United States
Department of
Agriculture
Forest Service
Red River
Ranger District
Nez Perce
National Forest
American and
Crooked River
     Project
                           APR 11 2005
       RECORD OF DECISION
              April 2005

-------

-------
 INTRODUCTION

 This Record of Decision documents the decision to implement an alternative of the American
 and Crooked River Project Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The project is on the
 Red River Ranger District of the  Nez Perce  National Forest.  This document describes the
 different alternatives considered and the rationale used in selecting an alternative.

 The project area is located in two separate watersheds within the Nez Perce National Forest in
 Idaho  County, near Elk City.  The American River watershed  is  located northeast of Elk City,
 and the  Crooked  River  watershed  is located  southwest of Elk  City.   The project  area
 encompasses approximately 39,000 acres.
 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION

 The purpose and need for the project was determined after comparing the existing condition of
 the  project area  with  the  desired  future condition  and  management goals and  direction
 described in the Nez Perce National Forest  Plan.  The project area's existing condition was
 determined  using field data  and the findings from the  South Fork Clearwater River Landscape
 Assessment (SFLA) and other relevant agency and scientific publications.

 In portions of the project area, the forest vegetation is dominated by lodgepole pine that became
 established  following  wildfires  that occurred  in  the late  1800s and early  1900s.   Extensive
 stands of lodgepole pine are now mature (80 to  130 years old) and susceptible to bark beetle
 attack.  Mountain pine beetle infestations in the project area have increased substantially since
 1998 and are killing increasing numbers of trees.  As these trees die and accumulate as dry fuel
 over the next  10 to 20 years, there is the potential to carry a severe wildfire over a wide area.
 Due to limited fire occurrence over the past 50 years, shade-tolerant trees  (such as grand fir,
 Douglas-fir,  and subalpine  fir) have  become established under  many of  the forest stands,
 creating  a situation known  as a "fuel ladder."   Given favorable weather  and fuel  moisture
 conditions, a ground fire could move into the crowns in many of these areas  and result in large,
 intense wildfires.

 The proximity of this forest fuel buildup to Elk City as well as private inholdings, residences, and
 government facilities  within the  two  watersheds heightens concerns for  public safety and
 potential property damage from wildfire. Additionally, the large number of roads in the project
 area  would  tend to exacerbate  the  increase in run-off  and associated sedimentation from
 burned areas during post-fire precipitation events.

The purpose of the project is to reduce existing and potential forest fuels, create conditions that
will help sustain long-lived  fire tolerant tree  species (ponderosa pine,  western  larch),  and
contribute to the economic and social well being of people who use, and reside within, the local
area.

The objectives of the project  are to:

-------
   •   Promote the health and vigor of timber stands and improve the environment for long-
       lived,  fire  resistant species  by reducing densities of lodgepole pine or other small
       diameter trees that provide fuel ladders for development of crown fires,

   •   Increase  relative  proportions  of long-lived, fire resistant tree species by restoring or
       regenerating  to  western larch, ponderosa  pine, and  by  protecting large  diameter
       ponderosa pine, Douglas fir, and western larch,

   •   Reduce the risk of large-scale crown fire spread by creating vegetative patterns through
       harvest or silvicultural treatments, that would increase fire suppression and management
       effectiveness, and

   •   Reduce the likelihood of severe local fire effects by removing dead, dying, and downed
       trees that would otherwise result in high fuel loading.

Based on feedback from the public in response to the DEIS, clarification of the economic and
social  well-being  portion of the Purpose and  Need  Statement was provided  in the FEIS.
Evaluation of alternatives considered a combination of factors that define economic and social
well-being including:

   •   Protection of property and infrastructure from potential wildfire effects.
   •   Economic opportunities.
   •   Public use and enjoyment of the area associated primarily with:
          o   Recreation opportunities.
          o   Fish and wildlife habitat.
          o   Water Quality.

DECISION TO BE MADE

Within the regulatory framework consisting of  all applicable laws, regulations,  and policies, this
decision will include:

   •   The  location, design,  amount, and scheduling of hazardous fuel treatments, timber
       harvest,  activity  fuels  treatment   (slash),  temporary   road   construction,  road
       reconstruction, and silvicultural practices;

   •   The estimated timber volume, if any, to make available from the project  area at this time;

   •   Access management measures necessary to meet Forest  Plan standards and project
       objectives;

   •   The amount,  location, and type of water quality/fish  habitat restoration that  needs to
       occur in conjunction with other management actions;

   •   Appropriate design criteria, mitigation, and monitoring; and

   •   Scheduling of activities, if necessary, to meet the purpose and need of the action.

   •   Review and adopt Visual Quality Objectives.
AMERICAN-CROOKED RIVER PROJECT EIS
NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
ROD-2

-------
 CHANGES BETWEEN THE DRAFT AND FINAL EIS

 Alternative  D of the FEIS  includes all of the hazardous  fuel/vegetative treatment  units in
 Alternative D of the DEIS with the following exceptions.

    •  Units 99,  99.2, 105,  and 329 (about 62 acres) were identified as meeting Forest Plan
       criteria for old growth. I decided to drop these units from consideration for harvest in the
       FEIS.

    •  Units 541, 542, and 543 (about 105 acres of thinning and partial canopy removal) were
       added between road 1810 and the top of Flatiron Ridge in order to facilitate improved
       wildfire  containment  and suppression  effectiveness in this  strategically important area
       (FEIS Section 3.4).

 There were several minor changes to the Design and Mitigation Measures (FEIS Table 2.3) to
 add clarity or avoid duplication.   Design and Mitigation Measures listed apply to all alternatives
 analyzed in detail in both the DEIS and FEIS.

 I removed reference to creating "fuel  breaks" and  "safety areas" from the objectives of the
 project because,  although the project creates diverse vegetative patterns through harvest that
 reduces  the continuity of  hazardous fuels in  strategic areas, it does not propose to manage
 these areas as long-term fuel  breaks.  Harvest activities will  temporarily provide areas that
 provide increased safety for fire fighters conducting suppression activities.  However, safety
 zones specifically delineated for public use would more appropriately be addressed  through
 localized defensible space projects or in the Idaho County Hazard Mitigation planning process.

 Based on public input, I substantially increased the amount of watershed restoration in the FEIS
 over and above that which was analyzed and determined in the DEIS as sufficient to achieve an
 upward trend in  water  quality  and  fish habitat.  The additional  approved  list of watershed
 improvements is  shown in Table R-2 of this Record of Decision and would have a maximum
 equivalent to Alternative E in the FEIS.

 An error in the miles of instream improvement was displayed in the DEIS.  Part of the reason for
 this error was that some  stream reaches were considered  for instream  improvement at two
 levels of intensity, with a higher level of improvement in the "additional restoration" category.
 The number of miles was  double  counted for those reaches that  included  both levels  of
 treatment. These numbers  have been corrected in the FEIS for all action alternatives.  The
 actual watershed treatment  that was  originally  proposed has  not  changed only the way the
 number of miles was tabulated.

 These changes have been analyzed in detail in the FEIS.


 THE DECISION AND CHANGES FROM THE FEIS

 I have decided  to implement Alternative D, of the American and Crooked River Project Final
 Environmental Impact Statement, with the modifications that  are identified below.  Maps AR-1
 and CR-1, in this Record of Decision, display the Selected Alternative.  In making this decision, I
 considered information  in the  FEIS  and supporting project  file;  information presented  in
 meetings and informal sessions I attended; all public comments;  and the results  of coordination
and consultation with the Nez Perce Tribe, NOAA Fisheries, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service,


                                                  AMERICAN AND CROOKED RIVER PROJECT
                                                           NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
                                                                              ROD-3

-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Idaho Department
of Environmental Quality,  Idaho  State  Historic Preservation  Office,  and the  Idaho County
Commission.  The description of  the Selected Alternative is followed  by the  rationale for the
decision.

I  am including the following modifications to the FEIS Alternative D as  part of the Selected
Alternative.  The effects of these  modifications are minor in the overall context of the project,
and are within the range of effects  considered in the FEIS.

   •   No harvest will occur in Units 333, 336, 337, and 338, totaling 73 acres, because recent
       survey information indicates the presence of old growth conditions within  substantial
       portions of these units.  This change is consistent with  the overall project constraint to
       avoid activities in areas meeting old growth criteria.

   •   Temporary roads planned for construction in association with Units 11.1, 15, 21, 22, and
       33, totaling approximately 1.3 miles, will not be constructed. Portions of these units may
       still be harvested from  existing roads, with short  spurs  to landings, less  than 300 feet,
       where  necessary.   This will  result in a reduction  of  approximately  40 acres  to be
       harvested.  These changes affect the Silver Creek sub-watershed, an important tributary
       to Crooked River.  I am making  these changes because Silver Creek has a relatively
       high  density of proposed activity compared to other sub-watersheds in  the project area.
       In addition, the ratio of roads constructed to acres harvested indicates inefficiencies that
       can be easily corrected by this change.   This  change  is consistent with our efforts to
       minimize risks to fish habitat and produce a well-balanced project.

   •   The  temporary road  planned for construction in association with Units 504,  508, 509,
       510,  510.9, 511, 512,  and 513,  totaling approximately 1mile, will not be constructed.
       Some of these units are located in a currently unroaded portion of the East Fork of
       American River.  The terrain is relatively flat. A field review of these units  concluded that
       most of the area in  the associated units  could  be harvested using methods that would
       not require a road to be built, such as log forwarding.

   •   Cultural sites identified in  the project area will be buffered to  protect them  during
       implementation of this project.  This is estimated to  be  only a few acres, which will be
       determined during contract layout.


TRANSPORTATION

The transportation system proposed in Alternative D was adopted, with the minor modifications
noted above, for the selected  alternative. To facilitate timber  harvest activities, an  estimated
12.0 miles of temporary roads  will be constructed. Each of these temporary roads will exist on
the landscape for one to three years and will  be decommissioned  following timber harvest
activities.  Changes to public access to the area  are minor and  summarized in Tables R-3, R-4,
and R-6 of this document.  Although there is a considerable amount of road decommissioning
associated with this project (up to 37 miles), most of these roads are currently administratively
closed to use, impassible with motorized  equipment, or are receiving little if any recreational use
at this time (FEIS, Section 3.8).
AMERICAN-CROOKED RIVER PROJECT EIS
NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
ROD-4

-------
In addition to temporary roads, the selected alternative will require a combination of annual and
deferred maintenance to prepare existing classified roads for timber haul. Maintenance will  be
required on about 90.5 miles of road.  Of this roadwork, 84.0 miles will be maintained as part of
the long-term transportation system for the analysis area. Table R-1 and Maps AR-1 and CR-1
display the  road maintenance and  temporary road construction  needed to  facilitate timber
removal.


VEGETATION TREATMENTS

Up to 3,340 acres of hazardous fuel  reduction will occur, using timber harvest. Appendix H of
the FEIS describes all of the treatment types by unit for each action alternative.

Of the planned harvest acres, about 34 percent will be clearcut, and the remaining acres will  be
partially  cut or thinned.   Harvest methods include ground-based tractor (52 percent of the
project acres) and  cable systems (34 percent); the remaining acres (14 percent) are anticipated
to be roadside salvage.  This harvest is estimated to produce 25 million board feet (MMBF) of
timber.

       Table R-1.  Vegetation Treatment Activities with the Selected Alternative
                  Acres of
                 Treatment
                              Tractor Yard/Machine Pile
                              Cable Yard/Broadcast Burn
Roadside Salvage
Total Acres Treated
                              Percent Clearcut
                              Percent Partial Cut/Thin
                              Wildland Urban Interface
               Temporary Road Construction (miles)
                Road Reconditioning for Timber Harvest (miles)
                                      1,759
                                      1,114
  466
3,339
                                      34%
                                      66%
                                      1.113
                                       12.0
                                      90.5
1 Temporary roads will be decommissioned within one to three years of construction.
2 This category includes a range of activities, such as surface blading, drainage repair, and roadway brushing with
occasional culvert installations, slump repairs, and stabilization work. The roadwork in this category is primarily for
the purpose of timber removal.

WATERSHED IMPROVEMENTS

The  watershed improvements identified in  FEIS Alternative D, are adopted for the Selected
Alternative.  These actions are  discussed  below and  summarized in Table  R-2.   Additional
details are given in  Appendix D of the FEIS.  The items listed  under "Required" must be
completed under this action concurrent with fuel reduction and timber harvest aspects of the
action. The items shown as "Additional" may be completed as funding allows.
                                                   AMERICAN AND CROOKED RIVER PROJECT
                                                             NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
                                                                                ROD-5

-------
     Miles (acres) of Decommissioned Roads
               Table R-2. Watershed Improvements with the Selected Alternative
     Miles of Watershed Road Improvements
16.6
          24.6
     Number of Sites of Watershed Road Improvements
     Number of Stream Crossing Improvements
  13
 21
 34
     Miles of Instream Improvements
11.1
3.5
14.6
     Miles of Recreation and Trail Improvements
 2.3
2.3
 4.6
     Acres of Recreation and Trail Improvements
 8.1
            8.1
     Acres of Mine Site Reclamation
     Acres of  Soil Restoration  in  addition  to  road
     decommissioning
  32
 26
  58
     Miles of Access change for vehicle use3~
     Miles of Access change from road to tralf
 2.6
            2.6
 1.6
            1.6
  Road decommissioning for this project covers a range of activities, from recontouring to abandonment due to
overgrown conditions.  It includes 6.5 miles of roads to be used for timber harvest and  decommissioned upon
completion of harvest activities. See Appendix D of the FEIS.
  Stream crossing improvements include upgrading or improving culverts and bridges to improve fish passage and
peak water flows and are listed as the number of sites.
  This is an access change, which restricts to two wheeled vehicles or snowmobiles over snow, and excludes use by
all terrain vehicles (ATV).
4 The miles of roads being converted to ATV trail.


VISUAL QUALITY OBJECTIVES

The Visual Quality Objectives identified as recommended in the Forest Plan were reviewed and
adopted for this project.  No changes to the Forest Plan VQO recommendations were made.

