Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
120360521
label
Forest Conference-Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS)-Summar
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
120360521
contentType
document
title
Forest Conference-Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS)-Summar
citationUrl
collections
Records of the Council on Environmental Quality (Clinton Administration)
Kathleen McGinty's Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
120360521
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
42-t-7432005-20120769F-Seg2-026-007-2018
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
d5c89542563b2a91
ocrText
FOIA Number: 2012-0769-F
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the William J. Clinton
Presidential Library Staff.
Collection/Record Group:
Clinton Presidential Records
Subgroup/Office of Origin: Council on Environmental Quality
Series/Staff Member:
Kathleen (Katie) McGinty
Subseries:
OA/ID Number:
4302
FolderID:
Folder Title:
Forest Conference-Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS)-Summary
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
S
61
7
2
3
P.7/32
FEB 18 '94 04:32PM
Summary
Summary
INTRODUCTION
This Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (Final SEIS) presents
10 alternatives and discloses their environmental effects. These alternatives
propose alternate Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
management direction within the range of the northern spotted owl. These
lands are in the Pacific Northwest and northern California. Each alternative
consists of combinations of (1) land allocations managed to protect and
enhance habitat for late-successional and old-growth forest related species and
to protect and enhance aquatic resources, and (2) standards and guidelines for
the management of these land allocations. Alternative 9 is identified as the
preferred alternative, and represents the forest ecosystem plan proposed by
President Clinton on July 1, 1993.
BACKGROUND
The ongoing controversy concerning management of federal lands has resulted
in what has been described as a gridlock of lawsuits, court rulings, appeals,
and protests. The public debate has expanded from a focus on management of
northern spotted owl habitat to include management of all old-growth forest
associated species and old-growth ecosystems.
Recent court rulings require completion of environmental impact statements.
The Forest Service is required by the U.S. District Court for the Western District
of Washington to prepare a new or supplemental environmental impact
statement (EIS) to correct deficiencies the court found in the 1992 Final
Environmental Impact Statement on Management for the Northern Spotted Owl in the
National Forests. The BLM is required by the U.S. District Court for the District
of Oregon to prepare an EIS to incorporate new information on the effects of
logging on the northern spotted owl and to consult on a conservation strategy.
Both agencies are currently enjoined from selling timber in northern spotted
owl habitat.
To seek a solution to the controversy, President Clinton held a Forest
Conference in Portland, Oregon, on April 2, 1993. During the day-long
conference, scientists, economists, representatives from the forest products
industry and environmental groups, Indian tribes, and others were invited to
present concerns, opinions, or proposals to the President concerning the
various issues surrounding the management of federal lands in the Pacific
Northwest and northern California.
After the Forest Conference, the Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment
Team ("the Assessment Team") was assembled to prepare an assessment that
took an ecosystem approach to forest management. The Assessment Team
examined many options, evaluated them, and developed and presented 10
options in their report, Forest Ecosystem Management: An Ecological, Economic,
and Social Assessment ("the FEMAT Report"). It is available on request.
Using the FEMAT Report, the SEIS Interdisciplinary Team prepared a Draft
SEIS with the Assessment Team's 10 options as alternatives. The Draft SEIS was
available to the public, agencies, tribes, and other governments for review on
July 30, 1993. Following a 90-day comment period which included public
FEB 18 '94 04: 33PM
P.8/32
Summary
hearings and which elicited over 100,000 comments, the SEIS Interdisciplinary
Team considered these comments, utilized new information, modified some of
the alternatives, and subsequently prepared this Final SEIS.
The Underlying Needs and Purposes
The agencies are responding to dual needs: the need for forest habitat and the
need for forest products.
The need for forest habitat is the need for a healthy forest ecosystem with
habitat that will support populations of native species (particularly those
associated with late-successional and old-growth forests) and includes
protection for riparian areas and waters. This need was reflected by President
Clinton in these words at the Forest Conference:
[A]s we craft a plan, we need to protect the long-term health of our forests, our
wildlife, and our waterways
[W]e hold them in trust for future generations.
The need for forest products from forest ecosystems is the need for a
sustainable supply of timber and other forest products that will help maintain
the stability of local and regional economies on a predictable and long-term
basis. This need was reflected by President Clinton in these words at the Forest
Conference:
[W]e must never forget the human and the economic dimensions of these
problems. Where sound management policies can preserve the health of forest
lands, [timber] sales should go forward.
[T]he plan should produce R predictable and sustainable level of timber sales and
nontimber resources that will not degrade or destroy the environment.
Each of the alternatives in this SEIS meets both needs to some degree. While
meeting the underlying needs, the agencies also strive to meet additional
purposes.
The agencies must take an ecosystem management approach to forest
management, with support from scientific evidence, and meet the requirements
of existing laws and regulations. These requirements were reflected by
President Clinton at the Forest Conference:
[O]ur efforts must be, insofar as we are wise enough to know it, scientifically
sound, ecologically credible, and legally responsible.
The agencies must cooperate with all the federal agencies. As also stated
by President Clinton at the Forest Conference:
[W]e will do our best to make the federal government work together and work for
you. We may make mistakes but we will try to end the gridlock within the Federal
Government and we will insist on collaboration not confrontation.
FEB 18 '94 04: 33PM
P.9/32
Summary
The alternatives considered in detail in this SEIS respond to these underlying
purposes and needs. Alternatives that would not meet these underlying
purposes and needs were eliminated from detailed study.
The Proposed Action
The proposed action is to adopt coordinated management direction for the
lands administered by the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management
within the range of the northern spotted owl that meets the underlying need
and purposes. This regionwide management direction will provide overall
coordination across administrative units, provinces, and watersheds. The
action will amend the management direction established in all existing Forest
Service and BLM land management plans for the areas and resources covered
by this SEIS. This new management direction will apply to projects that will be
conducted after site-specific environmental analysis. The existing management
plans to be amended include existing Regional Guides, Forest Plans, Unit
Plans, Timber Management Plans, Management Framework Plans, and
Resource Management Plans for lands within the range of the northern spotted
owl The coordinated management direction established by the Record of
Decision for this SEIS will also be incorporated into all land and resource
management plans within the range of the northern spotted owl as they are
completed or revised.
The Issues
For more than two decades there has been growing controversy about the
management of the old-growth forests on federal lands. When harvested, they
have great economic value and make way for younger forests and the wildlife
they support. If preserved, they provide an environment for many other
species and contribute to other nontimber forest values and environmental
qualities.
At the Forest Conference, President Clinton posed the fundamental question in
his opening remarks:
How can we achieve a balanced and comprehensive policy that recognizes the
importance of the forests and timber to the economy and jobs of this region, and
how can we preserve our precious old-growth forests, which are part of our
national heritage and that, once destroyed, can never be replaced?
President Clinton continued:
The most important thing we can do is to admit, all of us to each other, that there
are no simple or easy answers. This is not about choosing between jobs and the
environment, but about recognizing the importance of both and recognizing that
virtually everyone here and everyone in this region cares about both.
