Tillicum Watershed Restoration Projecta123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic... · 2016-05-12 · Vegetation Report Tillicum Watershed Restoration Project 3 All thinning

Tillicum Watershed Restoration Project

Vegetation Report

Prepared by:

Eireann Pederson

Forester

for:

Entiat Ranger District

Okanogan Wenatchee National Forest

April 2016

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination against its customers,

employees, and applicants for employment on the bases of race, color, national origin, age,

disability, sex, gender identity, religion, reprisal, and where applicable, political beliefs, marital

status, familial or parental status, sexual orientation, or all or part of an individual's income is

derived from any public assistance program, or protected genetic information in employment or in

any program or activity conducted or funded by the Department. (Not all prohibited bases will

apply to all programs and/or employment activities.)

Vegetation Report Tillicum Watershed Restoration Project

i

Contents

Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1 Resource Indicators and Measures .......................................................................................... 1 Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 2

Affected Environment ................................................................................................................. 3 Existing Condition ................................................................................................................... 3 Management Direction ............................................................................................................ 9

Environmental Consequences ..................................................................................................... 9 Alternative 1 – No Action ....................................................................................................... 9 Alternative 2 – Vegetation Proposed Action ........................................................................... 9 Alternative 3 – Proposed Action ........................................................................................... 13

Regulatory Framework ............................................................................................................. 18 Land and Resource Management Plan .................................................................................. 18 Federal Law ........................................................................................................................... 20 Other Guidance or Recommendations ................................................................................... 20 Compliance with LRMP and Other Relevant Laws, Regulations, Policies and Plans .......... 20 Summary ............................................................................................................................... 20

Degree to Which the Purpose and Need for Action is Met ....................................................... 20 Summary of Environmental Effects .......................................................................................... 21 Summary of Road decommissioning/closing effects to vegetation management ..................... 23 References Cited ....................................................................................................................... 24

Tables

Table 1: Resource indicators and measures for assessing effects.................................................... 2 Table 2 Forest Structural Classes Represented in the Planning area. *Descriptions taken from

FRS. ......................................................................................................................................... 4 Table 3: Resource indicators and measures for the existing condition ........................................... 5 Table 4 Stand Density Limits .......................................................................................................... 7 Table 5 Wenatchee NF Plant Associations and their maximum SDI rating represented in the

Project area. ............................................................................................................................. 7 Table 6 Lists the acreage of Silvicultural Prescription for each stand .......................................... 11 Table 7: Resource indicators and measures for Alternative 2 ....................................................... 13 Table 8: Summary comparison of how the alternatives address the Purpose and Need ............... 21 Table 9 Stand 44 Diameter Distribution comparison using the different alternatives................... 21 Table 10. Summary comparison of environmental effects to Vegetation resources. .................... 22

Figures

Figure 1 Tillicum EMDS Derived Stand Structure (existing conditions). ...................................... 4 Figure 2 Areas represented by Understory Reinitiation .................................................................. 5 Figure 3 Areas represented in the treatment area with >35% SDI .................................................. 6 Figure 4 Areas represented in the treatment area with 10TPA >20 inch DBH trees present. ......... 8 Figure 5 Tillicum Watershed Restoration Vegetative Proposed Actions ...................................... 10 Figure 6 Stand 44 Existing & Projected SVS and diameter distributions. .................................... 14 Figure 7 Stand 99 Existing & Projected SVS and diameter distributions. .................................... 15 Figure 8 Stand 55 Existing & Projected SVS and diameter distributions. .................................... 16


1

Introduction The Tillicum Watershed Restoration Project identified a purpose and need to modify the vegetative

structure, promote medium to large trees and restore resiliency within the planning area. The following

analysis will focus on the vegetation conditions within the Tillicum watershed. The analysis will compare

the No Action to the Proposed Alternatives. Alternative 2 and Alternative 3 are the same with respect to

vegetation and will be discussed in this analysis as the proposed alternative. Attachments included are the

following spreadsheets 2015 Existing Vegetation Conditions, 2020 Projected Post Treatment Conditions,

2045 Projected Conditions and the No Action 2045 Projected Conditions. Other attachments include: The

Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest Restoration Strategy (FRS), Background and Definitions.

The vegetative objectives for the Tillicum Watershed Restoration Project are designed to alter the

homogeneous state of the forest cover type and stand structure, in order to increase resiliency to

disturbance; protect existing and accelerate the development of large to medium trees, to provide habitat

for associated species; protect and enhance unique habitats to diversify composition and biodiversity;

protect and encourage the development of Northern Spotted Owl habitat across the Tillicum watershed.

To meet the above objectives the project proposes to reduce stocking by mechanical thinning

approximately 6,701 acres. Thinning prescriptions would be designed to distribute individuals, clumps

and openings across the stand in a variable fashion. Only trees less than 10 inches Diameter at Breast

Height (DBH) would be cut, using a chainsaw, within these acres. A portion of the residual trees would be

pruned to reduce ladder fuels. Lopping, scattering and handpile burning would be used to treat existing

and activity created fuels. The largest and healthiest trees within the stand would be retained. The

treatments would target the removal of ladder fuels and competition near the larger trees that currently

exist across the treatment areas and would be designed to increase residual tree diameter growth rates.

The activities listed below would be designated across the watershed with the following Silviculture

Prescription Objectives

1. Promote Diameter Growth (Rx1) - Residual stocking would range from 50 to 200 TPA, only

trees less than 8” DBH would be cut, created openings would generally be less than ½ acre in

size.