SUMMARY OF THE DECISION BY WATERSHED
Table  R-3  (American River Watershed) and Table R-4 (Crooked River Watershed) display the
activities for the  Selected  Alternative.  The tables display Miles of Road  Reconditioning and
Miles of Watershed Road Improvement.  Road reconditioning miles include activities  designed
to make the road usable for logging traffic.  Activities include grading, adding relief culverts,
cleaning ditches, removing brush etc.  Activities will mostly  occur on roads that are already
stable.  Miles of Watershed Road Improvement  include  some similar  activities  but also
revegetation, stabilization, and surfacing that will reduce erosion and improve drainage.
AMERICAN-CROOKED RIVER PROJECT EIS
NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
ROD-6

-------
        Table R-3.  Activities in the American River Watershed, Selected Alternative


Tractor Yard/Machine Pile
Cable Yard/Broadcast Burn
A_ 	 t Roadside Salvage
Treatment
Total Acres Treated
Percent Clearcut
Percent Partial Cut/Thin
Wildland Urban Interface
Temporary Road Construction (miles)1
Road Reconditioning (miles)2


841 [
239
137
1,217
29%
71%
464
7.1
33.9








Watershed Restoration
Miles (acres) of Decommissioned Roads3
Miles of Watershed Road Improvement4
Number of Sites Watershed Road Improvement
Stream Crossing Improvements5
Miles of Instream Improvements
Miles of Recreation and Trail Improvements
Acres of Recreation and Trail Improvements
Acres of Mine Site Reclamation
Acres of Soil Restoration in
above
addition to road decommissioning
Miles of Access change for vehicle use6
Miles of Access change from road to trail7
8.4 (34)
7.4
0
3.0
0
1.6
0
0
9.0
1.6
0
11.1
(44)
0
0
6.0
0
0.8
0
0
12.0
0
0
1 Temporary roads will be decommissioned within one to three years of construction.
2 This category includes a range of activities, such as surface  blading, drainage repair, and roadway brushing with
occasional culvert installations, slump repairs, and stabilization work.  The roadwork in this category is primarily for
the purpose of timber removal.
3 Road decommissioning for this project covers a range of activities, from recontouring to abandonment due to grown
in conditions.  See Appendix D of the FEIS.
 Some of the roadwork in this category is also included in the Miles of Road Reconditioning category in this table.
Although  this  roadwork is primarily for the purpose of timber removal, it will also  result in an improvement in
watershed health.
 Stream  crossing improvements include upgrading or improving culverts and bridges to improve fish passage and
peak water flows and are listed as the number of sites.
 This is an access change, which restricts to two wheeled  vehicles or snowmobiles over snow, and excludes use by
all terrain  vehicles (ATV).
7 The miles of  roads being converted to ATV trail.
                                                         AMERICAN AND CROOKED RIVER PROJECT
                                                                     NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
                                                                                           ROD-7

-------
            Table R-4. Activities in the Crooked River Watershed, Selected Alternative
^^^
Acres of
Treatment
Tractor Yard/Machine Pile
Cable Yard/Broadcast Burn
Roadside Salvage
Total Acres Treated
Percent Clearcut
Percent Partial Cut/Thin
Wildland Urban Interface
Temporary Road Construction (miles)1
Road Reconditioning (miles)2
918
875
329
2.122
37%
63%
649
4.9
56.6
,..,.








Watershed Restoration
Miles (acres) of Decommissioned Roads3
Miles of Watershed Road Improvement3
Number of sites of Watershed Road Improvement
Stream Crossing Improvements8
Miles of Instream Improvements
Miles Recreation and Trail Improvements
Acres of Recreation and Trail Improvements
Acres of Mine Site Reclamation
Acres of Soil Restoration in addition to road decommissioning
above
Miles of Access change for vehicle use6
Miles of Access change from road to trail7
10.5(42)
9.2
3
10
11.1
0.7
8.1
7.0
23.0
1.0
1.6
7.0(17)
8.0
0
16
3.5
1.5
0
2.0
14.0
0
0
1 Temporary roads would be decommissioned within one to three years of construction.
2 This category includes a range of activities, such as surface blading, drainage repair, and roadway brushing with
occasional culvert installations, slump repairs, and stabilization work.  The roadwork in this category is primarily for
the purpose of timber removal.
3 Road decommissioning for this project covers a range of activities, from recontouring to abandonment due to grown
in conditions. See Appendix D of the FEIS.
4 Some of the roadwork in this category is also included in the Miles of Road Reconditioning category in this table.
Although  this roadwork is primarily for the purpose of timber removal,  it will also result in an improvement in
watershed health.
5 Stream crossing improvements include upgrading or improving culverts and bridges to improve fish passage and
peak water flows and are listed as the number of sites.
6 This is an access change, which restricts to two wheeled vehicles or snowmobiles over snow, and excludes use by
all terrain vehicles (ATV).
7 The miles of roads being converted to ATV trail.



IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE

As documented in the planning record and subject to all applicable funding constraints, I intend
to implement all activities covered by this Record of Decision within a ten-year period.  I will use
multiple  funding  sources and  various  contracting methods,  including  stewardship  contracts
AMERICAN-CROOKED RIVER PROJECT EIS
NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
ROD-8

-------
where deemed appropriate, to accomplish the activities included in this decision.  All activities,
including vegetation treatments, road construction, road maintenance and reconditioning, and
watershed improvements will be scheduled for implementation beginning with those occurring in
the Crooked River  watershed.  Activities may begin the following year in the American  River
watershed.  Over the life of the project, activities will occur simultaneously in both watersheds
for periods of time.

In order to avoid loss of economic value due to mountain pine beetle-induced mortality in the
lodgepole  pine stands,  as described  in  the  FEIS,  Section 3.12,  it is important  that
implementation of vegetation management activities begin as soon as possible.

I intend to implement the harvest and restoration activities in a manner that allows for a balance
implementation of these activities "Required" watershed and fish habitat restoration activities will
be implemented concurrently with the vegetation  management  related aspects of the action.
"Additional"  watershed and fish habitat restoration activities  may be implemented as funding
allows.  If stewardship contracting is utilized to  conduct these actions, the restoration activities
will be a portion of the contract. By necessity, the  vegetative treatment would begin prior to the
restoration activities due to the contracting provision under the stewardship authority.   I will
actively manage this situation  to begin restoration activities as soon as possible under this
approach.

The  various types of restoration work (FEIS, Appendix D) will be implemented in  the following
manner.

   •  Road related activities  and riparian plantings that can  be completed separate from
       timber sale actions may be implemented at  any time during the life of the project.

   •  Road related activities that are linked with  the timber  sale activities must be scheduled
       with the timber sale actions and coordinated in a way that will not impede either.

   •  Instream restoration projects will require additional designs and permits. Implementation
       of the in-channel work will commence when required design work and permitting are
       completed (1-3 years).

DESIGN CRITERIA, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING
The  design criteria in the FEIS were developed to  avoid or reduce potential adverse effects the
various activities may cause with respect to the resources in the area of the project  and to assist
in accomplishing the overall goals of the project  including achieving consistency with Forest
Plan  standards.  These measures  are  the site-specific  best management  practices  to be
incorporated into design and layout of on-the-ground activities, contract provisions, and project
administration.  Design  criteria and mitigation measures are  displayed  in Appendix A of this
decision.

The  design  criteria are  augmented by terms and conditions specified in the Incidental Take
Statements of the  Biological Opinions received from NOAA Fisheries and  USFWS for this
project (Appendix B of this Record of Decision). These agencies reviewed the project and its
effects on threatened and endangered species, in accordance with Section 7 of the  Endangered
Species Act (ESA).  While the agencies determined that the project would not jeopardize listed
species, they issued an  Incidental Take Statement to address the possibility of accidental take
of ESA-listed species which might occur as a result of project activities. NOAA-Fisheries also

                                                  AMERICAN AND CROOKED RIVER PROJECT
                                                            NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
                                                                               ROD-9

-------
evaluated the effects of the  project on Essential Fish Habitat (EFH), in accordance with the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.

I will implement design criteria as specified above and the following monitoring.  The monitoring
plan is included in the FEIS  as Appendix I. Where additional monitoring is determined to be
necessary  for  specific  activities,  a  detailed  monitoring plan will  be  developed prior to
implementation  of those activities.  This monitoring plan will specify  the  monitoring items,
objectives,  location,  protocols,  and reporting for each item.  The Forest is currently engaged
with the  IDEQ,  EPA, Nez Perce Tribe, and the South  Fork Clearwater Watershed Advisory
Group to develop an implementation and  monitoring plan for South Fork Clearwater  TMDL.
This will be completed by the end of 2005, and provisions developed that may pertain to this
project will be implemented  as appropriate. To track implementation  accomplishments and
monitoring  accomplishments  and findings I  will require the preparation of an annual monitoring
report. This report will summarize activities and monitoring implemented in the previous year.
This report will also  detail the plan of operations for the current year and will be completed by
June 1, each year of implementation.

The Biological Opinions from NOAA Fisheries  and the  USFWS describe additional levels of
monitoring  and  reporting required to assess compliance  with terms and conditions, report any
incidental take of steelhead  or bull trout, and ensure habitat objectives are being met.  I will
implement this additional monitoring along with the monitoring specified in Appendix I.

RATIONALE FOR THE DECISION

Prior to developing and  publicly scoping the initial  proposed action, managers determined the
necessity to narrow the scope of the analysis in order to respond  quickly to the  rapidly
expanding mountain pine beetle epidemic in the lodgepole pine stands within the American and
Crooked River  watersheds.   At the  same time,  the importance and  sensitivity of the  two
watersheds and the South Fork Clearwater River with respect to wildlife and fish habitat was
recognized. After  completing and considering the initial field assessment phase of the  project
and prior to proposing  the project to the public, it was determined that hazardous fuel and
vegetation conditions could be addressed in a manner that would limit risks to other resources.
The following architecture was developed for the proposed action and  carried through to the
development of alternatives in order to minimize  risks to the important resources of the area and
to focus the analysis:

    •  The project area would exclude Inventoried Roadless Areas.

    •  The project would not treat fuels, harvest timber, or construct roads in areas meeting old
       growth criteria.

    •  There would  be no new permanent roads constructed.
    •  Management activities (vegetation treatment and road construction) in riparian areas
       (PACFISH RHCA's) would be minimized.
    •  Activities (vegetation  treatment and road construction) in high hazard  landslide prone
       areas would be avoided.
    •  The project would address State of Idaho TMDL limiting factors.
AMERICAN-CROOKED RIVER PROJECT EIS
NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
ROD-10

-------
   •   The project would implement watershed  restoration activities designed  to  meet the
       Forest Plan requirements to establish an upward trend in water quality and fish habitat
       conditions in watersheds that are below current objectives.
   •   The project would implement activities consistent with existing Forest Plan standards.
This framework, as well as the design criteria found in Appendix A of this decision, is common
to all action alternatives. As a result of these factors, none of the action alternatives would pose
resource risks not anticipated or allowed in the Forest Plan.

All alternatives  provide for an  upward  trend  in  aquatic conditions.   Differences between
alternatives relate to the amount and  rate of improvement  over the long-term.  All alternatives
have short-term negative  effects, none of which  are expected to measurably impair existing
water quality or fish habitat conditions.

Additionally, the range of action alternatives would  result in negligibly adverse to slightly positive
effects in big game habitat (elk and moose) and maintain recreational uses at or near current
levels over the long term with minor short-term disruptions due to operations over the life of the
project.

Considering the framework within which this project was developed, there are five key factors
that best represent the purpose and need of this project and reflect the main issues developed
through public scoping.  My decision is based on a  comparison of these factors:

   •   Total Acres of Vegetation Treatment to  Reduce Hazardous Fuels - The  purpose and
       need,  project objectives, and issues related to wildfire severity and resource protection
       would be best served by the  alternative would treat the most acres feasible within all
       other project constraints. Specifically:
       o  Reduce densities of  lodgepole pine or  other small diameter trees that provide fuel
          ladders for development of crown fires,
       o  Increase relative proportions of long-lived, fire-resistant tree species by restoring or
          regenerating western   larch,  ponderosa  pine,  and  protecting  large  diameter
          ponderosa pine, Douglas fir, and western larch.
       o  Reduce likelihood of severe local fire effects by  removing dead, dying,  and downed
          trees that would otherwise result in high fuel loading.
   •   Total Acres of Hazardous  Fuel Reduction  within the Wildland Urban Interface/Intermix
       Zones (WUIs) - The purpose and need, project objectives, and  issues related to
       potential wildfire effects to private  property  and community infrastructure would be best
       served by  the  alternative  that would provide the most acres of  treatment  within
       community protection zones or WUIs.  Specifically:
        o  Reduce the risk of large-scale crown  fire spread by  creating vegetative patterns
          through harvest or silvicultural treatments  that would increase fire suppression and
          management effectiveness.
   •   Potential Net Revenue - The purpose and need would be best served by the alternative
       that would produce the most potential  net  revenue that could be applied to restoration
       activities through Knutson-Vanderberg Act (KV) authorities or stewardship contracting
       authorities.
   •   Employment Opportunities - The purpose and need  of the project would be best served
       by the alternative that would provide the most employment opportunities.


                                                  AMERICAN AND CROOKED RIVER PROJECT
                                                            NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
                                                                               ROD-11

-------
   •   Watershed  Restoration - Issues related to maintaining beneficial uses and improving
       water quality and fish habitat would  be best addressed by the alternative that would
       provide the most watershed restoration.

Table R-5 compares the Selected Alternative to the other action alternatives with respect to the
five key decision factors. The Selected Alternative is the strongest alternative in four of the five
key decision factors. The fifth factor, watershed restoration, ranks Alternative E equally with the
Selected Alternative. However, the net revenues generated from Alternative E are insufficient to
cover the costs of the specified restoration. This makes the funding of the specified restoration
in Alternative E more uncertain than that shown for the other alternatives, including the Selected
Alternative.

I  have thoroughly reviewed the existing conditions as described in the FEIS (Chapter 3), I have
reviewed the purpose and need for action as described in the FEIS (Chapter 1.3), and I have
considered the significant issues associated with the action (FEIS Chapter 1.6 and pp. 15-16 of
this decision document).  I have also reviewed the consistency of this action with Nez Perce
Forest Plan goals (discussed in this decision document in the section Consistency with Forest
Plan Goals, Objectives, and Standards, below) and management direction from Chapter II of the
Forest Plan,

The  selected alternative best meets the purpose and need and responds  to the significant
issues identified during scoping, while conforming to applicable laws and regulations, complying
with  the  Forest Plan Standards (discussed at the end of each resource  section in Chapter 3,
under Adherence to Forest Plan Standards), and complimenting the goals and objectives of the
Forest Plan.

The analyses conducted as part of the  FEIS are based on the thorough application of the  best
scientific information currently available to the project Interdisciplinary Team.  The information
considered consists of  scientific literature, agency and  research findings, models and other
information that apply to local conditions within the project area  or similar conditions in other
nearby areas that are relevant and can  be extrapolated to the area affected by the project.  Use
of the best  science in the  evaluation of  this  project  includes consideration  of  opposing
viewpoints and disclosure of model and data limitations. Further, the Forest's consideration and
use of science has been coordinated with and reviewed by other technical experts. Comments
received by reviewers have been considered in the FEIS.