The ecological systems within the range of the northern spotted owl are
complex and varied. Managing these ecosystems to préserve and enhance late-
successional and old-growth forests and aquatic resources will have major
FEB 18 '94 04: 34PM
P. 10/32
Summary
effects on the overall structure, function, and appearance of the region's forests;
the water quality in streams and rivers; and the distribution, connectivity,
diversity, and sustainability of its terrestrial and aquatic communities,
In the last decade, the northern spotted owl became the focus in the debate
over how federal forest lands should be managed. However, the management
of habitat for the northern spotted owl affects other terrestrial and aquatic
species and the region's ecological systems collectively. There are 40 federally-
listed threatened or endangered species that may occur within the range of the
northern spotted owl; of these, about half use coniferous forest habitat on
federal lands.
The northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet are listed as threatened
species. The long-term persistence of the spotted owl and other old-growth
related species depends in large measure on providing habitat of adequate
amount and distribution to support their life functions. While most people
want the spotted owl and other old-growth species to survive, there is
disagreement over the size of populations that should be provided for, and the
forest management that will allow for long-term survival.
Aquatic and riparian areas are integral parts of the region's ecosystems and
major factors in supporting the economy of the region. Damage to forest
aquatic and riparian systems has contributed to degradation of some plant and
animal communities. Of immediate concern is the loss of salmon and steelhead
runs, which are major cultural and economic elements in the Pacific Northwest
and northern California.
Since World War II, timber harvest and reforestation have been a major part of
the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management's role of actively managing
federal lands for a variety of sustainable benefits for the Nation and to establish
younger forest stands. Species that need young forests and species that need
older forests are affected in different, often opposite, ways by changes in the
age, composition, and distribution of the habitat each need. Older forests are
essential habitat for many species; as the amount of older forests has decreased,
the survival of old-growth related species, including the northern spotted owl,
has become more uncertain.
The BLM and Forest Service's timber management programs provide raw
material for the wood products industry that, after milling and processing,
serve the needs of a large number and variety of consumers. The wood
products industry's principal employment is located in small cities, towns, and
rural areas. From 1986 to 1990, wood from federal forests supported half the
industry's jobs. Additionally, a quarter of the receipts from timber sales on
federal lands (and half of the receipts from the Oregon and California Revested
Lands (O&C lands)) go to county governments.
Reductions in the amount of timber sold for harvest directly affect employment
and the economic health of the forestry and wood products industries. These,
in turn, immediately affect the economic vitality of the communities dependent
on them, and the well being of workers and families. These changes threaten
the ability of some of these communities and their institutions to survive.
FEB 18 '94 04:34PM
P.11/32
Summary
There are other human uses of federal forest lands that would be enhanced,
maintained or curtailed if forests were managed to benefit the northern spotted
owl and other late-successional and old-growth related species. Road
construction and use, recreation, mining, and other land uses will be affected.
There are alternate paths for people and communities to take to adjust to
changes. The effectiveness of those paths and the human costs of making those
changes are dynamic and significant issues.
The Alternatives
THE No-ACTION
The No-Action Alternative is essentially comprised of the "No-Action"
ALTERNATIVE
Alternatives in the EISs being supplemented by this SEIS. The No-Action
Alternative in this SEIS basically represents management direction that was in
place immediately before the release of the Interagency Scientific Committee's
(ISC) A Conservation Strategy for the Northern Spotted Owl in the spring of 1990.
Because of subsequent listings of the marbled murrelet and the northern
spotted owl as threatened species, this No-Action Alternative is no longer a
reasonable alternative and could not be implemented today.
INTRODUCTION TO THE The 10 action alternatives presented in this SEIS are developed, with
ACTION ALTERNATIVES modification, from the 10 ecosystem management options developed by the
Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team and described in the FEMAT
Report. The management direction in the alternatives applies only to lands
administered by the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management within the
range of the northern spotted owl. Each alternative assumes other federal
lands, such as those administered by the Fish and Wildlife Service, National
Park Service, and Department of Defense, will be managed according to
existing management plans and applicable federal law.
How THE
Like other recent strategies for management of northern spotted owl habitat or
ALTERNATIVES
old-growth forests of the Pacific Northwest, the alternatives presented in this
ARE STRUCTURED
SEIS propose a network of designated areas managed primarily to protect and
enhance habitat for the northern spotted owl and other late-successional and
old-growth forest related species (hereafter referred to as designated areas),
and nondesignated areas referred to as the matrix. Within each of these areas,
standards and guidelines set management direction and apply to management
activities.
Each action alternative uses current plans and draft plan preferred alternatives
as a starting point, or baseline. Therefore, unless specifically excepted,
standards and guidelines of the current plans and draft plan preferred
alternatives apply to all alternatives where they are more restrictive or provide
greater benefits to late-successional forest related species than the provisions of
these alternatives.
LAND ALLOCATIONS
There are 24,455,300 acres of federal land within the range of the northern
spotted owl. Each alternative in this SEIS allocates these acres to one of the
following six categories of designated areas, or to the matrix. The categories are
listed in the order that acreage was tabulated, and not necessarily in the order
that corresponding standards and guidelines take precedence.
Summary
S-7
FEB 18 '34 04: 35PM
P.12/32
mmary
Designated Areas
ONGRESSIONALLY
All alternatives retain land allocations for existing lands that are
ESERVED AREAS
congressionally reserved. These include lands with congressional designations
that preclude timber harvest, as well as other federal lands not administered by
the Forest Service or BLM. This includes National Parks and Monuments,
Wildernesses, Wild and Scenic Rivers, National Wildlife Refuges, and military
reservations. The location and size of these areas do not change among the
alternatives. Management of these lands follows direction written in the
applicable legislation or plans.
LATE-SUCCESSIONAL
Late-Successional Reserves are identified for each alternative. These areas
RESERVES
would be managed to protect and enhance conditions of late-successional and
old-growth forest ecosystems, which serve as habitat for late-successional and
old-growth related species including the northern spotted owl. For most
alternatives, some level of silvicultural treatment (such as thinning young
stands) is permitted in stands of a certain age to accelerate the development of
old-growth habitat characteristics, subject to review by the Regional Ecosystem
Office. These reserves are designed to maintain a functional, interacting, late-
successional and old-growth forest ecosystem.A management plan should be
prepared for each large Late-Successional Reserve (or group of smaller Late-
Successional Reserves) before habitat manipulation activities are designed and
implemented. Silvicultural activities and Late-Successional Reserve plans are
subject to review by the Regional Ecosystem Office.
MANAGED
Managed Late-Successional Areas are identified for some alternatives in areas
LATE-SUCCESSIONAL
where regular and frequent fire was a natural part of the ecosystem. The
AREAS
objective for these areas is to produce and maintain an optimum level of late-
successional and old-growth stands on a landscape scale. In these designated
areas, certain silvicultural treatments and fire hazard reduction treatments
would be allowed to help prevent complete stand destruction from large
catastrophic events such as high intensity, high severity fires; or disease or
insect epidemics. As with Late-Successional Reserves, each Managed Late-
Successional Area should have a management plan.
ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT
Adaptive Management Areas occur only under Alternative 9. The objective for
AREAS
each of these areas is to develop and test new management approaches to
integrate and achieve ecological and economic health, and other social
objectives. Each of these 10 areas has a different emphasis to its prescription,
such as maximizing the amount of late-successional forests or improving
riparian conditions through silvicultural treatments. A complete description of
the purpose for each Adaptive Management Area, as well as specific objectives,
appears in Appendix B3, Adaptive Management Areas. Some scheduled timber
harvest (that contributing to the probable sale quantity, also referred to as PSQ)
takes place in some of the Adaptive Management Areas.
ADMINISTRATIVELY
Administratively Withdrawn Areas are those areas identified in current plans
WITHDRAWN AREAS
and draft plan preferred alternatives as not scheduled for timber harvest and
not included in calculations of allowable sale quantity (ASQ). Administratively
Withdrawn Areas include recreation areas, lands not technically suitable for
timber production, certain visual retention and riparian areas, and areas
P. 13/32
FEB 18 '94 04: 36PM
Summar
removed from timber production for the protection of locally endemic species.
For all alternatives, unless specifically excepted in this SEIS, Administratively
Withdrawn Areas and all other standards and guidelines of the current plans
and draft plan preferred alternatives apply where they are more restrictive or
provide greater benefits to late-successional and old-growth related species
than other provisions of these alternatives.
RIPARIAN RESERVES
The Riparian Reserves provide an area along all streams, wetlands, ponds,
lakes, and unstable and potentially unstable areas where riparian-dependent
resources receive primary emphasis. Riparian Reserves are important to the
terrestrial ecosystem as well, serving, for example, as dispersal habitat for
certain terrestrial species. Riparian Reserves are not mapped; however, sample
distributions of Riparian Reserves are shown on the Alternative 9 map
included with this Final SEIS.
Matrix
The matrix consists of those federal lands outside the six categories of
designated areas listed above. Most timber harvest and other silvicultural
activities would be conducted in that portion of the matrix with suitable forest
lands, according to standards and guidelines. Most scheduled timber harvest
(that contributing to the PSQ) takes place in the matrix. The matrix also
includes nonforested areas, and forested areas that are technically unsuitable
for timber production, and therefore do not contribute to PSQ. Many
alternatives apply the ISC Conservation Strategy's 50-11-40 rule for
management of the matrix. Each alternative also specifies the amount of green
trees, snags, and down logs that will be left following management activities.
Environmental Consequences
Chapter 3&4 describes in detail the environmental consequences of the
alternatives. Under each of the alternatives considered, timber harvests of older
forests will decline from historic levels. The environmental consequences
associated with timber harvest, such as loss of late-successional forest habitat,
new road construction, increased stream sedimentation, and water quality
degradation, will be proportionately less. Social and economic impacts to
timber-dependent communities will be proportionately greater. The
preservation of late-successional and old-growth forests will have beneficial
consequences to the fish, wildlife and plants associated with them, to water
quality and to ecological diversity. The following discussion summarizes and
compares the key impacts identified.
EFFECTS ON
The evaluation of late-successional and old-growth forest ecosystems is
LATE-SUCCESSIONAL AND
expressed as an expected likelihood of achieving long-term past conditions
OLD-GROWTH FOREST
based on three attributes that characterize the quantity and quality of the
ECOSYSTEMS
ecosystem. The attributes are 1) abundance and ecological diversity - the acreage
and variety of plant communities and environments, 2) processes and functions
the ecological actions that lead to the development and maintenance of the
Summary
S-9
Table S-1. Summary and comparison of land allocations and standards and guidelines among alternatives
humans
Alternative
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
0
9
10
Congress. Res.
Million actes
7.321
7.321
7.321
7.321
7.321
7.321
7.321
7.321
7.321
7.321
Million acres
11.402
8.951
7.359
8.066
6.376
7.501
5.423
7.501
7.431
7.501
FEB 18 '94
Treatment of
Treatment of
West Treatment
Treatment of
stands less than 50
Same $9
stands and salvage
Same as
Same as
Same as
stands in
of less than 60
Same as
Timber harvest/salvage
None
Alternative
per Northern
years old Very
Alternative
Alternative
Alternative
Murrelet Zone I
years old.
Alternative
Spotted Owl
4
limited salvage
2
2
4
up to 50 years.
East Manage to
2
Recovery Plan
Other stands up
reduce risk of
Late-Successional
to 180 years.
calastrophic loss.
Reserves
Protection for sites
occupied by marbled
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No²
No
Yes
Yes
murrelets outside
reserves
Protection of SAT species
dosely associated with
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
old growth
1.522 (AMA)
Managed Late-
Million arres
0
0
1.700
0.238
0.381
0
0.381
0
0
0.102 (MLSA)
Successional Areas
or
Adaptive
West Long
Treatment of
Adaptive
retation, 50 percent
Management
stands and salvage
Management
retention
Same as
Same as
Timber harvest/salvage
Areas
Areas
N/A
N/A
East Long rotation,
per Northern
Alternative
N/A
Alternative
N/A
and some
N/A
(All. 9 only)
Spotted Owl
4
$
or uneven-age
Recovery Plan
Managed Late-
management
Successional
Areas
Administratively
Withdrawn
Million acres
1.080
1.509
1.499
1.652
2.067
1.828
2.282
1.828
1.477
1.828
Areas
Million acres
1.880
2.164
2.134
2.896
2674
2.513
0.622
1.503
2628
2513
CSAY
Variable,
Riparian
2:1:1 in Tier I Key
Same as
Same as
Same as
Same "
usually no
Same as
Same as
Reserves
Widths'
2:1:1
Watersheds, 21%
Alternative
Alternative
Alternative
Alternative
reserves on
2½
Alternative
Alternative
other watersheds
2
1
2
2
Intermittent
1
2
streams
Million acree
2.773
4.511
4.443
6.284
5.637
5.293
8.428
6.303
3.975
5,293
Natl. Forest-
50-11-40
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
BLM-modified
Matrix
Support 40% pop:
Variable on
Same at
Same as
Same as
Constal areas
Snags:lugs:green trees
2:26
2:26
West 12,
National Forests
Alternative
2:26
Alternative
Alternative
WA/OR: 2.8-12:0
220
per acre
East 2-10:4
BLM 2269
4
4
4
Other areas 2:8-
12:15%
, Riparian Reserve Widths (e.g., 2:1:1), are expressed as multiples of the height of a maximum site-potential tree, measured on each side of fish-bearing streams, nonfish-bearing
streams, and intermittent streams, respectively (see text).