2. Shaded Fuel Break (Rx2) - Residual stocking would range from 10 to 50 TPA, only trees less

than 10” DBH would be cut, created openings would generally be less than ½ acre in size.

Approximately 1,076 acres.

3. Initiate Stand Structure Change (Rx3) - Residual stocking across 50% of the area would range

from 5 to 15 TPA and occur in areas 1 to 5 acres in size. These areas would be receptive to the

establishment of new seedlings. The remaining 50% of the area would be aligned with the

“Promote Diameter Growth Rx-1”

4. Restore and Maintain Fire Return Intervals (Rx4) - Thinning with prescribed fire. Acceptable

mortality ranges across the stands would be < 5% for trees greater than 16” DBH; < 10% for trees

between 8”- 16” DBH; < 40% for trees less than 8” DBH.

Resource Indicators and Measures

The resource indicators chosen are structure class distribution, stand density index (SDI) and diameter at

breast height (DBH). The structure class distribution identifies the stratification of the landscape into

process based structure classes to further analyze the landscape patterns and ecological processes, i.e.

disturbance and succession (FRS 2012). Stand density is a term that refers to an absolute measure of tree


2

occupancy per unit area; it also measures the intensity of inter-tree competition for site resources.

Measurements of stand density quantify aspects of stand structure by describing a combination of the

average number of trees occupying a unit of forestland and their size (Tappeiner et al. 2015). Stand

Density Index (SDI) is based on Reineke’s 1933 concept of self- thinning and is expressed as a

competitive equivalent number of 10 inch trees/per acre. DBH is the diameter at 4.5 feet above ground

and is the standard method for expressing the diameter of a standing tree.

Table 1: Resource indicators and measures for assessing effects

Resource

Element

Resource Indicator Measure

(Quantify if possible)

Used to address:

P/N, or key

issue?

Source

(LRMP S/G; law or policy,

BMPs, etc.)?

Forest Health-

Structure and Composition

Structure Class

Distribution

Portion of the landscape

meeting the desired future

structure class

(Understory Reinitiation)

Yes

OKA-WEN National Forest

2012 Restoration Strategy

Stand Density Index

(SDI)

% of treatment area

>35% Stand Density

Index (SDI)- Lower limit of Full Site Occupancy

Yes

OKA-WEN National Forest

2012 Restoration Strategy,

Dry Forest Restoration Principles.

Promoting

Medium & Large Trees

Diameter at Breast

Height (DBH)

% treatment area with

minimum 10TPA >20in DBH

Yes

NWFP, OKA-WEN

National Forest 2012

Restoration Strategy,

Okanogan Wenatchee NF Large Tree Policy

Methodology

The Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest Restoration Strategy (FRS) and the Ecosystem Management

Decision Support (EMDS) tool was used to initiate the analysis. For detailed information on the FRS

background and process, as well as the EMDS Tillicum Landscape Assessment reference Appendix A,

(Veg Report Appendix A Landscape Assessment.pdf) and Appendix B, (Appendix B Tillicum Landscape

Assessment Visual Display.pdf) filed in the Project Record.

The FRS analysis provided details to the interdisciplinary team (IDT) to pursue a restoration project and

identify a potential landscape treatment area (PLTA). After the PLTA was decided on field surveys began.

Several stands within the project area were surveyed in 2014/2015 using the Region 6 Common Stand

Exam (CSE) principles. Plots were taken throughout the project area on a scale of approximately one plot

per 20 acres. Data collected at these plots followed the procedures for the R6 CSE Intensive Survey.

Data was then entered into the USDA Forest Management Service Centers, Forest Vegetation Simulator

(FVS). FVS is a modeling system used by several agencies for predicting forest stand dynamics across

the United States. FVS modeling is based on semi-distance-independent individual tree growth and yield

models (Dixon 2010). The East Cascades Variant 1987, updated in 2012, was used to account for local

conditions during FVS simulations. Stands were selected for analysis based on their proposed treatment

and data availability.

The next steps of the analysis were to compare the FVS projected stand dynamic results from the No

Action to the Proposed Alternative. The FVS analysis looked at different thinning densities to meet the

desired future condition. The effects where modeled over the course of 30 years, 2015-2045. This

timeframe was selected to show the treatment effects.

The treatments simulated in FVS were analyzed under the following parameters:


3

All thinning was done in 2017, using the Fire and Fuels extension Thin with fuel piled and

burned.

Variable thinning densities were modeled and included: Thin to a residual 25 TPA, 50 TPA, 100

TPA or a thin everything less than 8 inches. Thinning treatments pertained to trees taller than 12

inches and/or a DBH less than 8 inches. Tree preferences during treatment favored ponderosa

pine and Douglas-fir.

Pile Burn: Percent piled (70%), timing (burn one year after piling), acceptable small tree

mortality (0.1%), largest tree killed (4” DBH)

2019 Prescribed Fire conditions: Temperature (70 degrees), wind speed (10 mph), fuel moisture

conditions (Dry), timing (Before green up), percent of stand burned (70%)

Information Sources

Region 6 Common Stand Exam data collection (field season 2014/2015)

Okanogan Wenatchee National Forest Restoration Strategy 2012

LRMP Wenatchee National Forest Plan 1990

Field Guide for Forested Plant Associations of the Wenatchee National Forest 1995

Incomplete and Unavailable Information

Not all stands within the analysis area had Region 6 CSE data collected. Walk thru exams were

conducted on the stands that did not receive the full stand exam. Data was then imposed onto the stands

without the full exam on the basis of like structure, canopy cover, species composition, plant association,

aspect and elevation.