My decision to select Alternative D from the FEIS, with the specified modifications, is based on
the above  considerations  as  well  as  comments  received from  public, other governmental
agencies, and  consultation with the Nez  Perce Tribe.   These comments,  and the Forest's
responses, are summarized in Appendix M of the FEIS.
AMERICAN-CROOKED RIVER PROJECT EIS
NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
ROD-12

-------
                             Table R-5. Key Decision Factors
    Total acres treated (acres)
    Wul acres treated (acres)
   Potential Net Revenue (M $)
  Employment Opportunity (Jobs)
   Watershed Restoration (M $)
1 Direct Employment Opportunities, year-long
2 For a more detailed display see Table ROD-3 or Appendix D of the FEIS
CONSEQUENCES OF TAKING No ACTION

The South Fork Clearwater  Landscape Assessment provided the context for needed action in
the American and Crooked River project area.   Field reviews, surveys, and  inventories,
including current insect activity surveys, focused this context on current, site-specific conditions.
Choosing no action would exacerbate the hazardous fuels buildup and risk of severe wildfire in
the project area.

Not harvesting timber at this  time would result in:

    •   Lost opportunity to remove dead, dying, and downed trees that contribute  to high fuel
       loading.
    •   Lost opportunity to reduce small diameter trees that provide fuel ladders for development
       of crown fires.
    •   Lost opportunity to capture the commercial value of the trees that would be removed.
    •   Lost opportunity to increase the proportions of long-lived, fire-resistant tree species.
    •   Lost opportunity to reduce severe effects of potential wildfire on the acres proposed for
       treatment.
    •   Lost opportunity to increase the probability of successful fire suppression.
    «   Lost opportunity  to  reduce the amount of hazardous fuels within Wildland Urban
       Interface/Intermix (WUI) areas in the vicinity of Elk City.
    •   Lost opportunity to create  up to 250 jobs.

Not implementing the proposed watershed improvements would result in:

    •   Lost  opportunity to reduce the number of roads that are in excess to forest management
       needs.

    •   Lost opportunity to reduce the backlog of road maintenance needs that present a risk to
       aquatic habitats (such as culvert failure).
    •   Lost opportunity to reduce sedimentation and enhance stream/aquatic conditions.
   •   Lost  opportunity to repair or remove fish barriers,  resulting in continued loss of fish
       habitat connectivity.
                                                  AMERICAN AND CROOKED RIVER PROJECT
                                                            NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
                                                                              ROD-13

-------
   •   Lost opportunity to restore soil productivity on selected sites.
   •   Continued adverse effects on fish habitat and populations where certain species are
       already at risk.

ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERABLE ALTERNATIVE

Title 40 CFR Section 1505.2(b) states that in preparing an  EIS an  agency shall: "Identify all
alternatives considered by the agency in reaching its decision,  specifying the alternative or
alternatives which were considered to be environmentally preferable.  An agency may discuss
preferences among alternatives based on relevant factors including economic and technical
considerations and agency statutory missions."

The  environmentally preferable alternative(s) promotes the  national environmental  policy as
expressed  in NEPA's Section 101.   Ordinarily,, this means the alternative(s) that causes the
least damage to the biological and physical environment. It also means the alternative(s) which
best protects, preserves, and enhances historic, cultural, and natural resources.

The  identification of the environmentally preferable  alternative involves  difficult judgments
involving the balance of environmental values as expressed by  numerous  comments on the
DEIS from the public, governmental agencies, and the Nez Perce Tribe.

Some  comments would suggest that Alternative A, the No Action Alternative, should be the
environmentally preferable alternative because Alternative A would create no new disturbances.
Alternative A would be the environmentally preferable alternative under a  set of values that
views vegetative and watershed restoration treatment disturbances, as being  negative, equating
to damage to the biological and physical environment.

Some  comments would suggest that Alternative E should  be the environmentally preferable
alternative  because  Alternative E combines the least amount of vegetative/hazardous fuel
treatment with the maximum level of watershed restoration  of any of the action alternatives.
Alternative E would be the environmentally preferable alternative under a  set of values that
views vegetative treatment disturbances as being negative, and watershed disturbances for the
purposes of improving long-term water quality and fish habitat as being positive.

Several comments would suggest that Alternative D should be the environmentally preferable
alternative because Alternative D, the Selected Alternative, combines the maximum amount of
vegetative/hazardous fuel treatment with the maximum level of watershed restoration of any of
the action alternatives.  Alternative D, the Selected Alternative, would be the environmentally
preferable  alternative under  a set of values  that views maximum  vegetation treatment as
preferable because it would treat the most acres and reduce the potential adverse effects of a
large wildfire on those acres  treated. Alternative D also  would be environmentally preferable
under a set of values that views a balance of vegetative and watershed restoration treatments
as being positive, if the balance would achieve a reduction in hazardous fuels and improve long-
term trends in water quality and fish habitat.

In this case,  I have identified Alternative  D, the Selected Alternative, as the environmentally
preferable alternative because it best protects, preserves, and enhances the historic, cultural,
and natural resources  within  the project area.  The Selected alternative also best meets the
intent of the National Environmental Policy Act, as stated in Section 101 of the Act. It does this
by reducing risks of resource damage from wildfire by treating the greatest amount of hazardous
fuels across the project area.  It also reduces the risks to life and property by treating the
AMERICAN-CROOKED RIVER PROJECT EIS
NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
ROD-14

-------
 greatest amount of hazardous fuels within WUI areas.  The Selected Alternative preserves
 existing high quality fish habitats in the Kirks Fork, East Fork American River, and Flint Creek,
 as do the rest of the alternatives.  The Selected Alternative preserves Inventoried Roadless
 Areas, old growth areas, riparian  habitat conservation areas, and high hazard landslide prone
 areas, as do all action alternatives.  The Selected Alternative provides the maximum level of
 watershed restoration in both American River and Crooked River considered in the development
 of alternatives in the FEIS as does Alternative E,  but also provides the greatest economic
 potential to implement this restoration.  Although there are some adverse effects associated
 with the all action alternatives that accrue proportionally with the level of activity, such as soil
 disturbance, sediment, and loss of snags, these effects are all within ranges and thresholds
 allowed by the Forest Plan. A system of measures to avoid or minimize  environmental harm
 from  the  Selected  Alternative has  been adopted,  including the location and distribution of
 activities across the landscape and application of appropriate design and mitigation measures.
 As a  result, the potential for measurable harm or damage to watershed, wildlife, and fisheries
 resources has been minimized or avoided while addressing important vegetation and hazardous
 fuel conditions to the extent practicable.

 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
 Public involvement in  the  project began in  August 2003.  A  public discussion was held at
 Orogrande, Idaho, on August 2 and a public field trip to the project area on August 28.  These
 sessions were held to provide information about the project area, present the  proposed action,
 and discuss local concerns  and interests that should be addressed in the project analysis.

 On September 15,  2003, a scoping  letter providing information and seeking public comment
 was mailed to approximately 30 individuals and groups that had previously shown interest in
 Forest Service projects on the Nez Perce National  Forest.   This included Federal and State
 agencies, the Nez Perce Tribe, municipal offices, businesses, interest groups, and individuals.
 The Forest Service  received 20 responses to this mailing.

 Announcements about the project were sent to the Lewiston Morning Tribune and Idaho County
 Free  Press via a news release on September 17, 2003, and information about the project was
 subsequently  published in  both papers.   A Notice of Intent was published in the  Federal
 Register on September 25, 2003, when the Forest Service decided to prepare an EIS for the
 project.

 The Draft EIS was issued to the public for review in early June 2004, with notices appearing in
 the Federal Register on June 10, 2004, in the newspaper of record (Lewiston Morning Tribune)
 on June 8, 2004, and in the Idaho County Free Press on June 9, 2004.  Several news articles
 also appeared in these and  other local newspapers.  Open houses were held in Grangeville and
 Elk City, Idaho on June 29  and 30, 2004, respectively.  The public comment period closed on
 July 23, 2004.

 Five people attended the two open houses  and 35  letters and electronic  comments were
 received in response to the Draft  EIS.  Several who commented on the DEIS did not provide
 comments during initial scoping and project development periods.

 In addition to these  specific activities, the American Crooked Rivers project has been listed on
the Nez Perce National Forest Schedule of Proposed Actions since July 2003.  This list is
mailed quarterly to approximately 470 groups and/or individuals. This information has also been
available on the Internet at www.fs.fed.us/r1/nezperce.

                                                  AMERICAN AND CROOKED RIVER PROJECT
                                                            NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
                                                                             ROD-15

-------
Consultation with the Nez Perce Tribe occurred over the duration of project development.

ISSUES USED TO DEVELOP AND/OR COMPARE ALTERNATIVES

Resources affected by the proposed action and relevant issues raised during scoping determine
the scope and extent of the analysis.  By definition, relevant issues include  predicted effects of
the proposed  action on resources within the  planning area,  and  also  include social  and
administrative  concerns.  Preliminary issues were identified through consultation with Forest
Service resource specialists and examination of existing resource data. Some relevant issues
raised during  the scoping process were addressed in the Nez  Perce Forest Plan Goals,
Objectives, and Standards.  Two significant issues, hazardous  fuels  management, and water
quality and fish habitat, were identified from public comment and  used to develop alternatives to
the proposed action.

HAZARDOUS FUELS MANAGEMENT

Several  differing views related to fire and fuels management  were  identified through  public
involvement and scoping.  There was disagreement over  whether existing fuel  levels  in the
project area warrant treatment:   some  believed that fuel  loadings have reached  hazardous
levels and should be treated, while others believed fuels treatments are not needed at this time.
Among those who felt treatments are needed, there was disagreement over the methods to use,
the priorities for treatment, and in what kinds of ecosystems to allow treatments.  Others  raised
concerns that  the project as proposed would not  reduce the potential for substantial adverse
effects from a large wildfire in the area. They believed that the proposed project would not treat
enough area (4-8 percent of the total project area) to effectively reduce the spread and severity
of a potential wildfire, and would not remove enough fuels to reduce the potential for crown fires.
Another concern was that dead, dying,  leaning,  and  overcrowded  trees pose  a threat to
evacuation along the Crooked  River Road in the event of a wildfire near the Elk City Township.
Some recommended that landscape scale fire modeling be used to analyze the effects  of the
proposed treatments, including fire history and past, present, and post-fuel treatment conditions.

WATER QUALITY AND FISH HABITAT
Among the scoping comments received, there was concern about the potential for the project to
result in early, increased water yields.  One view was that management activities in riparian
ecosystems have the potential to degrade riparian and aquatic health.  Another view was that
management activities can be used to maintain or improve riparian and aquatic health, and that
the proposed activities would  not negatively  impact fish populations or water quality.  Many
believed that assessing cumulative impacts on water quality, quantity, temperature, and  timing
of flows  would be  critical to informing  the  decision maker and public.   Many supported
watershed improvement activities to  improve existing  aquatic conditions and  help mitigate
potential  adverse impacts  on water quality and  fish habitat from activities on non-national
forestlands. Some were interested in the development of a restoration-only alternative.


RESPONSE TO COMMENTS AND CHANGES TO THE DRAFT EIS

EFFECTS ON UNROADED CHARACTER
After reviewing the comments to the DEIS from Friends of the Clearwater, an environmental
organization from  Moscow,  Idaho, I sought clarification  regarding  the  group's  comments

AMERICAN-CROOKED RIVER PROJECT EIS
NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
ROD-16

-------
 regarding inventoried roadless areas and unroaded areas.  On September 22, 2004, I received
 additional information from the group, including a map of unroaded areas within the project area
 that were of concern to them. I decided to analyze effects on unroaded areas in the FEIS, using
 the areas identified on  the map  provided  by  this group.   In  addition,  I  instructed  the
 Interdisciplinary team to take a harder look at the related concerns, in the FEIS,  than had been
 done  in the DEIS.

 COMMUNITY PROTECTION
 Periodic  consultations  have  occurred  with  the  Idaho County  Commission during  the
 development of the project.  On November 17, 2004, the Commission  sent the  Forest a letter
 requesting consideration  of  community protection around several  residential areas  near  the
 project area, including Elk City.  In response to the letter,  I have considered these areas in  the
 FEIS  and in the key decision factors influencing this decision.

 USE OF STEWARDSHIP CONTRACTING AUTHORITIES
 Several commenters on the DEIS, including the Nez Perce Tribe and the North Central Idaho
 Resource Advisory Committee, recommended that the  Forest use stewardship  contracting
 authorities to implement this project.  I intend to use stewardship contracting authorities, among
 other contracting mechanisms as appropriate, to implement this project.

 The use of existing stewardship contracting authorities is appropriate in the context  of this
 project for the following reasons:

 The project was developed through collaboration with  groups  and individuals  representing a
 broad spectrum of interests.

 The project, Alternative D, is supported by the Idaho County Commission.

 The project, Alternative D, is  supported by the North Central Idaho Resource Advisory Council,
 which is comprised of a broad-based membership of environmental,  political,  and  resource
 management perspectives.

 The project economic analysis indicates  a strong probability for a positive revenue/cost ratio,
 which would  provide  the  most direct opportunity to  apply  revenues  toward  resource
 improvement needs, including watershed and fish habitat restoration.

 OLD GROWTH

 The American and Crooked River Project was designed to avoid all direct harvest impacts to  old
 growth and meet Forest Plan Standards for Old Growth.  Concerns over which definition of  old
 growth (Forest Plan or North  Idaho Guideline) were brought up  during comments on the DEIS.
 All proposed units  were  evaluated, and units that had  either Forest Plan or North  Idaho  old
 growth characteristics were dropped  from consideration for harvest. FEIS Maps 17a and 17b,
 and the old growth discussion in FEIS Section 3.11  summarize the amount and distribution of
 old growth for this project.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED  IN DETAIL IN THE FEIS

Three action alternatives to the proposed action were developed in response to  the significant
issues, and  five  alternatives, including the No Action alternative, were considered in  detail.
                                                 AMERICAN AND CROOKED RIVER PROJECT
                                                           NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
                                                                             ROD-17

-------
Alternative C was the proposed action and Alternatives B, D, and E responded to the significant
issues.  Alternative D was the preferred alternative in the Draft and Final EIS.  Table R-6
displays the activities for the action alternatives as analyzed in the FEIS.

ALTERNATIVE A - No ACTION

Both  Forest Service and  the  CEQ regulations require the  development of the No Action
alternative.  This alternative serves as the baseline for comparison of the effects of all action
alternatives.

Under this alternative, there would be no change in current management direction or in the level
of ongoing management activities within the  project area.  No fuel reduction or watershed
improvement activities would be implemented.  Work previously planned within and/or adjacent
to the project area  would still occur under this alternative (FEIS Table 3.0, Projects considered
for cumulative effects).