1 Not specifically required in the alternative, but currently required under the Endangered Species Act.
P.14/32
I
FEB 18 '94 04: 37PM
P.15/32
Summar
Figure S-1. Estimated federal land allocation by alternative
25
20
15
Millions of Acres
10
5
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Alternative
Reserved Congressionally Areas
Late-Successional
Managed Late-
Adaptive
Reserves
Successional Areas
Management Areas
Riparian
Administratively
Reserves
Matrix
Withdrawn Areas
Summary 0 S-1:
FEB 18 '94 04: 38PM
P. 16/32
Summary
ecosystem and the values of the ecosystem for species and populations, and 3)
connectivity - the extent to which the landscape pattern of the ecosystem
provides for biological flows that sustain animal and plant populations.
In general, forest plantations, fire suppression, logging, ownership patterns,
and human population and environmental influences have altered the regional
ecosystem on Federal lands to the extent that none of the alternatives can
provide for a return to conditions that closely match those of previous
centuries. Site conditions across all landscapes will not return to their
presettlement conditions within the next 100 years. However, all of the
alternatives reverse the management trend of the last 50 years on Federal lands,
which, if continued, would have resulted in a steep decline in the quantity and
quality of late-successional ecosystems and the eventual loss of these
ecosystems in many Federal planning areas.
Some alternatives provide greater likelihoods than others of maintaining and
enhancing late-successional ecosystems at levels that approach typical long-
term conditions. Alternatives 1, 3, 4, and 9 received the highest ratings.
Alternatives 3 and 4 provide for relatively high amounts of late-successional
forest and strong connectivity through the presence of riparian reserves and
retention of old-growth components in managed forest matrix. Alternatives 3
and 4 also provide relatively high acreage of low elevation late-successional
ecosystems, which are relatively rare throughout the entire region. Although
Alternative 1 provides for the highest acreage of Late-Successional Reserves, it
did not rate as high as Alternatives 3 and 9 because it lacks restoration
silviculture in the reserves.
The Assessment Team assumed that without restoration silviculture, the
development of late-successional conditions would be retarded. Alternative 9
achieved a 60 to 80 percent or greater cumulative likelihood of reaching less
than long-term average conditions or better in moist provinces. Alternative 9
might have achieved a higher overall rating if it provided for more acreage of
late-successional ecosystems in the low elevations of Oregon. The Assessment
Team concluded that the opportunities to increase knowledge about ecosystem
function and management in the Adaptive Management Areas of Alternative 9
actually increased the likelihood that this alternative would provide late-
successional characteristics in the future.
The assessment of maintenance of a functional and interconnected, late-
successional forest ecosystem was not revised to reflect the changes described
in Appendix B11, Standards and Guidelines Resulting From Additional Species
Analysis and Changes to Alternative 9, because the changes to the Outcomes as
described in this assessment are expected to be relatively minor. Several of
these standards and guidelines are likely to enhance the attributes of late-
successional and old-growth forest ecosystems. The overall outcomes for the
ecosystem are likely to improve at least slightly as a result of the additional
measures incorporated into Alternative 9, but are not reflected in the results of
the assessment.
FEB 18 '94 04: 38PM
P.17/32
Summary
EFFECTS ON AQUATIC
The Aquatic Conservation Strategy (Appendix B6) was designed to address all
ECOSYSTEMS
elements of the aquatic and riparian ecosystem, including maintenance of
hydrologic function; high water quality; adequate amounts of coarse woody
material; a stable, complex stream channel; and a riparian area with suitable.
microclimate and vegetation. The likelihood of achieving an outcome with
sufficient quality, distribution and abundance of habitat to allow riparian-
dependent plant and animal species to stabilize, well-distributed across Federal
lands, is lower for Alternatives 2, 3, 5, 6, and 10 than for Alternatives 1 and 4,
and Alternative 9 with the standards and guidelines added since the Draft
SEIS. However, the Assessment Team determined that all alternatives except 7
and 8 would reverse the trend of degradation and begin recovery of aquatic
ecosystems and habitat on Federal lands within the range of the northern
spotted owl. Even if changes in land management practices and comprehensive
restoration are initiated, it is possible that no alternative will completely
recover all degraded aquatic systems within the next 100 years. Faster recovery
rates are probable for aquatic ecosystems under Alternatives 1 and 4, and
Alternative 9 with the standards and guidelines added since the Draft SEIS
than other alternatives. Alternatives 1 and 4, and Alternative 9 with the
standards and guidelines added since the Draft SEIS would reduce disturbance
across the landscape due to application of a larger Late-Successional Reserve
network and the use of wider Riparian Reserves for intermittent streams
throughout the planning area.
EFFECTS ON AIR AND
Air Quality
WATER QUALITY AND
SOIL PRODUCTIVITY
All alternatives in this SEIS propose to continue the use of prescribed fire in the
planning area. Consequently, all alternatives will have some smoke related
impacts, which are the primary source of air quality degradation on federal
lands under the proposed actions. This SEIS emphasizes the incorporation of
ecosystem principles into forest management where fire is valued as a natural
and necessary ecosystem process. Under ecosystem management, certain types
of prescribed fire, such as understory burning, will be emphasized. Understory
burning is designed to approximate natural low-to-moderate intensity
wildfires, and generally burns with fewer particulate matter emissions than
broadcast burning in clearcut harvest units. Total projected emissions
aggregated over the planning area, therefore, are lower under all of the
alternatives than historic emissions when fire use was primarily broadcast
burning. While total particulate emissions are lower under each alternative
than historic levels, the shift to lower intensity burning will result in different
smoke dispersion characteristics that will need to be closely monitored to
minimize air quality impacts.
Estimates of the expected acreage of prescribed fire use were calculated for all
federally managed lands for each of the alternatives in this SEIS. Assumptions
regarding the ecological need for prescribed burning, the hazard reduction
necessary for risk management, and the amount of prescribed burning
necessary for site preparation were made at this programmatic level. Results
show that Alternative 9 would likely result in the greatest prescribed fire
acreage at about 89,000 acres burned annually, followed by Alternatives 3, 7, 8,
5, 6, 10, 2, 4, and finally Alternative 1 with about 46,000 acres. All of these are
below the 1985 to 1990 average of about 109,000 acres burned each year. Total
Summary
S-13
FEB
18
'34
04
39PM
P.18/32
Summary
emissions were estimated based on the acres of expected burning, the type of
prescribed burning, and the emissions from each type of fuel consumed; so
emissions by alternative would rank in a pattern similar to acreage burned.
The estimates are very generalized because many of the assumptions about the
level of prescribed fire use for each land allocation within each province cannot
be validated until watershed/landscape-level analysis or province-level
planning are completed. Thus, air quality analysis at lower planning levels are
critical in determining the actual amount of prescribed fire that may be needed
on the landscape, and even more importantly, the air quality impacts of
prescribed burning. The use of prescribed fire may reduce the likelihood of
large, high-severity wildfire, as well as wildfire emissions. However, emissions
tradeoff analyses are essential to document the optimum amount of prescribed
burning necessary to offset wildfire emissions.