Affected Environment

Existing Condition

The Tillicum Creek sub-watershed has been impacted by past management activities including; timber

harvest, wildfire, salvage logging, road building, grazing and recreation. These disturbances have shaped

the watershed into its current homogenous state. These disturbance regimes have left a variation of forest

ages scattered throughout the project area. The most recent Tyee Fire in 1994 has provided areas of stand

initiation with ages ranging from 13-21 years old. Areas that survived the Tyee fire but had burned in the

1970 Gold Ridge fire are in a state of young forest multi story and stem exclusion with ages ranging from

21-80 years old. The remnant overstory that survived past disturbances ranges in age from 80-300 years

old.

The dominant forest type throughout the project area consists of 87% dry mixed conifer and 13% mesic

mixed conifer. The dry mixed conifer is dominated by Douglas fir and ponderosa pine. The mesic areas

reside in higher elevations (above 4500ft) and consist mostly of Douglas fir, grand fir and lodgepole pine.

Other species within the project area consists of lodgepole pine, western white pine, western larch,

Engelman spruce, subalpine fir, aspen and scattered pockets of western red cedar.


4

Structure stages modeled from EMDS are represented in Figure 1. The EMDS modeling system

projected that the majority of the area is in two stages, young forest multi story and stem exclusion open

canopy. These stages are over represented in comparison to understory reinitiation and stand initiation.

Table 2 describes the forest structural classes represented in the planning area.

Table 2 Forest Structural Classes Represented in the Planning area. *Descriptions taken from FRS.

Structure Class

Description *

Acres

% Land within

Treatment area

Young-forest multistory

(YFMS)

Two or more cohorts are present

through establishment after periodic

disturbances. Large and/or old seral

trees are often at reduced density from

fire or logging.

5060

35%

Stem exclusion open canopy

(SEOC)

Below ground competition limits

establishment of new individuals.

6120

43%

Understory reinitiation (UR)

Initiation of a new cohort as the older

cohort occupies less than full growing

space.

951

7%

Stand Initiation (SI)

Growing space is reoccupied following

a stand replacing disturbance.

2010

14%

Figure 1 Tillicum EMDS Derived Stand Structure (existing conditions).


5

Table 3: Resource indicators and measures for the existing condition

Resource Element Resource Indicator


Measure


Existing Condition

(Alternative 1)

Forest Health- Structure and

Composition

Structure Class Distribution Portion of the landscape meeting

the desired future structure class (Understory Reinitiation)

7%

Stand Density Index (SDI) % of treatment area >35% Stand

Density Index (SDI)- Lower limit of Full Site Occupancy

83%

Promoting Medium & Large Trees

Diameter at Breast Height (DBH)

% treatment area with minimum 10TPA >20in DBH

56%

Figure 2 Areas represented by Understory Reinitiation

Resource Indicator or Measure 1

Structure class distribution is an important indicator and one that is the most manipulated in managing

forest ecosystems. Forest structure includes the variety and spatial arrangement of live trees, snags and

logs. Structure provides evidence of key functions for wildlife, forest productivity, and helps define the

value of providing goods and services (Franklin et al. 2002).


6

The current structure class distribution is modeled through EMDS and identifies that the existing

condition has only 7% of understory reintiation (UR) represented in the planning area. The FRS

highlights seven structure classes that where identified by Hessburg et al. 2000, and of these seven UR is

lacking in representation across the planning area. Other structure classes such as young forest multi

story and stem exclusion open canopy are over represented. Under these current homogenous conditions

the desired future condition of a healthy forest with structure variation is unattainable.

Figure 3 Areas represented in the treatment area with >35% SDI

Resource Indicator or Measure 2

Stand Density Index is the resource indicator and will be measured by the percent of the treatment area

that currently has greater than 35% of the maximum SDI. Thirty five percent was chosen because

research and literature states that this number is relative to full site occupancy (Tappeiner et al. 2015,

Franklin et al. 2011, Franklin et al. 2007). Full site occupancy dictates the amount of resources (light,

water, air) available to allocate to the trees occupying the site. It also identifies the beginning stage in

which no new individuals will establish. Maximum SDI’s are based on plant associations identified in the

stand exams and are provided in Table 5.


7

FVS modeled results show that currently 83% of the treatment area has reached full site occupancy.

Within the 83%, 28% is already in a self-thinning stage (>60% of Max SDI), where competition induced

mortality is actively taking place. Table 4 identifies the current acres within each stand density limit.

Existing stand densities for all treatment areas have been identified and are found in the attachments

under 2015 Existing Vegetation Conditions.

Table 4 Stand Density Limits

Stand Density Limits Acres

Lower limit of Self Thinning- 60% MAX SDI 1970

Zone of Imminent Competition- 55% MAX SDI 237

Lower Limit Full Site Occupancy- 35% MAX SDI 3849

High End Crown Closure- 30% MAX SDI 123

On Set of Competition-25% MAX SDI 66

Lower limit of Crown Closure- 15% MAX SDI 269

Table 5 Wenatchee NF Plant Associations and their maximum SDI rating represented in the Project area.

Forested Plant Associations of

the Wenatchee National Forest

(Lillybridge et al.1995)

MAX

SDI

SPECIES TYPE

Acres

% of

Treatment

Area*

CDG131 530 PSME*/Pinegrass 2182 30.1%

CDG134 430 PSME/Pinegrass-Blue bunch

wheatgrass

446 6.2%

CDS412 450 PSME/Pachistima/pinegrass 178 2.5%

CDS639 550 PSME/shiny-leaf spirea/pinegrass 1864 25.7%

CES112 820 Subalpine fir/pachistima/ 527 7.3%

CWF444 785 Grand fir/heartleaf arnica 351 4.8%

CWG124 635 Grand fir/pinegrass 1396 19.3%

CWG125 750 Grand fir/pinegrass- lupine 123 1.7%

*PSME- Pseudotsuga menziesii

*Treatment Area- Areas covered with Stand Exam data.