ALTERNATIVE B

This alternative was developed in response to concerns that the proposed action  was treating
too many acres. This alternative treats 2,550 acres. It contains the watershed improvement
activities described in Appendix D and summarized above that would provide for an upward
trend in fish habitat and water quality.

ALTERNATIVE C - PROPOSED ACTION

The proposed  action was developed to respond to the purpose and need and was scoped in
June 2003.  This alternative would reduce existing  and potential fuel loads through removing
dead and dying lodgepole pine and live ladder fuels. It would treat 2,744 acres. It would also
implement watershed  improvement activities that would provide for  an upward trend in fish
habitat and water quality.

ALTERNATIVE D - PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
The preferred alternative was developed in response to significant issues raised by the public.
This alternative looks at more possibilities along roads than the proposed action.  It would treat
3,452 acres.  Entry into mixed conifer stands is included to meet the economic objective.   It
would also implement watershed improvement activities that would provide for an upward trend
in fish habitat and water quality. This alternative also analyses additional aquatic improvement
activities equivalent to Alternative E that may be implemented if funding is available.

ALTERNATIVE E

This alternative  proposes  activities that would reduce impacts to soils and  aquatics in the
American and  Crooked River watersheds.  It reduces ground-disturbing activities and includes
the most comprehensive watershed improvement package.  This alternative addresses the soils
and aquatics issues beyond what would be required to attain an upward trend.  It  contains the
maximum aquatics improvements package. It would treat 2,156 acres. The economic impact of
this alternative is discussed in FEIS Section 3.12.
AMERICAN-CROOKED RIVER PROJECT EIS
NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
ROD-18

-------
                    Table R-6.  Alternatives in the American and Crooked River Project
        Acres of
       Treatment
                   Tractor Yard/Machine Pile
                                  1,138 |  1,172
                    Cable Yard/Broadcast Burn
                                   945
Roadside Salvage
467
                   Total Acres Treated
                                  2,550
                   Percent Clearcut
                                   42%
                   Percent Partial Cut/Thin
                                   58%
                   Wildland Urban Interface
                                   559
                 1,813
      1,095
          1,173
            780
477
466
475
      2,744
          3.452
          2,156
       42%
           34%
           28%
       58%
           66%
           72%
        731
          1.113
           290
                                    1,759
             1,114
466
             3,339
              34%
              66%
             1,113
      Temporary Road Construction (miles)
                                    8.0
       14.3
           14.3
            5.4
              12.0
      Road Recondition!
                                          80.3
                  90.5
                      74.3
                         90.5
      Miles (acres) of Decommissioned Roads
                                   13.9
                                   1561
       17.3
       J69I
       18.9/18.1
        (73/74)
                     18.9/18.1
                       (73/74)
      Miles of Watershed Road Improvement
                                   15.2
       15.8
         16.6/8
           24.6
            16.6/8
      Watershed Road Improvement
      (number of sites)
                                     1
      Stream Crossing Improvements (number)
                                    10
         10
          13/21
             34
             13/21
      Miles of Instream Improvements
                                   10.3
       11.1
        11.1/3.5
           14.6
           11.1/3.5
      Miles of Recreation and Trail Improvements
                                    2.3
        2.3
        2.3/2.3
            4.6
            2.3/2.3
      Acres of Recreation and Trail Improvements
                                           8.1
                   8.1
                       8.1
                          8.1
      Acres of Mine Site Reclamation
                                                      7/2
                                             7/2
      Acres of Soil Restoration in addition to road
      decommissioning	
      Miles of Access change for vehicle use8
      Miles of Access change roads to trails"
                                    18
         26
         32/26
            58
             32/26
                                    2.6
        2.6
            2.6
            2.6
               2.6
                                    1.6
        1.6
            1.6
            1.6
               1.6
  Alternative  D includes analysis  of additional watershed improvement activities, equivalent to Alt  E,  that could  be
implemented if funding allows. The  required and additional watershed restoration work for this alternative is shown as X/Y in
the table. These numbers do not reflect changes identified in this decision.
2 This represents Alternative D with the modifications previous listed in this Record of Decision. Like Alternative D, it includes
additional watershed improvement activities, equivalent to Alt E, which could be implemented if funding allows. The required
and additional watershed restoration work for the Decision is shown as X/Y in the table.
3 Temporary roads would be decommissioned within one to three years of construction.
  This category includes a range  of activities, such as surface blading, drainage repair, and roadway brushing with occasional
culvert installations, slump repairs, and stabilization work. The roadwork in this category is primarily for the purpose of timber
removal.
  Road decommissioning for this project covers a range of activities, from recontouring to abandonment due to overgrown
conditions.  See Appendix D of the FEIS.
6 Some of the roadwork in this category is also included in the Miles of Road Reconditioning category in this table. Although
this roadwork is primarily for the purpose of timber removal, it will also result in an improvement in watershed health.
  Stream  crossing improvements include upgrading or improving culverts and bridges to improve fish passage and peak
water flows and are listed as the number of sites.
  This is an access change,  which only allows two wheeled vehicles or snowmobiles over snow, and excludes use by all
terrain vehicles (ATV).
9 The miles of roads being converted to ATV trail.


    ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND ELIMINATED FROM DETAILED STUDY

    The following alternatives were considered and eliminated from detailed study.  The rationale for
    not considering these alternatives is contained in  Chapter 2 of the Final EIS.

       •   Restoration Only and/or No Timber Harvest
                                                              AMERICAN AND CROOKED RIVER PROJECT
                                                                         NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
                                                                                              ROD-19

-------
    •   Defensible Space
    •   Expanded Action via Access through Inventoried Roadless Areas
    •   Expanded Action with Access outside of Inventoried Roadless Areas

CONSISTENCY WITH FOREST PLAN GOALS. OBJECTIVES. AND STANDARDS

The Nez Perce Forest Plan provides overall management direction for the Nez Perce National
Forest, including:

    •   Multiple-use goals  and  objectives,  and  management standards and guidelines to
       achieve them.
    •   Monitoring  and evaluation  requirements  to determine  whether goals, objectives,  and
       standards and guidelines are being met.
    •   Direction for management areas with similar management emphasis.

OVERALL CONSISTENCY

The selected alternative meets the goals and objectives of the Nez Perce Forest Plan, and is
consistent  with  Forest-wide  Standards  (existing and  amended)  for  Recreation,  Visual
Resources, Cultural Resources, Wildlife and Fish, Timber, Water, Soils, Riparian Areas, Wild,
Scenic, and Recreation Rivers, Air Quality, Roads and Trails, and Protection, through  project
design and planning.  (These are discussed at the end of each resource section in Chapter 3,
under Adherence to Forest  Plan Standards.)

The selected  alternative provides for monitoring and evaluation to  achieve the Forest Plan
goals, objectives, and standards (FEIS, Section 2.3). The monitoring discussed in Appendix I of
the FEIS relates to both project implementation and  reaching project goals and Forest Plan
monitoring requirements.

The selected alternative contributes to the Forest-wide Desired Future Conditions (pages 11-13
to 11-15 of the Forest Plan) by advancing the following Forest-wide Goals (from pages 11-1 and II-
2 of the Forest Plan).  The  following Forest-wide Goals apply to this project and will be  met as
follows:
                 Table R-7.  Consistency with Nez Perce National Forest Goals
         Provide a sustained yield of resource
         outputs at a level that will help support the
         economic structure of local communities
         and provide for regional and national
         needs.
The selected alternative will generate about 25.4
mmbf of timber and support 250 timber and fuels-
related jobs. (See FEIS, Section 3.12—Socio-
Economics.)
         Provide and maintain a diversity and
         quality of habitat that ensures a
         harvestable surplus of resident and
         anadromous game fish species.
Under the selected alternative, watershed
improvements will improve fish habitats. Reduced
road density, increased large woody debris,
improved pool habitat, riparian plantings, and
removal offish passage barriers (culverts) are
planned. (See FEIS, Section 3.3—Fisheries.)
AMERICAN-CROOKED RIVER PROJECT EIS
NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
ROD-20

-------
        Provide and maintain a diversity and
        quality of habitat to support viable
        populations of native and desirable non-
        native wildlife species.
                                          Viable populations will continue to be maintained
                                          on the Forest. Old growth standards and snag
                                          standards will be met or exceeded, and elk forage
                                          habitat will be improved as this project is
                                          implemented. (See FEIS, Section 3.11—Wildlife.)
        Provide habitat to contribute to the
        recovery of Threatened and Endangered
        plant and animal species in accordance
        with approved recovery plans. Provide
        habitat to ensure the viability of those
        species identified as sensitive.
                                          Habitats for Threatened, Endangered, and
                                          Sensitive plant and animal species will be
                                          maintained in the analysis areas. The proposed
                                          management actions will not adversely affect
                                          viability of existing sensitive plant populations.
                                          Impacts on wolves are expected to be small to
                                          negligible, and limited on lynx habitat. All lynx
                                          conservation measures will be met. (See FEIS,
                                          Section 3.10.1.3—Rare Plants and Sections
                                          3.11.1 and 3.11.2—Wildlife.)	
        Provide a wide range of dispersed and
        developed recreation opportunities and
        experiences by providing access, facilities,
        and education necessary to meet public
        demand.
                                          The selected alternative will not exclude any of the
                                          existing recreational uses and will not affect
                                          recreation features within the analysis area. (See
                                          FEIS, Section 3.6—Recreation.)
        Recognize and promote the intrinsic
        ecological and economic value of wildlife
        and wildlife habitats. Provide high quality
        and quantity of wildlife habitat to ensure
        diversified recreational use and public
        satisfaction.
                                          The selected alternative will result in positive
                                          trends in elk habitat and anadromous fish habitat
                                          potential that may result in some degree of
                                          increase in this segment of the economy. Current
                                          levels of other recreation-based economic
                                          activities will not be appreciably affected. (See
                                          FEIS, Section 3.12—Socio-Economics.)
10
Maintain air quality to meet or exceed
applicable standards and regulations.
The selected alternative will affect air quality.
Locally adverse and cumulative impacts to air
quality can be expected if extensive prescribed
burning occurs; however, these actions will also
decrease particulate matter emissions from
wildfires. Mitigation measures and procedures
outlined in the North Idaho Smoke Management
Memorandum of Agreement are intended to
coordinate prescribed burning actions to avoid
adverse cumulative effects on air quality. As a
result, Forest Plan Standards will be met. (See
FEIS, Section 3.5—Air Quality.)
11
Locate, protect, and interpret significant
prehistoric, historic, and cultural resources.
An appropriate heritage resource survey has been
conducted for the project area. All 25 sites within
the project area have been evaluated and
protection measures are in place for those sites
eligible for the National Register of Historic
Places.  The Idaho State Historic Preservation
Office has approved all evaluations and protection
measures. (See FEIS, Section 3.9—Heritage.)
12
Provide a stable and cost-efficient
transportation system through construction,
reconstruction, maintenance, or
All roads planned for decommissioning were
identified in the American and Crooked Rivers
Roads Analysis as not required for future
                                                     AMERICAN AND CROOKED RIVER PROJECT
                                                                 NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
                                                                                     ROD-21

-------
         transportation system management.
                                         management needs.  There is little change in
                                         travel access with highway vehicles, because
                                         most of the road miles proposed for
                                         decommissioning are currently closed to access
                                         vehicles. (See FEIS, Section 3.8—
                                         Transportation.)
  13
Protect resource values through cost-
effective fire and fuels management,
emphasizing fuel treatment through the
utilization of material and using prescribed
fire.
Some stands in the very frequent and frequent fire
regimes would have either mechanical
disturbance and/or fire returned to them. This
would start to bring the treated stands back into
their historic fire regime. In stands in the
infrequent and  very infrequent fire regimes, the
disturbance would tend to maintain the normal fire
return interval.  The treatments would lower the
acres in the project area classified as a high fire
hazard, and would reduce the fuel loadings and
continuity over the project area, reducing the
effects of a large-scale wildland fire.  (See  FEIS,
Section 3.4—Fire.)
  14
Protect resource values through the
practice of integrated pest management.
There are zones in the analysis area that have a
moderate risk of weed expansion, with the
transportation corridors as the primary spread
pathway. The risk of expansion will be minimized
through implementation of all design criteria for
noxious weeds and specified monitoring protocols.
(See ROD, Appendix A—Design Criteria and
Mitigation Measures, and FEIS, Section 3.10.4—
Weeds and Non-Native Vegetation.)
  18
Maintain soil productivity and minimize any
irreversible impacts to the soil resource.
About 20 acres of timber harvest or mechanical
fuel reduction are planned on soils highly
susceptible to surface erosion. No timber harvest
or road construction will occur on lands confirmed
as high risk for landslides. About 27 acres of
temporary road construction on soil substrata
highly susceptible to erosion are planned and will
be decommissioned after timber harvest. (See
FEIS, Section 3.1—Soils.)
Project design and mitigation measures were
developed to minimize detrimental disturbance
and erosion, with the objective of ensuring that
activity areas meet Forest Plan soil standard 2,
upon completion of the planned activities.  (See
ROD, Appendix A—Design Criteria and Mitigation
Measures.) Monitoring and restoration
requirements were established to verify
compliance and to augment mitigation or
restoration actions.  (See FEIS, Appendix I.)	
  19
Present diverse, natural-appearing
landscapes to view throughout the Forest.
No changes in VQOs/SIL will result from the
project.  Current scenic integrity level (SIL) will
remain moderate to very low. (See FEIS, Section
AMERICAN-CROOKED RIVER PROJECT EIS
NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
ROD-22

-------
                                                  3.6, Indicator 1— ROS/SILS.)
  20
Maintain or enhance stream channel
stability and favorable conditions for water
flow.
The planned timber harvest and temporary road
construction are expected to have relatively little
effect on channel morphology. The estimated
slight increase in EGA and sediment yield to the
prescription watersheds are at levels where little
channel erosion or deposition is anticipated, and
do not pose a risk to fish habitat. The actions are
consistent with the entry frequency and sediment
yield guidelines in Appendix A of the Forest Plan.
Several stream crossing improvements should
improve channel morphology conditions in their
immediate vicinity. Some of the road
decommissioning  involves crossings and riparian
areas; channel morphology should be improved in
these areas. (See FEIS, Section 3.2, Indicator
4—Channel Morphology, and Section 3.C
Fisheries.)
  21
Provide water of sufficient quality to meet
or exceed Idaho State Water Quality
Standards and local and downstream
beneficial uses.
Sediment yields in the peak activity year of 2005
all stay below Forest Plan sediment yield
guidelines.  The chronic sediment yield over base
is lower in 2012 than in pre-project conditions,
reflecting the effect of decommissioning and
improvements on existing roads. Other than
sediment yield, there will be little change in most
water quality parameters. Beneficial uses will be
protected. Instream improvement work will be
done in accordance with Idaho State Water
Quality Standards, Section 404 Permit
requirements, and Stream Alteration Permit
requirements. (See FEIS, Section 3.2, Indicator
5—Water Quality.)
  22
Protect or enhance riparian-dependent
resources.
No timber harvest is proposed within streamside
and wetland RHCAs and high-risk landslide prone
RHCAs.  PACFISH guidance will be applied to
restoration actions within streamside, landslide
prone, and wetland RHCAs. (See FEIS, Section
3.3—Fisheries.)
The following Forest Plan Goals do not apply within the context of this project.