Water Quality
The effects to water quality under the alternatives vary depending on the
acreages and distribution of the various land allocations and the type and
location of land disturbing activities occurring under the alternative. The most
significant factors related to potential water quality effects for each alternative
are the selected Riparian Reserve scenarios, the level and location of road
building, and the amount and method of timber harvest proposed. Alternatives
1, 4, and 9 would have the greatest benefit to water quality. Alternatives 2, 3, 5,
6 and 10 have the potential for not as great an improvement to water quality
than Alternatives 1, 4, and 9, primarily because they provide less protection for
intermittent streams in Tier 2 Key Watersheds and non-Key Watersheds.
Alternatives 7 and 8 have the greatest potential to affect water quality of the 10
alternatives analyzed in this SEIS. Based on the Riparian Reserves scenario and
other components of the Aquatic Conservation Strategy, all of the alternatives,
except 7 and 8, are expected to maintain or improve water quality, although
watershed recovery rates would be quickest for Alternatives 1, 4, and 9.
Subsequent environmental effects analysis at the province, watershed, and site-
specific levels will be needed to develop and implement water quality
protection measures.
Soil Productivity
Alternatives 7 and 8 have the most matrix and thus, have the highest potential
to adversely affect long-term soil productivity. Land disturbing activities affect
long-term soil productivity by affecting: (1) soil bulk density (untilled skid
trails, etc.); (2) soil displacement (road building, skid trails, etc.); (3) erosion
(exposure of mineral soil, road placement and drainage); (4) nutrient status
(removal of organic material by prescribed burning and intense utilization);
and (5) soil biology. Alternatives 1 and 4 would have the least amount of soil
disturbance predicted from management actions since they have the most Late-
Successional Reserves and thus, would have the highest probability of
maintaining long-term soil productivity. Alternatives 2, 3, 5, 6, 9, and 10 would
have intermediate levels of disturbance and probability of maintaining long
term soil productivity relative to the previously described alternatives. These
alternatives have fewer areas within reserves but more matrix than
Alternatives 1 and 4.
FEB 18 '94 40PM
P.19/32
Summary
EFFECTS ON
All of the alternatives provide for the continued existence of threatened and
THREATENED AND
endangered species. In the case of the northern spotted owl and the marbled
ENDANGERED SPECIES
murrelet, many components of the alternatives were specifically designed to
address the needs of these species. There are 39 federally listed and proposed
species which may occur within the range of the northern spotted owl. The Fish
and Wildlife Service also identified 10 of these species whose habitat use is
known to include late-successional forest, or their occurrence is directly
associated with such habitat. With this information, 23 of the listed and
proposed species were eliminated from detailed discussion in the Final SEIS for
one of three reasons: (1) they are not known to occur on the federal lands of the
planning area, (2) they do not inhabit coniferous forests, or (3) their presence in
the spotted owl's range is transitory or unaffected by forest management
activities. It has been determined that the alternatives considered in the Final
SEIS will have no effect on these species. The four salmon species are included
in the narrative discussion to more completely describe the reasons for the
determinations. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine
Fisheries Service have concurred with these determinations (see Appendix G).
The Fish and Wildlife Service identified six "species that are not restricted to
only late-successional forests or that are associated with unique or specialized
habitats that may not be considered late successional, but which may be
affected by forest management activities." Some of these species were not
evaluated by the Assessment Team because of their lack of association with
late-successional forests, however, they are addressed in this SEIS to provide a
complete accounting. The alternatives in this SEIS are not likely to adversely
affect these species.
Four listed or proposed species are associated with late-successional forests: the
bald eagle, the Oregon chub, the northern spotted owl, and the marbled
murrelet. None of the alternatives is likely to adversely affect the bald eagle.
Management of nonfederal lands and cumulative effects are affecting the
Oregon chub, and cannot be mitigated by federal land management. The
following discussion summarizes the effects of the alternatives on the other two
species.
Northern Spotted Owl
The effectiveness of an alternative in providing for northern spotted owl
recovery on Federal lands relies heavily on the spacing, size and location of the
habitat. It was the conclusion of the Assessment Team that Alternatives 1
through 6 and 9 met or exceeded the conservation measures for federal lands
for the Final Draft Spotted Owl Recovery Plan (USDI unpub. 1992a).
Alternatives 7, 8 and 10 were found to have less assurance of owl recovery on
federal lands, primarily due to inadequate provision of dispersal habitat. While
Alternative 9 also lacked a specific dispersal habitat provision in the Draft SEIS,
other aspects of this alternative were expected to provide adequate dispersal
habitat. The additional standards and guidelines in Alternative 9 would
increase this assessment of adequacy of the alternative. Therefore, selection of
Alternatives 1 through 6, or Alternative 9 would provide the federal land
allocations and standards and guidelines necessary to achieve recovery of the
northern spotted owl.
Summary
S-15
FEB
18
'94
04:40PM
P.20/32
ummary
Marbled Murrelet
In the short term, the alternatives will provide a varying degree of "reserve"
protection for the population of murrelets known to occur in the planning area.
H
However, eight alternatives (all but Alternatives 7 and 8) also provide for
protection of murrelet sites outside of the reserves. The full impact of this
protection outside reserves is not known at this time because of the limited
CAT
surveys conducted for this species.
Alternative 1 provides habitat that would allow greater than 90 percent
likelihood of providing habitat conditions to support a marbled murrelet
population occurring well distributed on the federal lands. Alternatives 2, 3, to
HAIZ
5, and 6, had ratings of 84 percent likelihood of a well-distributed population
on federal lands, and Alternatives 9 and 10 were rated at 80 percent. The lowest
ratings were assigned to Alternatives 7 and 8. Alternative 7 was rated low
because of its lack of specific protection of murrelet sites in the matrix and less
protection of old-growth in coastal areas. Alternative 8 rated low because of
poor protection of murrelet sites in the matrix, and also because of its
allowance for timber harvest in stands up to 180 years of age.
In the Draft SEIS, Alternative 9 had a 80 percent likelihood of a murrelet
population well distributed on federal lands. The modifications made to
Alternative 9 have added protection of approximately 25,000 additional acres
of Late-Successional Reserves in the Olympic Adaptive Management Area
(AMA). Another change was for the Finney and Northern Coast Range AMAs,
which have amended direction stating that this Late-Successional Reserve
acreage may be reconsidered during development of the Adaptive
Management Area plans, if the proposed actions are consistent with the
Endangered Species Act requirements for the marbled murrelet. Other
modifications to Alternative 9 which would likely improve the murrelet rating
are: adoption of the Riparian Reserve Scenario 1, retention of 100 acres around
spotted owl activity centers in the matrix, survey and manage provisions for a
variety of other species, and retention of old-growth fragments in watersheds
where little remains. These modifications would result in retention of more
marbled murrelet habitat than the standards and guidelines for Alternative 9
described in the Draft SEIS. Based on the relative amount of Late-Successional
Reserve acreage in the alternatives, it is likely that a rating of the modified
Alternative 9 would fall between the ratings for Alternatives 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 and
the rating for Alternative 1.