8

Figure 4 Areas represented in the treatment area with 10TPA >20 inch DBH trees present.

Resource Indicator and Measure 3

Diameter at Breast height is a measurement indicator relative to identifying trees greater than 20 inches in

diameter. This measure will indicate the amount of large to medium trees across the landscape. Large

trees are defined as 20-24 inches; very large trees are defined as anything greater than 25 inches (FRS

2010). EMDS identifies medium trees as 16- 25 inches and large trees as anything greater than 25 inches.

Currently 67% of the treatment area has large to medium trees scattered throughout the overstory.

Although large to medium trees exists on the landscape the total number is low relative to the desired

future condition. The FRS identifies that a desired condition of 11-17 TPA greater than 20 in DBH exist

in the structure classes represented in the planning area for the dry and mesic plant association groups.

The existing amount of TPA greater than 20 inch DBH have been identified and are found in the

attachments under 2015 Existing Vegetation Conditions.


9

Management Direction

Desired Condition

The immediate desired future condition is one in which stand densities will be reduced (<35% of max

SDI) allowing for available growing space amongst the residual stands to increase, in order to optimize

growth rates.

The long term desired future condition is one in which the homogenous cover type and stand structure is

reduced providing heterogeneity and resiliency to disturbance across the watershed. Large to medium

trees (>20in. DBH) will be promoted and represented at a minimum density ranging from 11-17 TPA in

both the Dry and Mesic forest types (FRS 2012). Unique habitats such as aspen groves, springs, fens and

meadows will be promoted across the watershed.

Environmental Consequences

Alternative 1 – No Action

Under Alternative 1, no thinning, activity fuel treatments, prescribed burning, road improvements, road

closures, road decommissioning, stream restoration or other connected actions would take place.

Ongoing and future activities, such as routine road maintenance, recreation use, and noxious weed control

would be expected to occur

The No Action alternative would maintain the homogenous cover type and stand structure that currently

exists creating a highly susceptible area to major disturbances (wildfire, insect outbreaks). Stand densities

would continue to reach their maximums causing competition induced mortality (>60% of Max SDI).

Understory vegetation in these dense stands will continue to become dominated by shade tolerant species.

Stands that are degrading will continue to degrade with a high possibility of losing the large to medium

trees that currently exist across the landscape. The loss of these large trees will have a ripple effect on

wildlife by removing key components of their habitat.

Alternative 2 – Vegetation Proposed Action

Non-commercial thin (NCT), Handpile: This project proposes to reduce stocking by

mechanical thinning approximately 6,701 acres. Only trees less than 10 inches Diameter at

Breast Height (DBH) would be cut, using a chainsaw, within these acres. A portion of the

residual trees would be pruned to reduce ladder fuels. Lopping, scattering and handpile burning

would be used to treat existing and activity created fuels. The largest and healthiest trees within

the stand would be retained. The treatments would target the removal of ladder fuels and

competition near the larger trees that currently exist across the treatment areas and would be

designed to increase residual tree diameter growth rates.

o Residual tree stocking would range from 5 to 200 Trees per acre (TPA) and would be

distributed across the stand in a variable fashion including individuals, clumps ranging

from 2 trees up to 20 trees and openings (generally less than 1/2 acre and up to 5 acres in

size).

Prescribed Burn: On up to 7,393 acres, prescribed fire will be used to restore or maintain the

desired fire return intervals and fuel loadings consistent with historical fire regimes. These

treatments would be designed to reduce the potential wildfire intensity by reducing the amount of

existing dead and down woody material (<3” diameter). Historically, these stands burned on a

frequent basis; this treatment would help return them to their natural fire return interval.


10

Figure 5 Tillicum Watershed Restoration Vegetative Proposed Actions

Proposed Action Silviculture Prescription Objectives

1. Promote Diameter Growth (Rx1) - Residual stocking would range from 50 to 200 TPA, only

trees less than 8” DBH would be cut, created openings would generally be less than ½ acre in

size.

2. Shaded Fuel Break (Rx2) - Residual stocking would range from 10 to 50 TPA, only trees less

than 10” DBH would be cut, created openings would generally be less than ½ acre in size.

Approximately 1,076 acres.

3. Initiate Stand Structure Change (Rx3) - Residual stocking across 50% of the area would range

from 5 to 15 TPA and occur in areas 1 to 5 acres in size. These areas would be receptive to the

establishment of new seedlings. The remaining 50% of the area would be aligned with the

“Promote Diameter Growth Rx-1”

4. Restore and Maintain Fire Return Intervals (Rx4) - Residual fuel loading of coarse wood

greater than 3 inches diameter would be 3 and 10 tons (Dry Forest) and 5 to 10 tons per acre

(Mesic Forest). Acceptable mortality ranges across the stands would be < 5% for trees greater

than 16” DBH; < 10% for trees between 8”- 16” DBH; < 40% for trees less than 8” DBH.


