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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Final Environmental Impact Statement Rio de los Pinos Vegetation Management Project Alternative 1 – No Action With no action, there is the potential for a short-term build-up of fuels on the forest floor and in the canopies of the spruce trees as they begin to die. The first year or so after an Engelmann spruce is infested by spruce beetle, the tree begins a slow drying process, brought about by the larvae eating the phloem layer of the tree. During the second summer of an attack most needles turn yellowish-green and begin to fall (Holsten et al. 1999). This period is when the potential for large crown fires would be at its highest. After the needles have fallen the potential would significantly decrease until many years later when there would be a greater potential for a heavy build-up of fuels as the roots of snags begin to rot and snags begin to fall. As noted by Veblen and others (1994) in some areas large outbreaks of spruce beetle and root rot in subalpine fir have also resulted in heavy loadings of large woody fuels, which would support future standreplacement fires. This could take from ten to thirty years or more. If fine fuels, weather conditions, and ignition sources are available for a potential future fire event, the heavy fuels that have fallen to the forest floor could increase the severity of the burn and possibly damage soils, watersheds, and the ability of the area to regenerate. Alternatives 2 and 3 Since the action alternatives allow for salvage harvest of the large diameter fuels (1000 hour timelag fuels) and the slash left in the harvest units can be treated, this is the most ideal situation for avoiding a severe fire event that could severely damage soils and the watershed. Contract provisions allow for treating slash to make it less than 2 feet in height, creating fuels that are more compact and part of the duff and litter layer. The only difference between the action alternatives, as it relates to fire and fuels management, would be in the acreage treated by salvage. Alternative 2 would have the most positive effect on fuels and fire management from the standpoint that it is the largest acreage treated with some sort of harvest activity. Removing trees infested with spruce beetle and the resulting slash treatment would remove the largest amount of potential fuels from the stands. However, it would not serve to eliminate the potential for a stand replacement fire, because even a low intensity surface fire in spruce-fir can cause high percentages of mortality. Alternative 3 would concentrate its treatment to only the infested areas in the center portions of the analysis area and eliminating areas with high stream concentrations. This would key in on the concern at hand by treating the fuels generated by dying trees and then subsequently treating the slash in areas proposed for harvest, but not within areas around streams, thus leaving the area at risk for a wildfire damage soils due to high concentrations of fuels remaining on site. Cumulative Effects: There is a risk of a future fire impacting the analysis area in the short term following treatment. This increased risk of wildfire could increase the potential danger to life and high-value property, both on private and federal lands. With the high density of dead and live material adjacent to and within the analysis area, a favorable environment exists for ignition and rapid spread of wildfire during periods of extremes in temperature, winds, and low fuel moistures. Chapter 3 – Affected Environment & Environmental Consequences Page 3-98
Final Environmental Impact Statement Rio de los Pinos Vegetation Management Project Logging slash would be available to carry a fire, but in most areas it would be lopped and scattered to a level that the intensities of a fire would not be as great as untreated areas. Within the analysis area there would be very little dead fine fuels in a state that could readily carry a fire but the regeneration of grasses and forbs would create some live fine fuels. In this condition there is a chance that only a low intensity surface fire would carry through the analysis area. Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of the Resources There would be no irreversible or irretrievable commitment of resources if the proposed action is implemented. Under the no action alternative there could be adverse environmental effects to other resources that could lead to an irreversible and irretrievable commitment of resources if a severe wildfire were to occur. 3.21 Noxious Weeds Scope of Analysis The scope of the analysis for noxious weeds is the Rio de Los Pinos Analysis Area boundary and haul route to Colorado Highway 17. Past Actions that have affected the Existing Condition All infestations that have been located and/or treated within the Analysis Area have been alongside roads or areas of disturbed soils. Road construction and maintenance is the primary activity that has had impacts to the vegetation and soils within the analysis area. Existing Condition Observations have identified Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) as being the only noxious weed species present within the Analysis Area. There have been very few sites of Canada Thistle located within the Analysis Area. Sites of Canada Thistle that have been treated within the Analysis Area in the past, have been very small in size (less than 1 acre). Since this area has a relatively low population of Canada Thistle, the management priority is for eradication rather than containment. Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects Alternative 1 – No Action This alternative will have a low risk for noxious weed spread and/or introduction. This is primarily because this alternative will have the least amount of soil disturbance. Additionally, Chapter 3 – Affected Environment & Environmental Consequences Page 3-99
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:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84: Final Environmental Impact Statemen
Page 133: Final Environmental Impact Statemen
Page 157: Final Environmental Impact Statemen
Page 161: µ Unit 3 Unit 4 Rio de los Pinos -
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 ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?