EFFECTS ON SPECIES
The Assessment Team determined that 1,116 terrestrial speci es were closely
NOT THREATENED
associated with late-successional and old-growth forests. These species were
OR ENDANGERED
grouped into bryophytes, fungi, lichens, vascular plants, mollusks, amphibians
and reptiles, birds, and mammals. A list of 15 functional groups of arthropods
was also considered. Twenty-nine species of fish were determined to occur in
streams within late-successional and old-growth forests within the range of the
northern spotted owl. Each of the alternatives were evaluated to determine the
likelihood of habitat on Federal lands to support populations of these species
or groups of species. Expert panels were asked to predict a percent likelihood
whether habitat would be of sufficient quality, distribution and abundance for
species populations to: a) stabilize, well distributed, b) stabilize with significant
in distribution. c) continue existence only on refugia, or d) be at risk of
P.21/32
FEB 18 '94 04:41PM
Summary
extirpation. The assessment process and the potential outcomes that were
predicted are described for each of the species or groups of species in Chapter
3&4. Additional species analysis was conducted between the Draft and Final
a.
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statements. The analysis focused on the
likely outcomes for many of the species that were considered in the Draft SEIS.
While the analysis focused most directly on responding to public comments on
the preferred alternative (Alternative 9), much of it is also pertinent to the
remaining nine alternatives.
The results of the original assessments and the additional analysis are
summarized in Chapter 3&4, with extensive background material in
Appendices A and J. Attempts to further summarize these results would be an
oversimplification and possibly misleading. The following is a generalized
st
comparison of the impacts anticipated for the alternatives based on the nature
of the changes expected to occur to the habitat components important to the
species or groups of species that were analyzed. The relative impacts described
for Alternative 9 are those expected to occur with the standards and guidelines
added between the Draft and Final SEIS.
Nonvascular Plants and Allies
This includes bryophytes, fungi and lichens. Bryophytes include hornworts,
liverworts and mosses. The habitat components important to bryophytes
include live, old-growth trees, decaying wood, riparian zones and generally the
habitat characteristics achieved by more extensive and interconnected late-
successional and old-growth forested conditions. Alternatives 1, 3 and 9, are
generally the most favorable to bryophytes, because they provide the set of
allocations and management practices that best produces the habitat
components for bryophytes. Alternatives 4, 5, 7 and 8, provide respectively,
less of these habitat conditions. Based on their overall features, Alternative 2
would likely have effects between those of Alternatives 3 and 5, Alternative 6
would likely have effects similar to Alternative 5, and Alternative 10 would
likely have effects between those of Alternatives 5 and 7.
Fungi are neither plants nor animals but are recognized as a separate kingdom
of organisms, both in structure and function. Species diversity of fungi appears
highest in late-successional forests because of the diversity of habitat structures
and host species, and the abundance of coarse woody debris and standing dead
trees. Habitat components important to the fungi include dead, down wood;
standing dead trees; and live, old-growth trees; as well as a diversity of host
species and microhabitats. Also important for fungi is a well-distributed
network of late-successional forest. Small forest fragments can function as
refugia where fungi may persist until suitable habitat conditions become
available in adjacent stands. Alternatives that retain more of these habitat
features generally had higher ratings for species. Alternatives 1, 3, 4, and 9, are
generally the most favorable to bryophytes, because they provide the set of
allocations and management practices that best produces the habitat
components for bryophytes. Alternative 5 would provide intermediate levels of
this habitat. Alternatives 7 and 8 are similar in their effects, and would provide
less favorable habitat conditions for bryophytes. Based on their overall
FEB 18 '94 04:42PM
P.22/32
Summary
features, Alternative 2 would likely have effects between those of Alternatives
3 and 5, Alternative 6 would likely have effects similar to Alternative 5, and
Alternative 10 would likely have effects between those of Alternatives 5 and 7.
Lichens are a conspicuous component of old-growth forest ecosystems where
they play an important ecological role. The habitat components important to
lichens include live, old-growth trees, decaying wood, riparian zones and
extensive and interconnected late-successional and old-growth forested
conditions. Alternatives 1, 4, and 9, are generally the most favorable to lichens,
because they provide the set of allocations and management practices that best
produces the habitat components for lichens. Alternatives 3 and 5 would
provide intermediate levels of this habitat. Alternatives 7 and 8 are similar in
their effects, and would provide less favorable habitat conditions for lichens.
Based on their overall features, Alternative 2 would likely have effects between
those of Alternatives 3 and 5, Alternative 6 would likely have effects similar to
Alternative 5, and Alternative 10 would likely have effects between those of
Alternatives 5 and 7.
Vascular Plants
The largest and most dominant organisms of the late-successional and old-
growth forest ecosystem are the vascular plants. Vascular plants are defined as
those that contain conducting or vascular tissue. The habitat components
important to vascular plants are those which generally increase amounts of
late-successional, riparian, and old-growth habitat. Alternative 1 is generally
the most favorable to vascular plants, because it provides the set of allocations
and management practices that best produces the habitat components for
vascular plants. Alternatives 3, 4, 5, and 9 are similar in providing intermediate
levels of these habitat conditions. Alternatives 7 and 8 are similar in their
effects, and would provide less favorable habitat conditions for vascular plants.
Based on their overall features, Alternative 2 would likely have effects between
those of Alternatives 3 and 5, Alternative 6 would likely have effects similar to
Alternative 5, and Alternative 10 would likely have effects between those of
Alternatives 5 and 7.
Invertebrates
This includes arthropods and their allies, and mollusks. Arthropods include
insects, crustaceans, arachnids, and myriapods and collectively constitute over
85 percent of biological diversity in late-successional and old-growth forests in
the Pacific Northwest. The habitat components important to arthropods
include all the features that comprise an extensive and interconnected late-
successional and old-growth forested conditions, including a diversity of live,
old-growth trees; standing dead trees; dead and downed wood; canopy
structure; and riparian habitats. Alternatives 1, 3, and 4 are generally the most
favorable to arthropods, because they provide the set of allocations and
management practices that best produces the habitat components for
arthropods. Alternatives 5, 7, and 9 would provide intermediate levels of
habitat protection. Alternative 8 would provide less favorable habitat
FEB 18 '94 04: 42PM
Summary
conditions for arthropods. Based on their overall features, Alternative 2 would
likely have effects between those of Alternatives 3 and 5, Alternative 6 would
likely have effects similar to Alternative 5, and Alternative 10 would likely
have effects between those of Alternatives 5 and 7.