11

Table 6 Lists the acreage of Silvicultural Prescription for each stand

Stand

Total

Acres

Rx-1 (acres)

Promote Diameter Growth

Rx-2 (acres)

Shaded Fuel Break

Rx-3 (acres)

Stand Structure Change

Rx-4 (acres)

Restore and Maintain

Fire Return Interval

7614 5219 1076 406 912

2 100 97 3

3 19 18 1

3 28 23 5

4 9 1 8

8 29 26 3

9 30 30

10 36 34 2

11 29 26 3

13 10 2 8

17 3 3

20 16 16

21 14 1 13

22 11 11

22 99 92 7

23 26 15 11

24 61 57 4

26 59 56 3

28 10 10

28 5 5

29 2 2

30 82 77 5

30 13 13

32 18 10 8

32 5 5

33 1 1

35 30 29 1

36 48 44 4

37 1 1

38 3 2 1

39 116 94 22

40 61 60 1

41 266 261 5

42 2 2

42 43 43

43 61 52 9

44 138 116 22

46 3 3

48 33 26 7

50 200 198 2

51 145 38 107

52 94 84 10

54 95 89 6

54 51 43 8

55 243 30 213

56 122 122

57 104 18 86

58 18 16 2

59 133 114 19

60 26 24 2

62 2 2

62 35 31 4

63 10 10

63 412 396 16

64 21 1 20

66 <1 1

67 52 52

68 97 81 16

69 42 40 2

70 72 54 18

71 63 60 3

71 26 26


12

Stand

Total

Acres

Rx-1 (acres)

Promote Diameter Growth

Rx-2 (acres)

Shaded Fuel Break

Rx-3 (acres)

Stand Structure Change

Rx-4 (acres)

Restore and Maintain

Fire Return Interval

73 8 8

74 3 3

75 20 20

75 14 11 3

76 33 27 6

77 15 15

78 2 1 1

78 41 25 16

80 79 79

81 70 61 9

82 83 80 3

83 72 67 5

84 43 37 6

86 124 101 23

87 29 15 14

88 136 125 11

89 114 102 12

90 105 93 12

91 80 78 2

92 67 60 7

93 4 4

95 60 56 4

99 30 28 2

100 157 143 14

101 8 4 4

103 117 85 32

104 8 5 3

105 19 18 1

106 26 26

107 45 44 1

112 63 60 3

113 8 6 2

114 50 37 13

115 170 21 149

116 13 5 8

117 208 199 9

118 91 79 12

119 69 40 29

122 474 11 463

122 258 21 237

124 77 68 8

127 64 64

128 1 1

129 36 33 3

130 47 47

131 3 2 1

132 100 90 10

134 179 174.00 4

137 21 19.00 2

138 114 98.00 16

USFS Poly 161 161

Road

Easements

213 213

Total 7614 5219 1076 406 912


13

Alternative 3 – Proposed Action

Alternative 3 is the same as Alternative 2 for vegetation resources.

Project Design Features and Mitigation Measures

The following mitigation measures will be applicable:

A site specific silvicultural prescription shall be prepared for all activities proposing the

management of trees or timber stands to meet resource objectives. All prescriptions will be

prepared or approved by a certified silviculturist.

A clump and gap method will be used in thinning prescriptions to mimic what may have occurred

on the landscape naturally rather than a plantation with set spacing requirements.

Western red cedar, western larch, western white pine shall be retained during small tree thinning

operations. These species provide diversity across the watershed.

Where feasible, Rx fire ignition patterns should be adjusted to avoid mortality to western red

cedar, western larch, and western white pine.

Direct and Indirect Effects

Direct effects occur at the time and place the action is implemented. Indirect effects occur off-site or later

in time.

The direct effects under Alternative 2 would reduce stand densities throughout the planning area to meet

the desired less than 200 TPA and reduced SDI. Other direct effects would include a reduction in total

canopy cover, although not in the larger overstory.

The indirect effects under Alternative 2 would be increased diameter growth rates among the residual

trees and a less homogenous landscape that has improved resiliency to major disturbances such as

wildfire and insect outbreaks. Understory vegetation would respond to the new open areas with providing

shade intolerant species to reestablish.

Table 7: Resource indicators and measures for Alternative 2

Resource Element Resource Indicator


Measure


Alternative 2

Forest Health- Structure and

Composition

Structure Class Distribution Portion of the landscape meeting

the desired future structure class (Understory Reinitiation)

10%

Stand Density Index (SDI) % of treatment area >35% Stand

Density Index (SDI)- Lower limit of Full Site Occupancy

61%

Promoting Medium & Large

Trees

Diameter at Breast Height

(DBH)

% treatment area with minimum

10TPA >20in DBH

80%


14

Resource Indicator and Measure 1 Alternative 2 reduces the percent of stem exclusion open canopy and promotes understory reinitiation by

increasing its representation on the landscape from 7% to 10%. Promoting UR in areas where feasible

will help to establish the historic and desired overlap of structure classes. Creating areas of different

structure classes will help provide defense against disturbance processes as well as providing structure

variation that builds multi layers with a clump and gap mosaic of forest ages.


Alternative 2 reduces the percent treatment area with greater than 35% of maximum SDI from 83% to

61%. The reduced SDI will help provide the structure variation that will allow heterogeneity in the

overall cover type and stand structure. SDI values will be reduced to a level allowing the residual stand to

grow creating variation amongst size classes and structure.


Alternative 2 would increase the amount of large to medium trees across the watershed. By reducing

stand densities to provide growing space, diameter growth in the residual stand is projected to increase.

FVS model outputs indicate that on average one new size class (2inches) is generated every twenty years

following treatment.

Figures 5, 6, & 7 show existing (2015) & projected (2045) Stand Visualization (SVS) Images followed by

diameter distributions for a group of representative stands within the project area. Projected treatments

are modeled using Alt 2.

Figure 6 Stand 44 Existing & Projected SVS and diameter distributions.

