Memorandum
Date: September 5, 1997
To: Robert W. Williams, Regional Forester, Region 6, Forest Service
From: Donald R. Knowles, Executive Director
Subject: Regional Ecosystem Office Review of the Winema National Forest's Oregon Eastern Cascades Physiographic Province Late-Successional Reserve Assessment
Summary
The Regional Ecosystem Office (REO) and the interagency Late-Successional Reserve (LSR) Work Group have reviewed the Oregon Eastern Cascades Physiographic Province Late-Successional Reserve Assessment (LSRA). The REO finds that the LSRA, with the assumptions listed below, provides sufficient framework and context for future projects and activities within the LSR. Future silvicultural activities described in the LSRA (as discussed below) that conform to the LSRA criteria and objectives and that are consistent with the Standards and Guidelines (S&Gs) in the Northwest Forest Plan (NFP) are exempt from further project-level REO review.
Basis for the Review
Under the S&Gs for the NFP, a management assessment should be prepared for each large LSR (or group of smaller LSRs) before habitat manipulation activities are designed and implemented. As stated in the S&Gs, these assessments are subject to the REO review. The REO review focuses on the following:
1. The review considers whether the assessment contains sufficient information and analysis to provide a framework and context for making future decisions on projects and activities. The eight specific subject areas that an assessment should generally include are found in the NFP (S&Gs, page C-11). The REO may find that the assessment contains sufficient information or may identify topics or areas for which additional information, detail, or clarity is needed. The findings of the review are provided to the agency or agencies submitting the assessment.
2. The review considers potential treatment criteria and treatment areas addressed in the LSRA. When treatment criteria are clearly described and their relationship to achieving desired late-successional conditions are also clear, subsequent projects and activities within the LSR(s) may be exempted from the REO review, provided they are consistent with the LSRA criteria and S&Gs. The REO authority for developing criteria to exempt these actions is found in the S&Gs (pages C-12, C-13, and C-18).
Scope of the Assessment and Description of the Assessment Area
The REO reviewed the LSRA for conformity with the eight subject areas identified in the S&Gs (page C-11). Several initial questions regarding the desired future conditions and proposed silvicultural treatments were resolved in subsequent meetings and conference calls between the work group and Klamath Ranger District staff of the Winema National Forest. The LSRA was revised to reflect the results of those meetings and conversations and the revised portions of the LSRA were resubmitted by the Ranger District. The REO finds that the revised LSRA provides a sufficient framework and context for making future decisions on projects and activities within the LSR.
The LSRA addresses approximately 61,000 acres within LSRs RO227 (eastern portion, 48,669 acres; the western portion is within the Ashland Ranger District and is discussed only as it relates to the management of the eastern portion), RO228 (2,817 acres), and RO229 (9,219 acres). The LSRs are located within the Klamath Ranger District. Plant associations include: mixed conifer (11% of the LSRs), white fir (22%), Shasta red fir/white fir (50%), Shasta red fir/mountain hemlock (11%), and lodgepole pine (3%). Approximately 36% of the LSRs is in an old-growth condition.
The assessment successfully describes the conditions and processes within and surrounding the LSRs. The assessment details existing and expected future structure, as well as desired future conditions. It describes interior habitat, present conditions and those expected in 50 years when the LSRs will be fully functional. Connectivity within the LSR and with adjacent LSRs and the presence of known and potential Survey and Manage Species are also thoroughly discussed.
Assumptions and Clarifications
Members of the work group visited portions of the LSRs in order to more fully understand the proposals described in the LSRA. They observed proposed treatment areas and discussed possible treatments that would be undertaken in accordance with the LSRA. Further telephone conversations were held with members of the Forest staff to clarify unresolved questions. The Forest submitted another revised LSRA which included changes and clarifications that arose from the field trip and follow-up discussions. The following provides a synopsis of those changes, as understood by the interagency work group and the REO:
Desired Future Condition. Although the LSRs are expected to be fully functional within 50 years, there will be areas where large trees are not present and the desired large tree and snag levels may not be achieved during that time period.