Mollusk species of northwest coniferous forests are comprised of land snails,
slugs, aquatic snails and clams. The habitat components important to mollusks
include moist forest environments; areas around springs, bogs, and marshes;
basalt and limestone talus slopes; diverse vegetative cover; and the habitat
characteristics provided in the Riparian Reserves and influenced by Late-
Successional Reserve sizes. Alternatives 1, 3, and 9 are generally the most
favorable to land snails, because they provide the set of allocations and
management practices that best produces the habitat components for land
snails. Alternative 4, 5, 7, and 8 would provide less favorable habitat conditions
for the land snails. Alternatives 1, 4, and 9 are generally the most favorable to
slugs, freshwater snails and clams, because they provide the set of allocations
and management practices that best produces the habitat components for these
species. Alternatives 3, 5, 7 and 8 would provide less favorable habitat
conditions for slugs, freshwater snails and clams. Based on their overall
features, Alternatives 2, 6, and 10 which were not rated by the Assessment
Team would likely have effects on mollusk habitat similar to Alternative 5.
Vertebrates
This includes amphibians and reptiles, birds, mammals and fish. The number
of species of amphibians and reptiles in coniferous forests of the Pacific
Northwest is not large compared to the number of birds and mammals;
however, amphibians and reptiles comprise a distinct and important
component of the vertebrate fauna. No reptiles are closely associated with late-
successional forests. The habitat components important to amphibians are
those which would provide cool, moist old-growth conditions; cool water;
reduced sedimentation; protection of headwater streams; and coarse woody
debris, riparian zones and more extensive and interconnected late-successional
and old-growth forested conditions. For the Riparian groups, Alternatives 1, 4,
and 9, are generally the most favorable to amphibians, because they provide
the set of allocations and management practices that best produces the habitat
components for amphibians. Alternatives 3 and 5 would provide intermediate
levels of habitat protection. Alternatives 7 and 8 are similar in their effects, and
would provide less favorable habitat conditions for these amphibians. For the
Terrestrial groups, Alternatives 1 and 9, are generally the most favorable to
amphibians, because they provide the set of allocations and management
practices that best produce the habitat components for amphibians.
Alternatives 3, 4, and 5 would provide intermediate levels of habitat protection.
Alternatives 7 and 8 are similar in their effects, and would provide less
favorable habitat conditions for these amphibians. Based on their overall
features, Alternative 2 would likely have effects between those of Alternatives
3 and 5, Alternative 6 would likely have effects similar to Alternative 5, and
Alternative 10 would likely have effects between those of Alternatives 5 and 7.
The habitat components important to birds are those which would increase
large reserves, riparian protection and analysis, and retain green trees, snags,
and down woody material within the matrix. Alternatives 1, 3, 4, 5, and 9, are
Summary
S-19
FEB 18 '94 04:43PM
P.24/32
generally the most favorable to birds, because they provide the set of
allocations and management practices that best produces the habitat
components for birds. Alternatives 7 and 8 are similar in their effects, and
would provide less favorable habitat conditions for birds. Based on their
overall features, Alternative 2 would likely have effects between those of
Alternatives 3 and 5, Alternative 6 would likely have effects similar to
Alternative 5, and Alternative 10 would likely have effects between those of
Alternatives 5 and 7.
Temperate coniferous forests of the Pacific Northwest provide habitat for a
diverse array of mammal species. Habitat components important to mammals
other than bats include: dead, standing wood; dead, downed wood; live, old-
growth trees; and riparian zones. Large, decayed logs and snags are important
to many mammals as resting and denning sites. Large expanses of live, old-
growth trees are important to some mammals such as the fisher because they
provide continuous canopy cover. Fisher may be negatively affected by forest
fragmentation. Riparian zones provide potential habitat (including large snags
and cover) for mammals such as fishers and American martens. In general,
EFFECT
those alternatives that provide for greater amounts of late-successional and
HARV!
old-growth habitat resulted in higher ratings for mammal species. Alternatives
1, 3, and 9, are generally the most favorable to mammals, because they provide
the set of allocations and management practices that best produces the habitat
components for mammals. Alternatives 4 and 5 would provide intermediate
levels of habitat conditions. Alternatives 7 and 8 are similar in their effects, and
would provide less favorable habitat conditions for mammals. Based on their
overall features, Alternative 2 would likely have effects between those of
Alternatives 3 and 5, Alternative 6 would likely have effects similar to
Alternative 5, and Alternative 10 would likely have effects between those of
Alternatives 5 and 7.
Bats are a diverse order of mammals. There may be more species of bats in
North American temperate forests than any other group of mammals. The
habitat components important to bats are those which would increase late-
successional and old-growth forests, riparian areas, snags and down woody
material. Alternatives 1, 3, and 9, are generally the most favorable to bats,
because they provide the set of allocations and management practices that best
produces the habitat components for bats. Alternatives 4 and 5 would provide
intermediate levels of habitat conditions. Alternatives 7 and 8 are similar in
their effects, and would provide less favorable habitat conditions for bats.
Based on their overall features, Alternative 2 would likely have effects between
those of Alternatives 3 and 5, Alternative 6 would likely have effects similar to
Alternative 5, and Alternative 10 would likely have effects between those of
Alternatives 5 and 7.
The fish species that are analyzed include resident fish and anadromous fish.
There are an estimated 313 anadromous fish stocks at risk in the planning area.
Habitat loss and degradation are principal factors in the decline of these fish on
federal lands. Alternatives 1, 4 and 9 benefit aquatic and riparian habitats more
than the other alternatives. These benefits are principally due to: (1) the
application of Riparian Reserve Scenario 1 to intermittent streams in Tier 2 Key
Watersheds and non-Key Watersheds, (2) the highest amounts of Late-
Successional Reserves within Key Watersheds and throughout the range of the
northern spotted owl, and (3) the least amount of the matrix contained within
inventoried roadless areas Aquatic and riparian habitats are expected to
FEB 18 '94 44PM
P.25/32
Summary
recover faster in part, due to these factors under Alternatives 1, 4 and 9.
Alternatives 2, 3, 5, 6, and 10 benefit aquatic and riparian habitats to a greater
degree than Alternatives 7 and 8, but to a lesser degree than Alternatives 1, 4
and 9. Some of the reasons for the differences are that Alternatives 2, 3, 5, 6,
and 10 have less Late-Successional Reserves, include Riparian Reserve Scenario
2, and have more land in the matrix than Alternatives 1, 4, and 9. The opposite
is true when comparing the benefits of Alternatives 2, 3, 5, 6, and 10 to aquatic
and riparian habitat relative to Alternatives 7 and 8. Even though Alternatives
2, 3, 5, 6, and 10 benefit aquatic and riparian habitats to a lesser degree than
Alternatives 1, 4 and 9, they would reverse the trend of aquatic and riparian
habitat degradation and begin recovery of these habitats. The standards and
guidelines for Alternatives 7 and 8 are not adequate to reverse the trend of
aquatic and riparian habitat degradation and begin recovery of these habitats.
The principal reasons are the lack of explicitly defined Riparian Reserves for
Alternative 7, and the application of Riparian Reserve Scenario 3 for
Alternative 8.