Stand 44 2015 Initial Conditions Stand 44 2045 Projected Conditions


15

Stand 44 2015 Diameter Distribution Stand 44 2045 Diameter Distribution

Stand 44 was selected to represent areas where Northern Spotted Owl (NSO) habitat is being promoted

and protected. Silvicultural treatment objectives for the NSO area will follow the Rx1 prescription with

objectives to promote large trees and maintain multi layers with a minimum 40% canopy cover.

Treatments simulated in the model remove the smaller size classes to allow growth in the residual stand.

The current size class distribution for the existing condition ranges from 0-28 inches. Post treatment the

model projects the new range to be from 0-30 inches.




16


Stand 99 was selected to represent the general Rx1 silvicultural prescription. Stand 99 represents the

majority of the treatment applications throughout the project area. The current size class distribution

ranges from 0-34 inches. The projected post treatment size classes range from 0-36 with the majority of

growth in the medium tree category.


Stand 55 2015 Initial Conditions


17

Stand 55 2045 Projected Conditions Stand 57 2045 Projected Conditions


Stand 55 is located in the structure change prescription area (Rx3). FVS does not have the capability to

model the complete desired prescription; therefore Stand 57 is included to show the variation in the

prescriptions. 50% of the structure change areas will be treated with modeled results represented by

Stand 55 and the remaining 50% will be treated and modeled as Stand 57. The silvicultural objective is to

promote understory reinitiation by creating openings 1-5 acres in size to allow for a new cohort to

establish as the remaining cohort occupies less space and the residual stand increases in diameter growth.

Cumulative Effects

Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis

The spatial boundary for analyzing the cumulative effects to the vegetation within the project area will be

where the effects of this and other projects have and will overlap. The temporal boundaries are modeled


18

at 30 years for the ability to show treatment effects on diameter grow. Effects timeframes are defined as:

short term- immediately following treatment; long term- modeled at 30 years.

Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Activities Relevant to Cumulative Effects Analysis

Previous activities with a direct effect to vegetation include wildfire, prescribed fire, small tree thinning,

timber harvest, salvage logging, and reforestation. Other previous activities include road building,

grazing, invasive weed treatments and recreational use. For the complete list of specific past, present and

reasonably foreseeable activities see the master list located in the appendix.

The effects of the previous impacts include but are not limited to soil compaction from mechanized

equipment use, causing degradation in the available growing space; previous wildfires in the project area

have impacted the composition and structure, creating areas of early seral species and homogenous

structure; management activities such as small tree thinning have reduced stand densities in some areas

promoting larger trees across the landscape.

Reasonably foreseeable impacts include but are not limited to continued wildfire suppression activities,

prescribed fire, small tree thinning, recreational use, grazing and invasive weeds treatments. Private and

State sections within the planning area may impact vegetation resources by timber harvest activities

and/or reforestation following such activities.

Regulatory Framework

Land and Resource Management Plan

The Entiat Ranger District is managed under the 1990 Wenatchee Forest Plan, as amended by the

Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP 1994).

The Wenatchee National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) provides standards and

guidelines for Timber and Vegetation management projects.

Intermediate Harvest (Non-commercial thinning for this planning project)

o Intermediate harvests should be designed to improve quality, vigor and value of the

residual stand and not necessarily to maximize return from the intermediate harvest.

Silvicultural Examination and Prescription

o The selected silvicultural system must be capable of providing special conditions, such

as a continuous canopy or continuous high density live root mats when required by

critical soil conditions, or conditions needed to achieve management objectives such as

streamside protection, wildlife needs, and visual resources.

o The selected silvicultural system must permit control of existing or potential vegetation to

a degree that establishment of numbers of trees, other desirable vegetation, and rates of

growth as identified in site specific silvicultural prescriptions for harvest areas, can be

achieved.

o The sivicultural systems selected must promote stand structure and species composition

which avoids serious risk of damage from mammals, insects, disease, or wildfire and will

allow treatment of existing insect, disease, or fuel conditions.


19

o Silvicultural prescriptions will be prepared on a site specific basis for all activities

proposing the management of trees or timber stands to meet resource objectives. All

prescriptions will be prepared or approved by a certified silviculturist.

o The silvicultural prescription shall consider integrated pest management. Pests include

insects, diseases, animals, and vegetation.

Timber Stand Improvement

o The actual number of trees for satisfactory reforestation may range from 150-500 TPA.

Variations depend on species and tree sizes found on site. Stands with more than 500

TPA normally need thinning to optimize growth.

o Release projects shall be governed by the Final Environmental Impact Statement for

Managing Competing and Unwanted Vegetation.

Management Area

GENERAL FOREST (GF) – Provide for long-term growth and production of

commercially valuable wood products at a high level of investment in silvicultural

practices.

SCENIC TRAVEL- RETENTION (ST-1)- To retain or enhance the viewing and

recreation experiences along scenic travel routes

SCENIC TRAVEL- PARTIALRETENTION (ST-2)- Provide a near natural appearing

foreground and middle ground along scenic travel corridors

RIPARIAN RESERVES overlay all other management allocations where streams, ponds,

and wetlands are present and treatments within them are designed to meet and not retard

attainment of the Aquatic Conservation Strategy (ACS) objectives. The Aquatic

Conservation Strategy and the Wenatchee LRMP soil standards and guidelines set forth

objectives relative to the maintenance and restoration of sediment regimes, in-stream

flows, and site productivity. Proposed activities must maintain the existing condition or

lead to improved conditions in the long-term.

