Environmental Assessment

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES CHAPTER 3
Table 3-11 displays the projected effects of proposed treatments on summer range hiding cover within
that portion of the Implementation Unit (IU) 52 outside of the MA-7 deer habitat land allocation (MA-9
and MA-15 allocations), and IU 57. The table does not include summer range from the MA-8 general
forest allocation because all treatments in that allocation are located within black bark ponderosa pine
stands. As noted previously, both alternatives would meet the cover requirement within treated black
bark stands.
Table 3-11 Implementation Units -Effects for Vegetation and Fuel Treatments on Hiding Cover in Summer Range
Areas
Sub-Area Current Cover
IU #52 (Pine Mountain WRHU)
(4042 forested ac., gross 4791
ac.) 40
IU #57 (Mahogany-Lavacicle
WRHUs) (3162 forested acres,
gross 3307 ac.) 40
Pumice Springs OGMA [sub-set
of IU #57; 338 forested acres] 41
1445 ac. (36% of
forested/potential
cover)
918 ac. (29% of
forested/potential
cover)
[113 ac.; 33% of
forested/potential
cover]
Fuels Treatment
Effects
3-20
Vegetation
Treatment
Effects 12
Post-Treatment
Cover
Alt. 2 Alt. 3 Alt. 2 Alt. 3 Alt. 2 Alt. 3
-240
ac.
- 130
ac.
-1030
ac.
-1049
ac.
na na -40 ac. -90 ac.
na na [-40] [-90]
175
ac.
(4%)
878
ac.
(27.8
%)
[73;
21.6%
]
Totals: 7204 forested ac. 2363 ac. (32.8%) 1053 ac. (14.6%) 1094 ac. (15%)
266
ac.
(6.5%
)
828
(26%)
[23;
6.8%]
Alternatives 2 and 3 have a lower risk of a bark beetle epidemic, especially in treated stands, because
conditions in those stands would not promote epidemic insect levels. Untreated stands would continue
to have high and/or increasing risks of such attacks, but large landscape level attacks are less likely due
to the mosaic of stand conditions created through both vegetation and fuel treatments. Both alternatives
also have a lower risk of a high intensity wildfire, again due to the mosaic of conditions created by
vegetation and fuel reduction treatments. Although hiding cover levels are low, and far below LRMP
objectives, the likelihood of that cover being lost to insect attack or wildfire is reduced for the next
several decades or until stand densities return to current levels.
Alternative 2 would require an amendment for thermal and hiding cover in deer winter range (see
Forest Plan Amendment #1, Chapter 1) to be made consistent with the LRMP. Alternative 3 avoids a
Forest Plan Amendment to wave the thermal cover objective of 30 percent by avoiding treating thermal
cover. Alternative 3 is Consistent with LRMP.
Alternative 2 and 3 (Forest Plan Amendment): A non-significant forest plan amendment has been
proposed to waive the hiding cover requirement in these two Implementation Units. The analysis
supporting the plan amendment concluded that the effects on deer would be minimal and short to midterm
in duration. This is due to the relatively large herd area associated with the North Paulina herd,
approximately 700,000 acres, the relatively large area of summer range included in that herd area,
approximately 400,000 acres, and the relatively small acreage of summer range affected, approximately
2,363 acres (approximately 0.6 percent of the summer range area for the herd).
40
IU data is for the summer range portions of the unit only. The allocations include OGMA (1,176 ac.) and Scenic Views (3,615
ac.)..
41
The Pumice Springs OGMA is the only portion of the Mahogany-Lavacicle IU summer range that will have any treatment
units.