Environmental Assessment

More documents

Recommendations

Info

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES CHAPTER 3 potential impact on shrubs. However, the target species for control with chemicals are not shrubs and overspray (e.g. windy conditions) would be avoided. The relatively small area to be treated is minor in comparison to overall amount and distribution of shrub habitats. Past and planned timber harvest activities may adversely impact shrubs, but generally this impact does not exceed 25 percent of an area. Planned and future timber harvest will utilize existing skid trails, landings and roads which will mitigate these effects. PDCs have been incorporated into all planned treatments to ensure retention of mature/late shrub age/structure classes within treatment units. Fuels treatments will have the greatest effect on shrub age/structure classes. Proposed treatments for both action alternatives are targeting the mature/late structure class, however there are units with inclusions of the mid stage. There is a PDC is in place to mitigate these effects on the mid class. There is a limited history in the area on past fuels treatment and their effects have been built into the current condition shrub classes as noted earlier. In conclusion, the cumulative effect on shrub habitat is not adverse to objectives for big game species forage availability, nor for associated shrub dependent wildlife. Over 50 percent of the winter range area will be retained in the mature/late age/structure class. Large blocks of xeric shrublands will not have any treatments and will continue to provide high value habitats for a variety of wildlife species. No shrub dependent species will be at risk to federal listing due to cumulative effects on them. Part 2 of Key Issue #1 (b) Effects of Open Road and Motorized Trails on Habitat Effectiveness Habitat effectiveness is affected by open road and motorized trail density. The Opine planning area has a current average open road density of approximately 2.97 miles per square mile and a combined average road and motorized trail density of approximately 4.96 miles per square mile. The Fox Butte Cooperative Travel Management Area program (Green Dot system) reduces open road/motorized trail densities to approximately 2.92 miles per square mile during the deer hunting season. Target road densities range from 1.0 to 2.5 miles per square mile within designated deer habitat (M7-22, LRMP page 4-115) and 2.5 miles or less in other land allocations (WL-54 LRMP page 4-58). Currently 25,976 acres of the planning area are closed to OHV use except on designated roads and trails (East Fort Rock OHV area). The remaining 28,647 acres are currently open to unrestricted motorized use including OHV use. Open roads and unrestricted off-road motorized vehicle use fragment wildlife habitat and disturb wildlife, especially during winter months when animals must use extra energy and resources to stay alive. Measurement Standard: Miles of system roads closed and decommissioned. Road and motorized trail density. Acres closed to unrestricted cross country motorized use. Habitat effectiveness is primarily influenced by open road and motorized trail density. Big game species generally avoid the areas adjacent to open roads and trails due to the disturbance from the vehicles and people. This effect reduces the amount of or use of available habitat in these areas. A number of variables influence the effects of roads and motorized trails. These include but are not limited to: the amount and type of traffic; the road and/or trail location; vegetation density and pattern; and topography. 3-32
AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES CHAPTER 3 Existing Condition for Roads and Motorized Trails Table 3-16 displays current road and motorized trail densities within the planning area. These figures include system roads and motorized trails as well as an estimated mileage of non-designated roads and trails within the planning area. The estimated mileage of non-designated roads and trails is a very conservative figure. It was determined using aerial photos and orthophotos in the district GIS system. Many are too small, narrow, or are hidden by tree canopies and are not visible on the aerial photos and orthophotos used for the analysis. Additionally, new routes (roads and trails) have been created since the aerial photos and orthophotos were created and therefore are not present. There is no current formal inventory information available that identifies the length or location of non-designated routes. Road and trail mileages, both system and non-designated, used for the wildlife analyses are based on information from the Deschutes National Forest corporate GIS database. Table 3-16 Estimated road and motorized trail density. Includes both system and non-designated roads and motorized trails Habitat Unit General Forest (nonwinter range) Lavacicle WRHU Mahogany WRHU Pine Mtn WRHU (total) Potholes WRHU Tepee Draw WRHU Miles of System Roads Miles Designate d (System) Motorize d Trails Est. Miles Nondesign ated Roads & Trails Habi tat Squa re Mile s 3-33 Estimate d Existing Road & Trail Miles (System & Nondesignate d) Existing Density (Miles / Sq. Mile) Roads & Motorized Trails Syste m Road s System Roads & Designat ed Trails System & Nondesignate d 5.69 3.32 0 1.50 9.01 3.79 6.01 6.01 40.56 0 2.89 68.86 12.46 4.97 45.73 (18.23 / 27.5) 45 0 6.29 61.19 49.52 7.56 72.72 34.17 6.88 Totals 133.91 99.47 28.59 11.7 0 18.9 3 21.0 1 15.1 4 17.0 1 85.2 9 43.45 3.47 3.47 3.71 86.29 3.64 4.30 4.56 6.29 2.18 2.18 2.48 118.27 4.04 7.31 7.81 113.77 4.28 6.28 6.69 377.08 3.47 4.63 4.97 (average) Road Density in Winter and Non Winter Range Habitat Unit: System road density within the planning area averages approximately 2.97 miles per square mile. Densities vary from a low of 2.18 miles per square mile within the Pine Mountain WRHU to a high in the Tepee Draw WRHU of approximately 4.28 miles per square mile. Adding the approximately 100 miles of designated motorized trails associated with the East Fort Rock trail system, the average road and motorized trail density increases to an average of 4.96 miles per square mile. The Pine Mountain WRHU has the lowest road and motorized trail density at 2.18 miles per square mile due to the lack of designated motorized trails. Due to the high mileage of motorized trails within the WRHU boundary, the Potholes WRHU has the highest average road and motorized trail density at approximately 7.31 miles per square mile. Adding the mileage of non-designated roads and trails, a conservative estimate due to the lack of up-to-date inventory, increases the density of roads and motorized trails to almost five (5) miles per 45 Miles of system roads in winter range and non-winter (OGMA and scenic views land allocation) portions of the Pine Mountain WRHU.
Page 1 and 2:
United States Department of Agricul
Page 3:
Abstract: The Opine Planning Area i
Page 6 and 7:
PROJECT LOCATION CHAPTER 1 Figure 1
Page 8 and 9:
PURPOSE AND NEED CHAPTER 1 commerci
Page 10 and 11:
PLANNING DIRECTION - MANAGEMENT ALL
Page 12 and 13:
PLANNING DIRECTION - MANAGEMENT ALL
Page 14 and 15:
OTHER PLANNING DIRECTION & STRATEGI
Page 16 and 17:
OTHER PLANNING DIRECTION & STRATEGI
Page 18 and 19:
ANALYSIS ISSUES CHAPTER 1 The Opine
Page 20 and 21:
ANALYSIS ISSUES CHAPTER 1 overstock
Page 22 and 23:
ANALYSIS ISSUES CHAPTER 1 Soils The
Page 24 and 25:
ALTERNATIVE DESCRIPTIONS CHAPTER 2
Page 26 and 27:
ALTERNATIVE DESCRIPTION - ALTERNATI
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
ALTERNATIVE DESCRIPTIONS - ALTERNAT
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63: COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES CHAPTER
Page 64 and 65: COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES CHAPTER
Page 66 and 67: IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES CHAPTER 2
Page 82 and 83: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT & ENVIRONMENTA
Page 130 and 131: ISSUE 3 - WILDFIRE RISK - DIRECT &
Page 162 and 163:
OTHER EFFECTS - CUMULATIVELY SIGNIF
Page 164 and 165:
AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT & ENVIRONMENTA
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Page 228 and 229:
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
Page 246 and 247:
Page 248 and 249:
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
AGENCIES AND PUBLICS CONSULTED CHAP
show all

Environmental Assessment

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?