Designated KEY WATERSHEDS overlay all other management allocations. Key

Watersheds were designated under the NWFP based on their ability to provide high

quality habitat or refugia for aquatic and riparian dependent species with an emphasis on

watersheds that would “directly contribute to conservation of at-risk stocks of

anadromous salmonids, bull trout and resident fish species”.

MATRIX - consists of those federal lands outside the six categories of designated areas

(Congressionally Reserved Areas, Late-Successional Reserves, Adaptive Management

Areas, Managed Late-Successional Areas, Administratively Withdrawn Areas, and

Riparian Reserves).

LATE-SUCCESSIONAL RESERVES (LSR) - will maintain a functional, interactive,

later successional and old-growth forest ecosystem. They are designed to serve as habitat

for late-successional and old-growth related species including the northern spotted owl.


20

Federal Law

Endangered Species Act (1973)

Clean Water Act (1977)

Clean Air Act (1970)

National Historic Preservation Act (1966)

National Forest Management Act (1976)

Northwest Forest Plan (1994)

Other Guidance or Recommendations

Okanogan Wenatchee National Forest Restoration Strategy 2012 (recommendation strategy)

Compliance with LRMP and Other Relevant Laws, Regulations, Policies and

Plans

Alternative 2 complies with all relevant laws, regulations, and policies discussed above. It abides by all

relevant standards and guidelines from the LRMP of the Wenatchee NF. Specifically Alternative 2 is

designed to improve the quality, vigor and value of the residual stand following an intermediate harvest

and in this case a non-commercial thin. Alternative 2 is designed to reduce stand densities to values

within the 150 to 500 TPA range identified in the Timber Stand Improvement Standards and Guidelines

under the LRMP. Alternative 2 will comply with the Silvicultural examination and prescription criteria

and all treatment prescriptions will be written or approved by a certified silviculturist.

Summary

Alternative 2 improves vegetative conditions throughout the treatment area. The degree to which the

Purpose and Need for Action is attained is described below.

Degree to Which the Purpose and Need for Action is Met The purpose of this project as it relates to vegetation is to;

Alter the homogeneous state of the cover type / stand structure dominating the landscape to

increase the resilience to disturbance;

Protect existing and accelerate the development of large trees across the landscape to provide

habitat for associated species;

Alter the homogeneous state of the cover type / stand structure dominating the landscape to

reduce the threat of western spruce budworm outbreaks;

Protect and encourage the development of Northern Spotted Owl habitat.

Protect and enhance unique habitats to diversify composition and biodiversity;

There is a need for action because:

Cover Type / Stand Structure (ctxss): Across the Tillicum subwatershed, the stem exclusion open

canopy and young forest multi story ctxss is over represented and understory reinitation is under

represented, resulting in a more homogeneous vegetative landscape that is vulnerable to

disturbance.


21

Medium-Large Trees: The medium and large tree structure across the subwatershed is under

represented resulting in decreased habitat potential and resilience to disturbance and reduced

habitat for associated wildlife species.

Insect Vulnerability: The homogenous ctxss across the subwatershed increases the risk for

western spruce budworm outbreaks.

Northern Spotted Owl (NSO): Habitat is under represented across the landscape.

Unique Habitats: Multiple unique habitats exist within the subwatershed (meadows, spring, fens,

aspen) and could be negatively impacted by disturbance.

Table 8: Summary comparison of how the alternatives address the Purpose and Need

Purpose and Need Indicator/Measure No Action Alt 2 Alt 3

Alter the homogenous

ctxss

Structure Class

Distribution

Remains the Same

Increases by 3%

Same as Alt 2

Provide Resiliency to

disturbance

SDI-% treatment area

>35%

Increases to 100%

Decreases by 37%

Same as Alt 2

Protect and Promote

large to medium trees

% treatment area with

minimum 10TPA >20in DBH

Increases by 23%

Increases by 24%

Same as Alt 2

Table 9 Stand 44 Diameter Distribution comparison using the different alternatives

Stand 44 No Action Stand 44 Alt 2 & 3

Summary of Environmental Effects The No Action Alternative will promote the current conditions and not address the purpose and need of

the planning project. This will continue to degrade the health of the forest by accelerating disturbance

processes such as insect outbreaks and an increased risk to wildfire. Under this alternative the forest

structure and composition will remain homogenous. Desired wildlife habitat components such as multi

layers, variation amongst age classes and/ or structure stages will not promoted or exist. Large and

medium trees will continue to be suppressed because diameter growth will be minimal if not stagnate as


22

available growing space is fully occupied. Stand densities will continue to promote shade tolerant species

encouraging non fire resistant species to exist causing concerns for wildfire risks. Unique habitats may

disappear due to conifer encroachment or extreme disturbances such as major insect outbreaks or wildfire.

Alternative 2 will promote the desired future conditions and address the purpose and need of the planning

project. To meet the purpose and need Alternative 2 will modify the homogenous structure and

composition to promote spatial variation across the project area. Spatial variation will help break the

continuity of the existing landscape and provide a more heterogeneous landscape that is resilient to insect

outbreaks and wildfire.

Alternative 2 is designed to apply treatments that will reduce stand densities to less than 35% SDI,

allowing available growing space in the residual stand. Available growing space will encourage diameter

growth and modify the existing structure stages providing the desired structure stages across the project

area. By modifying stand densities structure stages such as understory reintiation (UR) will be promoted.

Historically and in the predicted future the Tillicum landscape had more acres within the UR structure

stage and fewer acres within the young forest multi story and stem exclusion stages. Manipulating the

vegetation in areas where feasible will allow the UR structure stage to return to the landscape and

increase its representation by 4%, moving the existing condition from 7% to 10%.