       Table R-8. Nez Perce National Forest Plan Goals That Do Not Apply To This Project
          Protect and enhance identified, outstandingly
          remarkable values and free flowing condition
          of Wild and Scenic Rivers.
                                            The approved project actions are not within
                                            or  adjacent  to  the  7*  mile  eligible  river
                                            corridor.  Therefore, this project will not pose
                                            any  threats  to outstanding resource values
                                                      AMERICAN AND CROOKED RIVER PROJECT
                                                                 NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
                                                                                    ROD-23

-------


8
9
15
16
17
23


Protect and enhance wilderness values and
character in designated wildernesses.
Provide firewood for personal use.
Allow surface occupancy for leasable mineral
development where consistent with
management goals.
Protect Forest resources to allow for their safe
and orderly use.
Facilitate mineral exploration and
development while protecting surface
resources and environmental quality.
Provide administrative sites and facilities that
effectively and safely serve the public and
accommodate the workforce.

identified for South Fork of the Clearwater
River. (See FEIS, Section 3.7— Wild and
Scenic Rivers.)
No activities are planned in Inventoried
Roadless Areas or in Wilderness Areas.
Harvest activities at various levels and
intensities are planned in areas identified as
having possible unroaded characteristics.
(See FEIS, Section 3.7— Wilderness,
Inventoried Roadless Areas, and Areas with
Possible Unroaded Characteristics.)
The selected alternative will not provide
firewood as a timber product, and will not
directly or indirectly affect access to firewood
for personal use.
Approved activities will not affect leasable
mineral development.
The selected alternative will not affect the
protection of Forest resources or law
enforcement actions on the Forest.
Approved activities will not affect mineral
exploration and development.
Approved activities will not affect any
administrative sites or facilities.
Forest Plan Amendment 20 (PACFISH)
The PACFISH Environmental Assessment amended the Nez Perce Forest Plan in 1995 and is
incorporated as Amendment 20.  PACFISH establishes riparian goals, riparian management
objectives (RMOs),  and defines  riparian habitat conservation  areas  (RHCAs).  It  includes
specific direction for land management activities within riparian areas, wetlands, and landslide-
prone terrain. The riparian goals direct the Forest to maintain or improve habitat elements such
as water quality, stream channel integrity, instream  flows, riparian vegetation, and  several
others.  PACFISH also directs that "Best Management Practices" will  be applied to  all  land-
disturbing activities, including prevention of soil erosion during land management activities.

No site-specific analysis has been completed to modify PACFISH default buffers.  RHCAs will
be 300 feet either side of fish bearing streams  and 150 feet either side of non-fish bearing
streams.  Intermittent streams will be managed to  Key Watershed standards.
AMERICAN-CROOKED RIVER PROJECT EIS
NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
ROD-24

-------
COMPLIANCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS AND REGULATIONS

NATIONAL FOREST MANAGEMENT ACT
The National  Forest Management Act and accompanying regulations require that several
specific findings be documented at the project level. These are:

Forest Plan Consistency [16 U.S.C. 1604(i)] - All resource plans must be consistent with the
Forest Plan goals, objectives, and standards. Forest Plan goals, objectives, and standards are
displayed throughout the Final EIS. Consistency with these goals, objectives, and standards is
addressed  most specifically in Chapters 1, 2, and 3 of the FEIS and in the preceding section of
this decision.

Suitability for Timber Production [16 U.S.C. 1604(k)J - No timber harvest, other than salvage
sales to protect other multiple values, shall occur on lands not suited for timber production.  No
timber harvest will be scheduled on unsuitable land with this decision.  Refer to Forest Plan III-
37, III-38, and III-44.

Clearcutting and Even-aged Management [16 U.S.C 1604(g)(3)(F)(i)] - When timber is to be
harvested  using an even-aged  management  system,  a determination that the system is
appropriate to meet the objectives and requirements of the Forest Plan must be made, and
where clearcutting is used, it must be determined to be the optimum method. Clearcutting, seed
tree, and shelterwood cut treatments are proposed. Even-age management is appropriate to
meet the objectives and requirements of the Forest Plan and was determined to be the optimum
method of management where prescribed.

Openings Over 40 Acres

Direction in Forest Service  Manual 2471.1 states that the size of openings created by even-
aged silvicultural treatments in the Northern Rockies will normally be 40 acres or less,  with
certain  exceptions.   One of those exceptions includes  catastrophic events  such as  fire,
windstorms, or insect and disease attacks.  In these cases,  the  40-acre limitation may be
exceeded without 60-day public review and without Regional Forester approval, provided  the
public is notified and the environmental analysis supports the decision.

Implementation of the selected alternative will create some openings that are greater than 40
acres in size. All of these openings have been precipitated by the action of catastrophic events,
in this  case insect attacks and  disease. The harvest units range in  size from 1 to 81 acres in
size.  In several  instances,  the units are adjacent to other planned or existing units, and the
cumulative opening size will  exceed 40 acres. FEIS Table L-1 in Appendix L displays openings
over 40  acres that will be  created with implementation of the  selected alternative.   The
documentation in the FEIS constitutes public notification.

Vegetative  Manipulation  [36 CFR  219.27(b)]  - All  proposals that  involve  vegetative
manipulation  of  tree cover,  for any purpose,   must  comply with  seven requirements.
Management practices shall:

     1.  Be  best suited to the goals stated in the  Forest Plan.  These goals are stated on pages
        1-4 through  1-7 of the  FEIS and vegetative manipulation as a means to the goals is
       discussed in Chapter 3 of the FEIS. How this decision implements and meets the goals
       of the Forest Plan are discussed in this decision on pages ROD-19 through ROD-23.
                                                 AMERICAN AND CROOKED RIVER PROJECT
                                                           NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
                                                                            ROD-25

-------
    2.  Assure that technology and knowledge exist to adequately restock lands within 5 years
        after final harvest.  This is discussed  in the FEIS  in Section 3.10,  Vegetation  and
        Appendix H, Treatments by Alternative.

    3.  Not be chosen primarily because they will give the greatest dollar return or the greatest
        output of timber.  The estimated economic and timber outputs were  determined  and
        displayed in the FEIS in Section 3.12, Socio-Economic and were factors in my decision.
        However, the effectiveness of each alternative to meet the project purpose and need (to
        reduce hazardous fuels in the project area) while meeting Forest Plan standards for
        watershed conditions, was the primary consideration in my decision.

    4.  Be chosen after considering potential effects on residual trees and adjacent stands.
        These considerations  are fully analyzed and  displayed in  the  FEIS in Section 3.10,
        Vegetation.

    5.  Be  selected  to avoid permanent impairment of site  productivity  and  to  ensure
        conservation of soil and water resources. These subjects are addressed in the FEIS in
        Sections  3.1,  3.2, and 3.3 (Soils, Watershed and Fisheries, respectively).  With the
        application of design and mitigation measures, the project is expected to fully meet
        Forest Plan standards for soils  (compaction and erosion).  Soil restoration and road
        decommissioning will mitigate the effects of past and planned timber  harvest and will
        slightly improve existing conditions.  The project is expected to have short-term impacts
        on sediment yield (primarily from road work and soil restoration), followed by long-term
        improvements; all of the short-term  impacts are expected to be within the Forest Plan
        guidelines.

    6.  Be selected to provide the desired effects on water quality and quantity, wildlife and fish
        habitat, regeneration  of  desired tree species, forage production, recreation uses,
        aesthetic values, and other resource yields.  The selected alternative produces the
        desired effects through compliance  with Forest Plan goals,  objectives, standards,  and
        guidelines (Chapter 3 of the FEIS).

    7.  Be practical in terms of transportation and harvesting requirements and total costs of
        preparation, logging, and  administration.  The economic outputs were discussed in the
        FEIS  in  Section  3.12,  Socio-Economic.   The  costs associated  with the various
        vegetative treatments  and watershed  restoration actions are based on current local
        projections.

Roads  [36 CFR  219.27(a)(10)]  - Any roads  constructed must be designed according  to
standards appropriate to planned uses,  considering safety, cost of transportation, and effects
upon  lands and resources.  The selected  alternative will not construct any  new permanent
roads.  Where temporary road use is proposed, construction will be performed to standards
appropriate for the planned use.

Wilderness  and  Roadless Areas  -  Congress  and  the  Forest Service  have  identified
Wilderness Areas and Inventoried Roadless Areas through past actions.  None of the selected
alternative's activities will occur within any Inventoried Roadless Area or Wilderness Area.

The National Forest Management Act regulations define unroaded  areas as any area without
the presence of classified roads, and of a size and configuration sufficient to protect the inherent
characteristics associated with its roadless condition.  Under the selected alternative, harvest
AMERICAN-CROOKED RIVER PROJECT EIS
NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
ROD -26

-------
 activities  and temporary  road construction will occur in  areas identified as having  possible
 unroaded characteristics, which will reduce solitude, natural integrity, and apparent naturalness.
 Road  obliteration will increase the  areas with possible unroaded characteristics as vegetative
 regrowth occurs.

 Sensitive Species - Sensitive  species  are addressed  for fish, plants,  and wildlife  (FEIS
 Sections  3.3, 3.10.1.3, and  3.11.2,  respectively).  Forest Service Manual (2670)  provides
 direction  for sensitive species management.  The selected  alternative incorporates design
 criteria for sensitive species to ensure their viability throughout their range on National Forest
 lands  and to ensure they do not become  Federally listed  as threatened  or endangered
 (Appendix A of this decision).

 Species  Viability  [36 CFR  219.20] - The National  Forest  Management Act requires  that
 vertebrate species populations' viability be maintained across the "planning area," generally
 defined as each National Forest.  The selected alternative, implemented in combination  with
 past,  present and  reasonably foreseeable future  management  actions in the project area,
 contributes toward maintaining viable populations of all native and desired nonnative vertebrate
 species populations well distributed across the Forest.

 Wildlife Species Viability:  The wildlife species viability analysis for this project  (Appendix  J of
 the  FEIS) relied  on  data  summarized  from  mid-scale  subbasin ecological assessments
 encompassing the  project area, and site-specific habitat analyses for species-at-risk that are
 relatively well distributed across the Forest. The site-specific analysis addressed federally listed
 species, Forest  Plan Management Indicator Species, and key Forest Service sensitive species
 (from  the USFS Region  1  "species of concern" list, last updated October 25, 2004).   The
 selected alternative and analysis  of impacts on wildlife species addressed in the American  and
 Crooked River FEIS are consistent with Forest Plan standards and guides, the Endangered
 Species Act, National Forest Management Act, and Forest Service Manual 2670.

 Based on application of carefully-designed actions in the American and Crooked River Project
 and in consideration  of the species population monitoring data collected to date across the
 Forest, the evidence fully supports the conclusion that all monitored terrestrial management
 indicator and federally listed species populations are being maintained or are increasing locally,
 and will continue to do so after implementation of this project. The desired condition for the
 American and Crooked River Project is to protect and enhance the habitat and local populations
 of wildlife species.  The selected alternative complies with NFMA direction that wildlife habitats
 be managed to  maintain viable populations of existing native and desired non-native species
 well distributed  across the  "planning  area" (Nez Perce Forest),  of which  the  American  and
 Crooked River Project area  is a part.  At the  Forest level and across the range of the various
 wildlife species,  past,  present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions  in and around  the
 American and Crooked River watersheds will have a small or negligible effect on wildlife habitat
 or wildlife populations.

 Fish Species Viability:  The  Nez Perce National Forest Plan (USFS 1987) identified steelhead
 trout, westslope  cutthroat trout, and Chinook salmon as Management Indicator Species (MIS).
All three of these species  exist in the project area.  The plan calls for monitoring of population
 levels of all MIS on the Forest.

Assessment of population viability is a critical part of addressing the effects of land management
actions on both terrestrial and aquatic species. Significant vegetation management and aquatic


                                                  AMERICAN AND CROOKED RIVER PROJECT
                                                             NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
                                                                               ROD-27

-------
restoration proposals in Red River, Crooked River, and American River predicated the need to
address population viability across the upper South Fork Clearwater subbasin.

A population  viability analysis for MIS fish species has been completed and is in the project
record (Population Viability Assessment Upper South Fork Clearwater River,  USFS 2004).  In
summary, this work found that most streams in the project area supporting  MIS fish species
were  impacted by past management activities.  Anadromous fish (steelhead and Chinook)
populations had been impacted by  a long  history of  hydroelectric dams  and subsequent
supplementation.  Resident fish like westslope cutthroat were more influenced by harvest and
introductions  of non-native fish  like brook trout.  All three species had  been impacted  by
alterations to their habitat.

Population monitoring of these fish found highly variable data but a general decline in mean
densities from the 1980s through 2003 for steelhead trout and Chinook salmon. Monitoring data
for westslope cutthroat trout showed no real trend.

The assessment of risk to MIS species from ongoing and proposed activities found a degree of
habitat degradation expected over the short term, as a result of implementing the American and
Crooked River project. This will be followed by an expected long-term improvement following
the road decommissioning and other watershed improvement activities.


NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT
The requirements of NEPA, as specified in 40 CFR Part 1500, have been fully applied through
this project planning effort.  The DEIS, FEIS, and ROD, and the comprehensive analyses and
public involvement steps which they incorporate, comply with the letter and intent of NEPA. The
FEIS  analyzes a reasonable range of alternatives, including No  Action,  and  discloses the
expected environmental effects of each alternative within the context of identified issues.  This
Record of Decision describes the selected alternative and the rationale supporting the decision.
This project is in full compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act.

Cumulative Effects  - Cumulative effects are discussed in the FEIS in Chapter 3 for  each
resource.   FEIS  Table 3.0 displays the recently past, current  (or present),  ongoing,  or
reasonably foreseeable future activities within the American and Crooked River watersheds, as
well other activities in the  South Fork Clearwater River Subbasin. If other projects occur in the
future that significantly affect the basis of this decision, the decision will be amended.