Specific late-successional habitat characteristics that are obtainable for the LSRs include: canopy closure of 56% or greater; retention of large diameter (>25" dbh) Douglas-fir, ponderosa pine, and/or sugar pine (averaging a minimum of 1-10 trees per acre, while striving to retain the largest number supportable); and coarse woody debris (CWD) of less than 3" in diameter will be 12 tons per acre or less.
Landscape Distribution of Habitat. The landscape distribution of habitat for these LSRs is classified into three principal characteristics: late-successional areas meeting nesting, roosting, and foraging (NRF) requirements of the northern spotted owl (at least 50% of the LSRs); late-successional habitat not meeting NRF and other habitat meeting dispersal requirements of the northern spotted owl; and other habitat or "open" areas. These three characteristics are described as follows:
- Late-Successional Areas Meeting NRF. This habitat (which will comprise at least 50% of the LSRs) will occur in white fir and Shasta red fir stands and will be evenly distributed across the landscape.
- Late-Successional Habitat Not Meeting NRF and Other Habitat Meeting Dispersal Requirements. Approximately 25% of the landscape will consist of areas that are late-successional habitat but are not NRF habitat (e.g., Shasta Red Fir - Mountain Hemlock plant association), cannot sustain high-stand densities, are managed for bald eagle habitat, are recovering from past harvest (that will be in transition from dispersal to NRF conditions), and areas not capable of sustaining NRF conditions but will maintain sufficient canopy closure and tree size to meet dispersal requirements.
- Other Habitat or "Open" Areas. No more than 25% of the LSRs will be in open areas that include non-forested lands, areas of past harvest or disturbance, and areas in which stand canopy is too sparse or tree size to small to meet dispersal requirements.
Stand-Level Criteria for Developing Appropriate Treatments.
- Thinning. Thinning to reduce the risk of fir engraver mortality in white fir and mixed conifer associations, where white fir comprises 60% of the basal area. Although usually trees 7-14" in diameter will be removed, occasionally trees up to 21" will be removed to accomplish the treatment objectives.
- Fuel Treatments. Salvage sales and/or hand fell and pile treatments may be used, when small diameter CWD levels are sufficient and high-snag levels indicate future risk of fuel buildup. This treatment would typically be employed where Armillaria root rot or fir engraver beetles have created high-snag levels. In other cases, infrequent blowdown events may create high-hazard fuels.
Commercial Treatment Summary.
- Silviculture projects in the LSRs will be designed primarily to reduce the risk of loss of late-successional values. Treatment will focus on fir engraver risk, western pine beetle risk, and fire hazard. Minor amounts of other risk treatments and enhancement treatments may occur.
- The preference shall be to treat young stands for promotion and retention of older-stand characteristics realizing that not every eligible stand will be treated in order to maintain landscape-level stand diversity.
- The treatment acreages shown on Table 12 are not additive because more than one treatment may be applied to the same acres.
- Because of the amount of stands in various reserve allocations (riparian reserves, semi-primitive recreation areas, 100-acre unmapped LSRs, etc.), 50-60% of the "at risk" stands in any particular watershed will not be treated for fir engraver risk.
- Culturing treatments for western pine beetle may also include areas being treated for fir engraver. Culturing treatments may also occur in Shasta red fir stands containing remnant pines stressed by dense fir under stories.
- Treatments to reduce fire risk will most often occur in white fir and mixed confer stands in conjunction with fir engraver treatments.
- Salvage activities may be considered in stands where stand replacing events exceed 10 acres and where the downed wood exceeds the identified CWD targets (page 58) and impedes new stand establishment. Salvage activities may also be utilized to remove hazard trees that threaten public safety or property.
- The number of acres treated for fir engraver (per decade) will be <5,000 (Figure 12).
Conclusions
Based on the discussion presented in the final LSRA, the REO finds that the LSRA provides sufficient framework and context for future projects and activities within the LSR. Silvicultural activities described in the LSRA which are consistent with the S&Gs and the treatment criteria identified in the assessment as discussed above, are exempted from future project-level REO review. Please provide the REO with a copy of the revised final LSRA.
cc:
REO, RIEC
Arnie Holden, R-6
Robert Shull, District Ranger, Klamath District, Winema National Forest
Phil Jahn, Silviculturist, Klamath District, Winema National Forest
988/ly