Veg database). Presently, there is a large spruce beetle (Dendroctonus rufipennis) outbreak in the area that may lead to relatively high tree mortality. The existing condition is rapidly changing and difficult to accurately predict. Consequently, the proportion of late-successional forest displayed in Table 3.12-1 may actually be considerably lower once the insect outbreak subsides. An evaluation of old growth was done for the analysis area following an inventory protocol developed by Erhard et al. 1998. The protocol provides a screen to determine if suspected old growth is present by comparing the Mehl (1992) old growth attributes to the Forest's stand exam data. Field verification was conducted on all sites that were both suspected old growth and proposed for treatment under one of the action Alternatives. None of the proposed harvest sites under any action Alternative is old growth and ties to an analysis completed for the Final Chapter 3 – Affected Environment & Environmental Consequences Page 3-73
Page 1 and 2:
United States Department of Agricul
Page 3 and 4:
Final Environmental Impact Statemen
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58: Final Environmental Impact Statemen
Page 107: Final Environmental Impact Statemen
Page 157: Final Environmental Impact Statemen
Page 161:
µ Unit 3 Unit 4 Rio de los Pinos -
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 175 and 176:
Jack Lewis Conejos Peak RD 15571 CR
Page 177 and 178:
Colorado Wild Page 3 Under alternat
Page 179 and 180:
Colorado Wild Page 5 to help provid
Page 181 and 182:
Colorado Wild Page 7 it is difficul
Page 183 and 184:
Colorado Wild Page 9 be avoided to
Page 185:
Colorado Wild Page 11 USDA Forest S
Page 188 and 189:
2-3 2-4 2-5 2-6
Page 190 and 191:
2-7 2-8
Page 192 and 193:
2-10 2-11
Page 194 and 195:
2-12 2-13 2-14
Page 196 and 197:
2-15
show all

Final Environmental Impact Statement Rio de los Pinos Vegetation ...

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

Delete template?

Save as template?