HEALTHY FOREST RESTORATION ACT
The Healthy  Forest Restoration Act of 2003 (Public Law 108-148, December  3, 2003) gives
direction to conduct hazardous fuels reduction projects on National Forest  System lands. These
projects are "aimed at protecting communities, watersheds, and certain other at-risk lands from
catastrophic wildfire, to enhance efforts to protect watershed, and address threats to forest and
rangeland health, including catastrophic  wildfire,  across the landscape,  and other purposes"
(H.R.  1904).   Specific direction for  hazardous fuel reduction projects  is  found in Title 1 -
Hazardous Fuel Reduction on Federal Land, Section 102 - Authorized hazardous fuel reduction
projects (16 USC 6512).  While this project is consistent  with the intent  of the  Act, it was not
scoped and is not considered a project authorized under the Act.
AMERICAN-CROOKED RIVER PROJECT EIS
NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
ROD-28

-------
 Noxious WEEDS MANAGEMENT

 Analysis and evaluation of invasive plants in the American and Crooked River FEIS is based on
 direction contained  in the Federal Noxious Weed  law (1974) as amended, Executive Order
 13112 for Invasive  Species, Forest Service policy (2080), Northern Region Supplement (R1
 2000-2001-1)  Implementation of Integrated  Weed Management  on National Forest System
 lands in  Region 1, and the Nez Perce National Forest Plan (II-7, II-20, II-26, III-6). In general,
 the Forest is directed to implement an effective weed management program with the objectives
 of preventing the introduction and establishment of noxious weeds; containing and suppressing
 existing weed  infestations; and cooperating with local, state, and other federal agencies in the
 management of noxious weeds.

 There are zones in  the analysis area that have a moderate risk of weed expansion, with the
 transportation corridors as the primary spread pathway. The risk of expansion will be minimized
 through  implementation  of all design criteria for  noxious  weeds  and specified monitoring
 protocols (ROD Appendix A—Design Criteria and Mitigation  Measures,  and FEIS  Section
 3.10.4—Weeds and  Non-Native Vegetation).


 ENDANGERED  SPECIES ACT AND MAGNUSON-STEVENS FISHERY CONSERVATION AND
 MANAGEMENT ACT
 Threatened  and endangered species are designated under the Endangered Species Act.  It is
 the policy of Congress that all Federal  departments shall seek to conserve endangered and
 threatened  species  and  shall utilize  their authorities in  furtherance of this purpose  (ESA
 1531.2b).  The Endangered Species Act also provides  direction that federal agencies will
 consult on all activities that may affect listed species and/or their habitat.

 The Magnuson-Stevens Act, Section  3, defines Essential Fish  Habitat as "those waters and
 substrate necessary for fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity." Pursuant to
 Section  305(b) of  the Magnuson-Stevens Act and  its implementing regulations (50 CRF
 600.920), Federal   agencies  must consult with  the  National  Oceanic  and   Atmospheric
 Administration  - National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA-NMFS) regarding any of their actions
 that may adversely affect  Essential  Fish Habitat.   Federal  agencies may incorporate an
 Essential Fish Habitat Assessment into Biological Assessments prepared for consultation under
 the Endangered Species Act.

 The American  and Crooked River project is in compliance with the  Endangered Species Act.
 Biological Assessments were prepared for threatened and endangered species that could occur
within the project area and potentially  be affected by the project. Concurrence from U.S. Fish
and  Wildlife Service (USFWS)  and  NOAA-NMFS  has been  documented.  The following
determinations of effect have been made for the selected alternative (Table R-9). Copies of the
Biological Opinions are in  the project record.  The Biological Assessments and documentation
of consultation  are contained in the American Crooked River project file.
                                                AMERICAN AND CROOKED RIVER PROJECT
                                                          NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
                                                                           ROD-29

-------
     Table R-9. Summary of Effects Determinations for Threatened and Endangered Species

.c
(0
il
| Wildlife
Species
Fall Chinook Salmon
Steelhead/lnterior Redband
Trout
Bull Trout
Gray Wolf
Bald Eagle
Lynx
Status
Threatened
Threatened
Threatened
Threatened (10(j))
Threatened
Threatened
Determination of Effect
No Effect
Likely to Adversely Affect
Likely to Adversely Affect
Not Likely to Jeopardize
Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Not Likely to Adversely Affect
The Biological Opinion from  USFWS for the American and Crooked  River Project (January
2005) includes reasonable and prudent measures to avoid or minimize take of bull trout (section
VII.C), and the non-discretionary terms  and conditions required to implement those measures
(section VII.D). It also includes discretionary conservation recommendations (section VIII).  The
mandatory terms  and conditions  become  required design or mitigating elements for this
decision, and thus ensure project compliance with the Endangered Species Act.

The Biological Opinion from NOAA-NMFS for the project (March 2005) includes reasonable and
prudent measures to avoid or minimize take  of  steelhead,  and the mandatory terms and
conditions required to implement those  measures.  These terms and conditions also serve as
the Essential  Fish Habitat conservation recommendations required by  the Magnuson-Stevens
Act.  These mandatory terms and conditions become required design or mitigating elements for
this decision, and thus ensure project compliance with the Endangered Species Act.

The  American and  Crooked  River Area have been  designated  as  priority watersheds, as
directed by USFWS and  NOAA-NMFS for recovery of  Endangered Species Act listed fish
species.  These  regulatory  agencies  issued  Biological Opinions for  Land and Resource
Management  Plans 1998 (USDI  NOAA-NMFS,  et  al, 1988)  with  guidelines for  priority
watersheds.  The selected alternative adheres  to these guidelines (as discussed in the FEIS
Section 3.3—Fisheries).

According to USFWS list #1-4-04-SP-612 (letter dated 9/01/2004),  no threatened, proposed, or
candidate plant species or their suitable habitat occurs within the project area. Consultation for
listed plants is not warranted, and  a Biological  Assessment was not prepared for listed plant
species.


MIGRATORY BIRD TREATY ACT  (MBTA) AND MIGRATORY BIRD CONSERVATION EXECUTIVE
ORDER (DATED JANUARY 10,2001)

The selected alternative is in compliance and alignment with both the MBTA and  the Migratory
Bird  Conservation Executive  Order (dated January  10, 2001)  which  authorizes activities
including  habitat  protection,   restoration,  enhancement,  necessary   modification,   and
implementation  of actions that benefit priority  migratory  bird  species  (Memorandum of
Understanding Between USDA Forest  Service and USDI Fish & Wildlife Service - 01-MU-
11130117-128). Despite the risks of limited, potential direct disturbance and localized impacts
to nesting habitats of a few bird  species within this landscape, the  selected  alternative is
AMERICAN-CROOKED RIVER PROJECT EIS
NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
ROD-30

-------
 consistent with  current  interpretation  of  the  MBTA  applicable to disturbance  of nesting
 songbirds.


 CLEAN AIR ACT

 The Clean Air Act,  passed in 1963 by the U.S. Congress and amended several times,  is the
 primary legal instrument for air resource management. Air quality standards are established by
 the Environmental Protection Agency and implemented by the State of Idaho Dept. of Health
 and Welfare through their State Implementation Plan and State Smoke Management Plan. The
 Nez Perce National Forest Plan direction for air quality is to meet the requirements of the State
 Implementation Plan and the State Smoke Management Plan (Forest Plan p. II-23).

 In the American Crooked River project, fire and smoke will be managed to comply with State
 and Federal air quality regulations and controls and ensure compliance with the Clean Air Act.
 Implementation of the selected alternative will increase particulate matter emissions from timber
 harvest activities, but are  expected to reduce these emissions from wildfires.  Impacts to air
 quality (visibility) in the nearby Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness (Class  I airshed) will  be minimal
 and short in duration due to the relatively small burn size.


 CLEAN WATER ACT

 The Clean Water Act stipulates that states are to adopt water quality standards.   Included in
 these  standards  are  provisions for  identifying beneficial  uses, establishing  the status of
 beneficial uses, setting water quality criteria, and establishing Best Management Practices to
 control non-point sources of pollution.  The South Fork Ciearwater Subbasin Assessment and
 Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) address water-quality-limited streams listed under Section
 303(d) of the Clean Water Act. The TMDL was approved by the EPA in July 2004.  The entire
 project area contributes to the South Fork Ciearwater River, which is Section 303(d) listed for
 water temperature and sediment.

 The selected  alternative is expected to comply with applicable Clean Water Act and Idaho State
 Water Quality Standards through the application of project design criteria, best management
 practices, and soil and water conservation practices (Project Design  and Mitigation Measures,
 FEIS Table 2.3). An in-depth discussion of the effects of the project on aquatic resources is in
 FEIS Sections 3.2—Watershed and Section 3.3—Fisheries, and  the effects of the watershed
 improvements are analyzed in detail in FEIS Appendix E.  The  effects of the project on the
 South Fork Ciearwater River are discussed in Section 3.2.3 of the FEIS.

 The Environmental  Protection Agency and Idaho Department of Environmental Quality have
 been consulted on this project.  On September 30, 2004, the Forest received a letter from Idaho
 DEQ regarding the  project stating, "The information contained within the DEIS appears to be
 consistent with the intent of this TMDL and the agreement between State and Federal Agencies
 regarding impacts to this water body." Their concerns have been addressed with my decision.


 FLOODPLAINS AND WETLANDS MANAGEMENT (EXECUTIVE ORDERS 11988 AND 11990)

 Executive Orders 11988 and  11990  pertain to  floodplain management and protection of
wetlands.  The selected alternative has project design measures and  watershed improvements
that are expected to meet the intent and assist in the attainment of the  objectives of these

                                                 AMERICAN AND CROOKED RIVER PROJECT
                                                           NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
                                                                             ROD-31

-------
Executive  Orders.  Riparian and  floodplain function will  be  restored during streamside road
decommissioning and instream improvement projects. Some human-created compacted and/or
saturated areas that support riparian plant species on old landings, skid trails and roads may be
altered in  the soil restoration  and road decommissioning  projects.  The functionality  and
distribution of natural wetlands should be enhanced.


IDAHO FOREST PRACTICES AND STREAM CHANNEL PROTECTION ACTS
The  Idaho Forest Practices Act regulates forest practices on all land ownerships in Idaho.
Forest practices on national forest lands must adhere to the rules pertaining to the Act (IDAPA
20.02.01). The rules are also incorporated as BMPs in the Idaho Water Quality Standards.

The  Idaho Stream Channel Protection Act regulates stream channel alterations between mean
high  water marks on perennial  streams in Idaho.  Instream activities on national  forest lands
must adhere to  the rules  pertaining  to the  Act  (IDAPA  37.03.07).   The  rules are  also
incorporated as BMPs in the Idaho Water Quality Standards.

The  Rules and Regulations Pertaining to the  Idaho Forest  Practices Act  (IDAPA 20.02.01),
Rules and  Regulations and  Minimum Standards for Stream  Channel  Alteration  (IDAPA
37.03.07), and Forest Service Soil and Water  Conservation Practices (FSH 2509.22) will be
implemented, including those site-specific practices established for the area (Project Design and
Mitigation  Measures, FEIS Table 2.3).


FEDERAL ROAD MANAGEMENT POLICY

Along with Federal regulations and Forest Service manual and handbook guidance, the Federal
Road Management Policy (published in the Federal Register  on January  12,  2001) defines
agency policy regarding transportation systems. Terminology changes in the policy reflect the
agency's emphasis on maintaining environmentally sound access. Additional elements of the
policy direct agency officials to identify the minimum transportation system needed to administer
and protect National Forest System lands, and to document this system through the use of road
management objectives.

All roads  planned for decommissioning were identified in the  American and Crooked Rivers
Roads Analysis (USDA Forest Service  2003a)  as not required for future management needs.
These roads were selected for decommissioning primarily because of the resulting benefit to
watershed health by returning the landscape to near natural state.


ALASKA NATIONAL INTEREST LANDS CONSERVATION ACT
The  Alaska  National  Interest  Lands Conservation Act  (ANILCA)  assures access to  non-
federally-owned lands within the boundaries of  the National  Forest System  as is deemed
adequate  to  secure reasonable use. The selected alternative  is in compliance with ANILCA.
The  planned road obliteration will  not restrict access to non-federally owned land.  Travel from
non-federally owned land to federally owned land will be restricted to the access prescription for
that road or trail.
AMERICAN-CROOKED RIVER PROJECT EIS
NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
ROD-32

-------
WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS ACT
The Wild and Scenic River Act (Section 2(b)) specifies three classification categories:  wild,
scenic, and  recreational.  The potential  classification of an eligible river is based on the
condition of the river,  and  the  adjacent  lands,  as it existed at the time of assessment
determination. The selected alternative does not allow any developments or activities within the
South Fork of the Clear-water River Corridor, a candidate for an eligibility study under the Wild
and Scenic  Rivers Act.  The selected alternative will  not alter the potential classification of the
river into the National Wild and Scenic Rivers  System prior to a suitability study.  No activities
are proposed inside the river corridor.


NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT

The National  Historic  Preservation Act (NHPA)  sets forth  a framework for identifying  and
evaluating historic properties, and assessing effects to these properties (36 CFR 800 Subpart
B).   Section  101  of the  National  Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires  the federal
government to preserve important historic, cultural,  and natural aspects of our national heritage.
To accomplish this, federal agencies utilize  the Section 106 process associated with the NHPA
(codified  in  36  CFR 800.3b and 800.8).   Locally,  the  Nez Perce National Forest uses a
programmatic agreement signed  between  Region-1  of the  U.S. Forest Service, Idaho State
Historic  Preservation Office (SHPO),  and  Advisory Council on Historic  Preservation to
implement the Section 106 process.

Five historic properties  determined eligible for the National  Register of Historic  Places were
identified in the project area. All five are related to the historical theme of mining settlement and
technology.   Project activities  and/or their associated boundaries  in  the vicinity of these
properties will be modified, as appropriate, to assure the avoidance of significant elements
associated with  these National  Register properties.  As a result, I  have made a "no adverse
effect" finding concerning cultural properties and  the American Crooked River Project,  per
Stipulation V(d)(1) of the programmatic agreement.  The Idaho SHPO has concurred with all
avoidance measures associated with this "no adverse  effect" determination.


INDIAN TREATY PROVISIONS (EXECUTIVE ORDER 13175)
The American and Crooked River project is located within that area  ceded to the United States
in 1855 by the Nez Perce people.  As a result of the 1855 Treaty, elements of Nez Perce culture
such as  tribal welfare, land, and  resources were entrusted to the  United States  government.
Commensurate with the Forest Service's authority and responsibility to manage resources of
the National Forests is the obligation to consult, cooperate, and coordinate with the Nez Perce
Tribe in developing and planning projects on National  Forest system lands that may affect tribal
rights (Executive Order 13175, Section 3a).