Treatments under this alternative would also promote and protect the existing large to medium tree

component by removing smaller diameter trees from the understory and reducing the existing TPA across

the project area. Reducing stand densities and promoting large to medium trees will help provide the

desired habitat components for the northern spotted owl. Treatments will also address protecting unique

habitats across the project area by removing encroaching conifers and providing barriers where needed

from grazing.

Table 10. Summary comparison of environmental effects to Vegetation resources.

Resource

Element

Indicator/Measure No Action Alt 2 Alt 3

Forest Health-

Structure and

Composition

Structure Class

Distribution Under no action

structure classes will

remain the same.

Stem exclusion open

canopy will continue

to dominant the

landscape. This will

contribute to

increased risks to

disturbance and a

lack of spatial

variation across the

landscape.

Vegetation treatments

will manipulate the

current stem exclusion

open canopy structure

classes into the desired

understory reinitiation

class. Creating areas of

different structure

classes will help

provide defense against

disturbance processes

as well as providing

structure variation that

builds multi layers with

a clump and gap mosaic

of forest ages.

Same as Alt 2


23

Resource

Element

Indicator/Measure No Action Alt 2 Alt 3

Stand Density Index

(SDI), -% treatment

area >35%

No vegetation

treatments would be

implemented therefor

there will be no

reduction in SDI

values. This will

continue to degrade

the health of the

forest and continue

influence disturbance

processes such as

wildfire and insect

outbreaks.

Vegetation treatments

would reduce SDI

values across 37% of

the treatment areas.

This will have a

positive influence on

breaking the

homogenous structure

and composition of the

residuals stands.

Same as Alt 2

Promoting

Medium &

Large Trees

Diameter at Breast

Height (DBH), %

treatment area with

minimum 10TPA

>20in DBH

No action will not

promote or protect

medium to large

trees. There will

continue to be an

increased risk to

losing medium to

large trees to

disturbances. The

available growing

space will continue to

be fully occupied not

allowing for growth

in the residuals trees.

Reducing stand

densities will encourage

diameter growth in the

residual stand by

freeing up available

resources and growing

space. Removing the

smaller diameter trees

from the understory

will help to protect the

existing large to

medium trees.

Same as Alt 2

Summary of Road decommissioning/closing effects to vegetation

management

In Alternative one (no action) access would remain unchanged. Management of stands within the

subwatershed would likely be less expensive due to the existing road network.

In Alternative 2 (proposed action) access would be decreased due to the removal of 69 miles of the road

system. The remaining portions of the road system would be maintained and/or upgraded to prevent

negative impacts to aquatic resources and reduce the potential from mass wasting associated with road

wash-outs. Management of stands within the subwatershed would be more expensive. Handcrews that

access areas for small tree thinning would be required to hike further distances and future harvest

operations would have longer haul routes and skidding distances.

In Alternative 3, the access would be decreased due to the removal of 88 miles of the road system. The

remaining portions of the road system would be maintained and prevent negative impacts to the aquatic

resources and reduce the potential from mass wasting associated with road wash-outs. Management of

stands within the subwatershed would be more expensive. Handcrews that access areas for small tree

thinning would be required to hike further distances and future harvest operations would have longer haul

routes and skidding distances.


24

References Cited Dixon, G.E. 2010 Essential FVS: A user’s guide to the Forest Vegetation Simulator. USDA Forest

Service, Forest Management Service Center. Fort Collins, CO

Franklin, Jerry F.; Mitchell, Robert J.; Palik, Brian J. 2007. Natural Disturbance and Stand Development

Principles for Ecological Forestry. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-19. Newtown Square, PA: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station. 44 p.

Franklin, Jerry F.; Johnson, Norman K. Dry Forest Restoration Principles and Prescriptions. 2011

Franklin, Jerry F.; Spies, Thomas A.; Van Pelt, Robert.;Carey, Andrew B.; Thonburgh, Dale A.; Berg,

Dean Rae.; Lindenmayer, David B.; Harmon, Mark E.; Keeton, William S.; Shaw, David C.;

Bible, Ken.; Chen, Juquan. 2002. Disturbances and structural development of natural forest

ecosystems with silvicultural implications, using Douglas-fir as an example. Forest Ecology and

Management 155 (2002) p. 399-423.

Lillybridge, T.R.; Kovalchik, B.L.; Williams C. K.; Smith, B.G. 1995. Field guide for forested plant

associations of the Wenatchee National Forest. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-359. Portland, OR:

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 335p. In

cooperation with: Pacific Northwest Region, Wenatchee National Forest.

Smith, David M.; Larson, Bruce C.; Kelty, Mathew J.; Ashton, P. Mark S. The Practice of Silviculture,

Applied Forest Ecology. Ninth Edition. John Wiley & Sons Inc. 1997

Tappeiner, J.C. (John C.); Harrington, Timothy B.; Maguire, Douglas A.; Bailey, John D.

Silviculture and Ecology of Western U.S. Forests. Second Edition. Oregon State University

Press. 2015.

USDA Forest Service. 2010 Updated 2012. Okanogan Wenatchee National Forest Restoration Strategy

(FRS 2012). USDA Forest Service. Wenatchee National Forest, Wenatchee, WA.

USDA Forest Service. 1990. Wenatchee National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. USDA

Forest Service. Wenatchee National Forest, Wenatchee, WA.

Documents

Tillicum Watershed Restoration Projecta123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic... · 2016-05-12 · Vegetation Report Tillicum Watershed Restoration Project 3 All thinning