The  Nez Perce Tribe has been actively involved with project development as well as ongoing
activities  in  the  project area, and the selected alternative  will not conflict with any treaty
provision or federal trust obligation.  The American and Crooked River project was  designed
and  modified as a direct result of consultation with the Nez  Perce Tribe and  other state and
federal agencies to maintain or  improve tribal treaty resources (hunting, fishing and gathering).
The  selected alternative will maintain or improve water quality and will limit the  potential for
short-term incidental losses of Endangered  Species Act listed anadromous fish and bull trout.

                                                  AMERICAN AND CROOKED RIVER PROJECT
                                                            NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
                                                                              ROD-33

-------
The project will create aquatic habitat conditions for long-term increases in abundance of these
species.  It will also create upland habitat conditions that are expected to maintain or improve
populations of big  game species in the area.  It will maintain or improve  native plant foods
utilized by the Nez Perce Tribe.  The project will not impose any restrictions on traditional
access rights of the Nez Perce tribal members or restrict, in any way, tribal members' abilities to
continue to exercise the full range of treaty rights in the project area over the long term.

Government-to-government consultation with the Nez Perce Tribe  included attendance and
input throughout the planning process.  The following list summarizes the consultation that has
occurred during the development of this project.

  •  August 28, 2003      Nez Perce Tribal Attendance of the Project Initiation Field Trip

  •  October 29, 2003     Nez Perce Tribal Scoping Letter

  •  April 6, 2004         Forest Service Response Letter to the Nez Perce Tribe

  •  July 6, 2004          Meeting with the Nez Perce Tribe Natural Resource Subcommittee

  •  July 21, 2004        Nez Perce Tribal Comment  letter on the DEIS

  •  November 19, 2004   Forest Service Response Letter to the Nez Perce Tribe

  •  December 7, 2004    Meeting with the Nez Perce Tribe

  •  February 25,2005    Meeting with the  Nez Perce  Tribe  Habitat/Watershed  Division of
                        Fisheries Dept


ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE (EXECUTIVE ORDER 12898)
Executive Order  12898  requires an  analysis of  the  impacts  of  the  proposed  action and
alternatives to the  proposed action on minority and low-income populations.  It is designed in
part "...to identify, prevent, and/or mitigate, to the greatest extent practicable, disproportionately
high and adverse human health or environmental effects of USDA programs and activities on
minority and low income populations."

I  have reviewed the effects of the selected alternative and find that these actions will have no
disproportionate impacts on individual groups of peoples or communities. Implementation of the
selected action will produce no adverse effects on minorities, Native Americans, or women. No
civil liberties will be affected. Project specific consultations were held with the Nez Perce Tribe,
which holds treaty rights for hunting, fishing, and  other activities on the Nez Perce National
Forest (Response  to Public Comments, Tribal  Correspondence).  The implementation of this
project  is  expected  to provide  employment opportunities  (FEIS, Section  3.12—Socio-
Economics) in communities such as Elk City, Grangeville, Kooskia, Kamiah, Cottonwood, and
Lapwai, Idaho. Some of these communities include minority populations that may benefit from
the economic effects.

APPEAL PROVISIONS AND IMPLEMENTATION
This decision is subject to appeal pursuant to Title  36 CFR 215.7. A written Notice of  Appeal
meeting the requirements of Title 36  CFR 215.14 must be submitted (regular mail, fax, email,
hand-delivery, or express delivery) within 45 days of the date  the legal notice of this decision is
published in the Lewiston Morning Tribune.  Notice of Appeal must be submitted to:

AMERICAN-CROOKED RIVER PROJECT EIS
NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
ROD-34

-------
 Mailing Address:                        Hand delivery or express delivery:
 USDA, Forest Service, Northern Region     USDA Forest Service, Northern Region
 ATTN.: Appeals Deciding Officer           Federal Building
 P.O. Box 7669                           ATTN.: Appeals Deciding Officer
 Missoula, MT 59807                      200 East Broadway
                                         Missoula, MT 59807

 Fax:  (406)329-3347               Email:  appeals-northern-regional-office@fs.fed.us

 The office business hours for those submitting hand-delivered appeals are: 7:30 am to 4:00 pm
 Monday  through Friday, excluding holidays. Electronic appeals the subject line should contain
 the name of the project being  appealed.  An automated response will  confirm your  electronic
 appeal has been received.  Electronic appeals must be submitted  in a format such as an email
 message, plain text (.txt), rich text format (.rtf), or Word (.doc).  In cases where no identifiable
 name is attached to an electronic message, a verification of identity will be required. A scanned
 signature is one way to provide verification.

 It is the appellant's responsibility to  provide sufficient project- or activity-specific evidence and
 rationale, focusing on the decision, to show why my decision should be reversed.  The appeal
 must be  filed with the Appeal Deciding Officer in writing.  At a minimum, the appeal must meet
 the content requirements of 36 CFR 215.14, and include the following information:

    •   The appellant's name and address, with a telephone number, if available;
    •   A signature, or other verification of authorship upon request (a scanned signature for
       electronic mail may be filed with the appeal);
    •   When multiple names are listed on an appeal, identification of the lead appellant and
       verification of the identity of the lead appellant upon request;
    •   The name of the  project or activity for which the decision was made,  the name and title
       of the Responsible Official, and the date of the decision;
    •   The regulation under which the appeal is being filed, when there is an option  to appeal
       under either 36 CFR 215 or 36 CFR 251, subpart C;
    •   Any specific change(s) in the decision that the appellant seeks and  rationale for those
       changes;
    •   Any portion(s) of the decision with which the appellant disagrees,  and  explanation for the
       disagreement;
    •   Why the appellant believes the Responsible Official's decision failed to consider the
       substantive comments; and how the appellant believes the  decision specifically violates
       law, regulation, or policy.

 Individuals or organizations that submitted substantive comments during  the comment period
specified at 215.6 may appeal this decision.

 If no appeal is received,  implementation of the decision may occur five business days from the
close  of  the  appeal period.  If an  appeal  is received,  implementation may occur  15 days
following  the date of a favorable appeal disposition.
                                                 AMERICAN AND CROOKED RIVER PROJECT
                                                           NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
                                                                             ROD-35

-------
FURTHER INFORMATION

A detailed project record exists for this decision and the analysis upon which it is based.  The
project file is  available  for public  review  at the Nez Perce Forest Supervisors Office  in
Grangeville, Idaho.  Please contact the individual identified below for additional information on
this decision.

                          Terry Nevius, District Ranger
                          Red River Ranger District
                          P.O. Box 416
                          Elk City, ID 83525-0416
                          208-842-2245
RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL

I am the responsible official for the American-Crooked River Project.
JANE L. COTTRELL
Forest Supervisor
DAT1
AMERICAN-CROOKED RIVER PROJECT EIS
NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
ROD-36

-------
Selected Alternative: Proposed Harvest Units, Roadside Salvage,
Temporary Roads, Road Maintenance, and Road Decommissioning
American and Crooked River Project: Crooked River
                                                                              nscrrtonaiy
                                                                         H Roadilda Salvage
                                                                         Harvest Units
I"~| Project Area Boundary
GJJ Elk atyTowruliip Boundary
1^ Private Land kiholdngs
(~~1 BLH Lands
Erirtng Roads
                                                                             Inventoried RoMflew Areas
                                                                             Community Protection Areas
                                                                             Areas with Unraaded Ouraclaristfcx
     Main County Roads
     Main Foratt Servlca Roads
     Other Roads

-------

-------
Selected Alternative: Proposed Harvest Units, Roadside Salvage,
Temporary Roads, Road Maintenance, and Road Decommissioning
American and Crooked River Project:  American River


    |:\lslll«iV)l^lc«^p^liea_s^_c^^»^n
-------

-------
               APPENDIX A - DESIGN CRITERIA AND MITIGATION MEASURES .
                                       •«,* •    -„•_- '••ijv -•** "v*' t'-f-?;,'**•'.jet ir^
.=*?
Design and mitigation measures would apply to all actions.  Forest Plan standards and other
Agency direction, along with  information  derived from monitoring  past projects, were used to
identify  design and mitigation measures applicable to the action.  Mitigation measures  are
practices used during implementation of the activities.

 Table RA-1: Project Design and Mitigation Measures for the American and Crooked River Project
Areas Excluded from Timber Harvest or Fuel Reduction Activities
1
No timber harvest or mechanical fuel reduction activities would occur in
Forest Plan existing or replacement old growth, Inventoried Roadless
Areas, streamside RHCAs, or high hazard landslide prone areas
NEPA project
design, silviculture
prescription, and
field prep.
High, based
available
inventory and
monitoring data
Vegetation
2
3
Falling would be done to minimize breakage and damage to residual
trees.
Silvicultural prescriptions would be written for each unit, including slash
treatment and burn guidelines to meet Riparian Management Objectives
Field preparation,
contract and
contract
administration/
inspection
Silvicultural
prescription,
High, based on
sale
administrators'
observations
High, based on
protocols for
Silvicultural
certification
Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas
4
5
6
No cutting of trees would be allowed in PACFISH default streamside or
wetland RHCAs, except at temporary road crossings, instream habitat
improvements, and to facilitate anchoring of cable yarding systems.
Post harvest burning will occur in harvest units to reduce slash and fuel
resulting from the harvest activities. The burning will be designed and
implemented with the intent of restricting burning to stay within the unit
boundary. Fire that moves outside the external unit boundary will be
suppressed if it poses a threat to riparian resources. On occasion fire will
move into small RHCA inclusions within the unit. Burning will not be
ignited within these areas, but may be allowed to back into these areas
under conditions where fire intensity will be low and burning will not result
in extensive reduction in canopy, cover or exposure of bare soil in these
RHCA inclusions.
Landslide prone areas are also considered Riparian Habitat Conservation
Areas (RHCAs). No timber harvest would occur in areas of high landslide
hazard, as described in (1) above. Timber harvest, road construction, or
fuel reduction in areas of moderate landslide risk would be modified as
needed to protect slope stability. If additional, unmapped landslide prone
areas are found during project implementation, areas would be dropped
or activities would be modified with watershed specialist oversight to
protect slope stability.
Field preparation,
contract and
contract
administration/
inspection
FS Fuels
management
NEPA project
design, silviculture
prescription, and
field prep.
High, based on
inventory and
monitoring data
High, based on
Research, PNW
Lab, Starkey
Project
High, based on
landslide
inventory data

-------
                                 APPENDIX A


Soils, Water Quality, and Fish Habitat
7




8


9





10









11









1?
l£.




Planned activities would be modified in any proposed timber harvest or
fuel reduction unit that is found to have previously unidentified significant
soil impacts from past human-caused disturbance. The planned activities
in that unit would be modified or dropped, or post-harvest restoration
implemented to ensure that cumulative impacts would not exceed Forest
Plan soil quality standard number 2 (percent of area detrimentally
impacted upon completion of activities). Site-specific review of treatment
units prior to implementation would identify extent of detrimental soil
disturbance.

Timber harvest and fuel reduction activities would be coordinated with soil
restoration activities for greatest efficiency.


Broadcast burning would be applied in preference to excavator piling
wherever practical to reduce physical soil damage and to encourage
natural regeneration.





Temporary roads would be built, used, and decommissioned within a 1 to
3-year period, in order to reduce the amount of sediment production.
Coordination of temporary road use and decommissioning with the BLM
Eastside Township project would be required.





New, temporary roads would be constructed using minimal road widths
and out-sloped surface drainage. Road cuts, fills, and treads would be
stabilized with annual grass cover where roads are held more than one
year. Temporary roads would be located to avoid live water and high-risk
landslide prone terrain. If avoidance of live water is not possible, stream
crossings would be designed consistent with criteria described below and
in Forest Plan Amendment 20 (PACFISH)






Coarse woody debris greater than 3 inches diameter would be retained in
timber harvest or fuel reduction units in amounts to meet guidelines in
Appendix K.




NEPA project
design, silviculture
prescription, and
field prep.



Contract
administration


NEPA project
design, silviculture
prescription, and
contract.





NEPA project
design and contract
QiHnrijnictratinn
C1UI 1 III lloll ClUUI 1






f^f^ntrt'ipt' ariH
W\Jl 111 OUl ul l\J
f*f\r\trsi ot
IAJI llfdwL
administration/inspe
p*inn
\siiWI i






NEPA project
design, silviculture
prescription,
contract, and
contract
administration.


Moderate, based
on research and
forest monitoring
data (Cullen et
al., 1991,
Froelich et al.,
1983, USDAFS
1QR8R 1QQD
1 £7OOD, 1 v7£/u,
1992, 1999, and

2003D).
Expected to be
moderate, little
data.
High, to the
degree
implemented;
based on forest
monitoring data
(USDA FS
1988B, 1990,
1992, 1999, and
2003D).
Moderate, based
on
implementation
monitoring of
timber sale
contracts and
Burroughs and
King, 1989.
High, based on
literature
(Water/Road
Interaction
Technology
Series, USDA
Forest Service,
San Dimas
Technology and
Development
Program, 1999;
Burroughs and
King, 1989)
High
effectiveness,
based on
Graham et al.,
1994 and Harvey
etal., 1987.
Implementation
effectiveness
has not been
monitored.
AMERICAN-CROOKED RIVER PROJECT EIS
NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
ROD-A-2

-------
APPENDIX A
n
JIBS
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Minimize whole tree yarding. Whole-tree yard boles only, leaving tops
and limbs on site, to maintain foliar nutrients. Over-winter slash at least
one winter to allow nutrients to leach into the soil.
Winter harvesting would only occur during frozen conditions. Frozen
conditions are defined as greater than 4 inches of frozen ground, a barrier
of snow greater than two feet in depth (unpacked snow), or one foot in
depth (packed snow).
Timber harvest, fuel reduction, and soil and stream restoration activities
would be limited or suspended when soils are wet, such that resource
damage may occur, to reduce rutting, displacement and erosion.
Skid trails, landings, and yarding corridors would be located and
designated to minimize the area of detrimental soil effects. Tractor skid
trails would be spaced 80 to 120 feet apart, except where converging on
landings, to reduce the area of detrimental soil disturbance. This does
not preclude the use of feller bunchers if soil impacts can remain within
standards.
On excavator piled units, additional trail construction would be minimized,
machines would be restricted to existing trails as much as possible,
number of passes would be minimized, and excavator piling would be
minimized, to reduce soil compaction. Numerous small piles are
preferred to few large piles to avoid nutrient losses and soil alteration that
favor weed invasion.
Cable systems would use one-end or full suspension wherever possible
to minimize soil disturbance.
Excavated skid trails and landings with cut slopes of more than 1 foot
would be scarified and recontoured, replacing topsoil as feasible on all
landings and trails not needed for harvest within the next 15 years.
Winged subsoiler, excavator, or similar equipment is preferred to restore
permeability and soil structure.
Fine organic matter and slash would be scattered over recontoured or
scarified areas on skid trails, decommissioned roads, and landings with a
goal of achieving 1 0 tons per acre of fines and 1 5-20 tons per acre of
larger material, up to 35 tons total where available and acceptable to fuel
managers. Water bars and seeding of approved weed-free annual or
native species would be added as needed for supplementary erosion
control.
Soil restoration areas would be stabilized within 14 days, using erosion
barriers, slash, or mulch as needed. Any soil restoration in an activity
area would be completed within one operating season, with allowance for
additional planting in subsequent seasons.
mammm
NEPA project
design, silviculture
prescription, BD
plan, and contract.
Contract
administration
Contract and
contract
administration/inspe
ction
Contract and
contract
administration/inspe
ction
Contract and
contract
administration/inspe
ction
Contract and
contract
administration/inspe
ction
Contract and
contract
administration/inspe
ction
Contract and
contract
administration/inspe
ction
Contract and
contract
administration/inspe
ction
fBfli^ffifHP^i
JiailiBgilililBHIClB»Ba
High (Garrison
and Moore,
1998; Moore et
al., 2004)
Moderate, based
on forest
monitoring data
(1987 report in
project file)
Moderate, based
on forest
monitoring
(USDA FS
1988B, 1990,
1992, 1999, and
2003D).
Moderate, based
on forest
monitoring
(Froelich, etal,
1981; USDA FS
1988B, 1990,
1992, 1999, and
2003D).
Moderate,
based on forest
monitoring
(USDA FS
1988B, 1990,
1992, 1999, and
2003D).
High where
implemented
(USDA FS
2003A; Krag,
1991)
High (Plotnikoff
etal., 1999;
Sanbom et al.
1999A, Sanbom
etal., 1999B)
High (Sanbom et
al., 1999A)
Moderate, based
on past
experience.
          AMERICAN AND CROOKED RIVER PROJECT
                   NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
                                 ROD-A-3

-------
                                 APPENDIX A
•
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
fffiHiiiBmlM
flMiiflffi
^^^^Mi^^H^^M^w^BiBMB^M^Mimlfii^^WM^^^ffiBBMMiBHSHmaaH^^BBHMHKw^flilisliBMMiiiBli'ag^
Non-excavated skid trails and landings not needed for harvest within the
next 15 years, that have been cut, compacted or entrenched 3 inches or
more would be scarified to a depth of 4 - 10 inches, or as directed by
contract administrator, to restore soil permeability. Excavator, winged
subsoiler or similar equipment is preferred, to avoid mixing surface ash
layer and subsoil.
Sediment and erosion control measures such as dewatering culverts,
sediment barriers, rocking road surfaces and/or ditches, etc., would be
. used as needed when constructing, reconstructing, and decommissioning
roads to protect fish habitat and water quality.
Activities including stream crossing road improvements would be
conducted in fish bearing streams between July 1 and August 15 to avoid
sediment deposition on emerging steelhead or Chinook redds, or
disturbance to bull trout moving to natal streams. These dates may be
site-specifically adjusted through coordination with the Central Idaho
Level I team and other agencies.
Stream crossing structures would provide for channel width, flow
velocities, substrate condition, and stream gradients that approximate the
natural channel and accommodate passage of streamflow, debris, fish,
and other aquatic organisms, and would use PACFISH standards. When
designing new structures, consider and give preference to open-bottom
arches, bridges and oversized culverts.
During instream habitat improvement activities, tree felling in RHCAs
would occur only where that activity would not affect Riparian
Management Objectives for shade and woody debris recruitment. Wood
for instream placement would be taken from outside the RHCA wherever
feasible.
Prior to instream habitat improvement activities, heavy equipment would
be inspected to assure no leakage of oil, fuel, or hydraulic fluid.
A Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures Plan (40 CFR 112)
would be prepared and implemented that incorporates the rules and
requirements of the Idaho Forest Practices Act Section 60, Use of
Chemicals and Petroleum Products; and US Department of
Transportation rules for fuels haul and temporary storage; and additional
direction as applicable.
For instream activities in fish-bearing streams that contain listed species,
fish are expected to disperse from the activity area. If needed, additional
measures would be used to ensure fish are not harmed or killed by
instream activity. If electrofishing were necessary, it would be conducted
in accordance with NOAA Fisheries electrofishing guidelines found at
httD://www.nwr.noaa.aov.
The State of Idaho Best Management Practices (BMPs) and Forest
Service Soil and Water Conservation Practices (SWCPs) would be
applied. These are incorporated by reference.
Contract and
contract
administration/inspe
ction
Contract and
contract
administration
NEPA project
design, contract and
contract
administration/inspe
ction
NEPA project
design, contract and
contract
administration/inspe
ction
Contract and
contract
administration/inspe
ction
Contract and
contract
administration/inspe
ction
Contract and
contract
administration/inspe
ction
Contract and
contract
administration/inspe
ction
Contract and
contract
administration/inspe
ction
Moderate to high
(Froelich et al.,
1983;Froelichet
al, 1985;Foltz
and Mallard,
2004; Luce,
1997)
High, based on
literature, San
Dimas,
Road/Water
Interaction
Moderate to
high, based on
past experience.
High, based on
literature, San
Dimas,
Road/Water
Interaction
High, based on
past experience.
Moderate to
high, based on
past experience.
High, based on
past experience.
Moderate, based
on past
experience.
High, based on
past experience.
Trails/Recreation
31
Coordination would minimize conflict with winter hauling on roads used as
groomed snowmobile routes.
Project design,
contract and
contract
administration/
inspection
Moderate, based
on past
experience.
AMERICAN-CROOKED RIVER PROJECT EIS
NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
ROD-A-4

-------
APPENDIX A

32

Trails 820, 832, 838, 844, 848, and others as identified, would be
protected during activities.
Designate all system trails as Protected Improvements in the Timber Sale
Contract. No skidding across trails, except over snow, fall trees away
from trails, cut stumps less than 12" in height within 100 feet of trails,
leave regeneration within 1 00 feet of trails to create a visual buffer
between treatment areas and trails, construct firelines to protect the
regeneration buffer and trail during slash treatment, and trails are not to
be used a firelines.
Contract and
contract
administration/inspe
ction
imnfiB9HHI
iiK§HS^^^HH
PJiJIIlpjpy^PljpS&e^BBSBS*™!
High, based on
past experience.
Access/Public Safety
33
34
Temporary roads would be closed to public use, except as specifically
authorized.
Operator would be required to set up warning signs advising of equipment
operations or hazards for public safety.
Contract and
contract
administration/inspe
ction
Contract and
contract
administration/inspe
ction
Moderate for
sediment
reduction and
wildlife security,
based on
monitoring
High, based on
past experience.
Air Quality
35
36
37
Procedures outlined in the North Idaho Smoke Management
Memorandum of Agreement would be followed, including restrictions
imposed by the smoke management-monitoring unit.
Prescribed burning would be conducted over several years to reduce the
amount of smoke in any one year. Priority in scheduling would be given
to units accessed by temporary roads scheduled for decommissioning
Additional restrictions, beyond those imposed by the smoke
management-monitoring unit, would be considered for prescribed burning
for local air quality reasons, including visual.
FS fuels
management
FS fuels
management
FS fuels
management
High, based on
burning approval
required daily by
smoke
monitoring unit.
High, based on
past experience,
and availability of
bum windows
and/or
personnel.
High, based on
past experience.
Wildlife
38
39
40
Snag and snag replacement green trees would be retained in numbers
consistent with Regional Guidelines (Appendix K)
Should any of the following be sighted in the project area during project
layout and implementation, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and unit
biologist would be notified: lynx or a lynx den, bald eagle, new wolf den or
rendezvous site, active goshawk nest. Appropriate protection measures
would be implemented where deemed necessary to protect these
species.
Should an active goshawk nest be discovered within a 450 feet distance
of timber harvest or fuel reduction activities, the nest tree will be
protected, as well as a 1 0-1 5 acre no-treatment buffer area around the
nest tree, as designated by the unit biologist to provide for foraging and
nesting sites.
Field preparation ,
NEPA project
design, contracting
and contract
administration
NEPA project
design, silvicultural
prescription, field
prep, contract
administration/inspe
ction, and USFWS
monitoring
Field prep, contract
and contract
administration/
inspection
High except
where safety
concerns or
wood cutting
result in loss.
Moderate; based
on public
sightings reports
and ESA section
7 consultation.
Moderate; based
on IDFG, et al,
1995, State
Conservation
Effort
          AMERICAN AND CROOKED RIVER PROJECT
                   NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
                                 ROD - A-5

-------
                                 APPENDIX A
•
41
ffi^JfiB^^ffi^^S3aMsM5^g^PSHP^^@^^B^^^^^^^^^K^^8
The integrity of existing access management restrictions would be
maintained within the planning area for wildlife security purposes.
Current access management restrictions would apply to existing
reconstructed roads after implementation of activities to maintain or
improve existing access and wildlife security. No contractor or their
representatives may use motorized vehicles to hunt or trap animals on a
restricted road.
illlflllMeinottlllilill
^mm^wl^K^i^^^m
Contract and
contract
administration/inspe
ction


High except
close to roads;
based on
standard timber
sale contract
clauses and
past results
monitoring .
Heritage Resources
42
43
Known historic properties or sites would be avoided or protected.
If additional cultural resources are discovered during project operations,
all ground-disturbing activities in that area will be halted until such
resources can be properly documented and evaluated by the Forest
Archaeologist in compliance with 36 CFR 800.13b3
NEPA project
design, field prep,
contract, and
administration/inspe
ction
Contract and
contract
administration/
inspection
High, objective to
achieve a "no
adverse effect"
on these
resources
Moderate based
on recognition of
resource and
contact with
Heritage
personnel
Noxious Weeds
44
45
46
47
48
Desirable vegetation would be promptly established on all disturbed
areas, using native and non-native plant species, as approved by the
Forest botanist.
All named plant cultivars used in revegetation will be certified blue-
tagged. All non-certified seed will be tested by a certified seed laboratory
against the all state noxious weed list and documentation of the seed
inspection test provided to the contract administrator. All straw and mulch
would be certified as free of noxious weed seed.
All mud, soil and plant parts would be removed from all off-road
equipment associated with the project before moving into the project area
to limit the spread of weeds. Cleaning must occur off National Forest
lands. This applies to all ATVs used on and off roads in the project area,
but does not apply to service or hauling vehicles that would stay on the
roadway, traveling frequently in and out of the project area.
All private rock used for surfacing would be county-certified as free of
noxious weed seed. Forest Service rock sources will be reviewed for
invasive weeds by a forest weed specialist or botanist. Borrow pits and
stockpiles will not be used if it is determined that it is infested with an
invasive plant that is not found in the area where the material will be
placed.
All small outbreaks of invasive weeds within the project risk zones (Map
16b), and along all haul routes leading to weed risk zones will be
pretreated prior to ground disturbing activities under the existing wee
management program.
Contract and
contract
administration/inspe
ction
Contract and
contract
administration and
inspection
Contract and
contract
administration and
inspection
Contract and
contract
administration/
inspection
Field prep, contract
Moderate based
on experience
High, based on
experience
High; based on
past experience
Moderate; based
on past
experience
High: based on
past experience
TES Plants
49
Candystick, a former Region 1 sensitive plant species, occurs in some
management units. Where live lodgepole are associated with candystick,
groups of live lodgepole pine would be left to protect candystick from
management activities.
NEPA project
design, field prep,
contract and
contract
administration/
inspection
High based on
past monitoring
and experience.
AMERICAN-CROOKED RIVER PROJECT EIS
NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
ROD-A-6

-------
                                                APPENDIX A
50
During implementation, if activities would impact previously unknown
sensitive plant occurrences, appropriate protection measures would be
implemented. Appropriate measures will vary depending upon the
ecology of the species involved and nature of the proposed action and
would be directed by a botanist.
Silvicultural
prescription, field
preparation,
contract, and
contract
administration/inspe
ction
High based on
monitoring,
experience, and
logic.
                                              Roadside Salvage
51
Roadside salvage would be limited to dead or dying trees, with no harvest
of standing trees more than 20 inches in diameter. (Windthrown trees
would not be subject to the diameter limit.)
Contractor permit
High; based on
based
experience and
accessibility to
sites
52
Salvage would be limited to areas adjacent to haul roads.  No tree cutting
or yarding would occur in RHCAs or in allocated existing or replacement
old growth.
Contractor permit
High; based on
based
experience and
accessibility to
sites
53
All yarding would be done from the road. Areas above steep cutslopes
that cannot be protected from yarding damage would be omitted from
salvage.  Yarding distance would not exceed 100 feet.
Contractor permit
High; based on
based
experience and
accessibility to
sites
54
No more than 80 dead or dying trees per mile (approximately 8
trees/acre) could be designated for cutting on each side of the road.
Contractor permit
High; based on
based
experience and
accessibility to
sites
55
Maximum opening size is one acre on each side of a road, or a maximum
of 400 feet along the road.
Contractor permit
High; based on
based
experience and
accessibility to
sites
56
Openings would be separated from other forest openings by at least 200
feet of pole size or larger forest along the road, on both sides, to provide
cover for wildlife crossing.
Contractor permit
High; based on
based
experience and
accessibility to
sites
57
Slash from salvage would be lopped and scattered, hand piled and
burned in the woods, or removed from the site at the discretion of the
District Ranger considering the Forest objective of maintaining less than
12 tons per acre of fine fuels.
Contractor permit
High; based on
based
experience and
accessibility to
sites
   1 Treatments would include roadside salvage within 100 feet of main haul roads. This component of the action would
   comply with all applicable design criteria developed for the action as a whole. These design criteria are not intended
   to limit or interfere with brushing, clearing, or hazard reduction activities associated with routine road maintenance.
                                                              AMERICAN AND CROOKED RIVER PROJECT
                                                                          NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
                                                                                              ROD - A-7

-------
                                     APPENDIX A
Correction: Between the draft and final EIS for the American and Crooked River project, we
erroneously dropped the following design criteria.  After investigation, it was determined that it
needed to be added back into the project.

                        Project Design and Mitigation Measures.
f'i*3(
-••• -$,. ,4.
8a
; r Project Design and Mitigation Measure
'VrSThss a? ••• '-•* • i" '-,-•',* •»!»;» s.v;',;'5%..v- . •*
Tractor yarding will be limited slopes less
than 35 percent, with the exception of small
inclusions in the unit.
; Implementation
Method
NEPA project design,
silviculture prescription,
and field prep.
Effectiveness
High, based on past
experience.
AMERICAN-CROOKED RIVER PROJECT EIS
NEZ PERCE NATIONAL FOREST
ROD-A-8

-------