EFFECTS ON TIMBER
Annual harvest levels from Federal forests within the range of the northern
HARVEST LEVELS
spotted owl averaged 4.5 billion board feet during the period 1980 to 1989. The
alternatives considered to protect the habitat of the northern spotted owl and
associated late-successional species will restrict timber harvest in these forests,
resulting in substantial social and economic costs.
The probable levels of federal timber sales for the first decade for each
alternative are summarized in Figure S-2, First Decade Probable Average
Annual Timber Sale Levels (PSQ) by Historic Period and Alternative. The PSQ
estimates in Figure S-2 include "other wood" which is the volume of cull,
salvage, and other products that is not normally part of allowable sale quantity
calculations. Historically, this has accounted for about 10 percent of the total
harvest volume from timber suitable federal lands in the planning area.
The PSQ figures for Alternative 9 are changed from the Draft SEIS to reflect
modifications made to Alternative 9 as a result of public comments and
internal review. The overall result of the revisions to PSQ for Alternative 9
between the Draft SEIS and the Final SEIS is a reduction of 92 MMBF per year;
from 1,050 MMBF to 958 MMBF per year, not including the "other wood."
Estimated sale levels under all alternatives are below program levels of the
1980s, as well as below the harvest levels of 1990-1992 when most new federal
timber sales were enjoined. In 1990-1992, harvests consisted of sales under
CAUTION
contract from the 1980's. The sale quantities of the alternatives will not permit
1990-1992 levels of timber harvest in the future. Due to several factors, it is
likely that sale levels of the selected alternative will take one to three years to
reach the decadal average sales potential.
In addition to reduced harvest quantities in the decade ahead, wood quality is
also apt to decrease. In the first decade, thinning and other partial harvests
y
would account for a large portion of the volume harvested under the various
alternatives. Secondary wood products manufacturers may see an even greater
decline in raw materials than the probable sale quantities would indicate as a
result of smaller average tree size.
Summary
S-21
FEB 18 '94 04: 45PM
P.26/32
Summary
Figure S-2. First decade probable average annual timber sale levels
(PSQ) by historical period and alternative
5
4.5
4
Billion Board Feet
3
2.4
2
1.8
1.4
1.0
7777
1.1
1.1
1
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.9
U/L
IIII
0.1
0
80-89 90-92
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Historical Period or Alternative
Forest Service
Forest Service
Other
BLM
Region 6 1
Wood
3
Region 52
1
Region 6 = Pacific Northwest Region
2
Region 5 = Pacific Southwest Region
3
Includes cull, submerchantable material, firewood and other products.
EFFECTS ON REGIONAL Regional Employment
ECONOMICS AND
COMMUNITIES
Under all of the alternatives, direct employment in timber harvesting and
processing will decline as a result of reduced harvest levels as shown in Table
S-2, Historic and Projected Employment in the Timber Industry in the Next
PUL 5000 $
Decade by Sub-Region and Alternative. The table compares the projected
employment levels to employment in 1990 and estimated employment in 1992
The projections imply a range of job displacement from 4,600 to 15,900 jobs,
relative to 1992 Compared to 1990, the potential displacement is 24,100 to
35,400 jobs.
The Final SEIS job displacement estimates are higher than the estimates
displayed in the Draft SEIS. The differences result from corrections in
predicting nonfederal harvest levels and, for Alternative 9, the reduction in
PSQ from federal forests between Draft and Final SEIS. The majority of the
affected jobs are in Oregon and are concentrated in southwestern Oregon
The alternatives presented in this SEIS would have the greatest effect on the
timber industry sector. In addition to displaced workers, there would be
indirect effects caused by fluctuating business expenditures in the region and
induced effects caused by changes in personal expenditures in the region.
These ripple effects tend to increase the ramifications of job gains or losses in
communities or regions. There is roughly one job affected outside the timber
industry for every job affected within the timber industry.
S-22
Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
P.27/32
FEB 18 '94 04:45PM
Summary
Table S-2. Historical and projected employment in the timber industry in the next decade, by
subregion and alternative¹
Actual Estimated
Alternative
State/Owl Region²
1990
1992
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
thousand jobs
Washington
Olympic Peninsula
13.9
11.6
11.7
11.6
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.6
11.2
11.6
11.6
Puget Sound
25.7
20.3
20.4
20.4
20.4
20.3
20.4
20.3
20.5
20.3
20.4
Lower Columbia
14.1
12.4
12.6
12.6
12.6
12.7
12.6
12.7
12.6
12.6
12.6
Central
4.2
3.8
4.0
4.1
4.0
4.0
4.1
4.1
4.3
3.9
4.2
Total
57.9
513
48.1
48.7
48.7
48.7
48.7
-48.6
48.7
49.0
48.4
48.8
Oregon
Northwest
21.9
19.8
20.3
20.3
20.4
20.7
20.0
21.6
20.8
20.5
20.5
West-Central
20.9
13.7
14.4
14.5
14.6
15.0
14.3
16.0
15.4
15.0
14.9
Southwest
21.4
10.3
12.0
12.1
12.4
12.8
12.1
15.3
13.8
12.8
12.9
Central
8.9
7.4
8.0
8.0
8.0
8.1
8.0
8.4
8.2
8.1
8.1
Total
731
62.8
512
54.7
54.9
55.4
56.6
54.4
61.3
58.2
56.4
56.4
California
Total
13.9
113
102
10.6
10.7
10.6
10.7
10.8
10.8
10.9
11.1
10.9
3 State Total
141.9
125.4
31095
1140
1143
114.7
116.0
114.0
120.8
118.1
115.9
116.1
ble
1 Includes self-employed individuals in all solid wood products and pulp and paper sectors. Wage and
salary employment is approximately 7.5 percent less than total employment.
992.
2 Owl Region = The range of the northern spotted owl
Timber-based employment would decline under all alternatives considered as
a result of reduced harvests. Subregions characterized as heavily timber
dependent are apt to experience the most severe impacts. While service
employment in forestry also appears to be faced with job declines, these
declines could be offset through investments in reforestation, timber stand
improvement, monitoring, inventory, and restoration activities.
Some employment gains could be made in recreation and tourism, as well as in
special forest products. It may, however, be difficult to absorb displaced
loggers and mill workers into these fields due to skill considerations and
geographic locations. In the long run, the alternatives presented in this SEIS
d
may provide an increased supply to commercial fisheries. Yet, in light of the
current issues and the potential over-capacity of the industry, these gains may
not be substantial. Restoration of salmon and trout runs, however, could have
positive effects on coastal recreation.
Summary
S-23
FEB 18 '94 04: 46PM
P.28/32
Summary
Rural Communities
Washington, Oregon, and California differ in the pattern, severity, and regional
distribution of the effects of reduced timber harvest to communities. The
results of the analyses are discussed in terms of the severity and direction of
the consequences, the communities' capacity to cope, and the resultant risk to
the communities. The Assessment Team conducted a detailed analysis of
Alternatives 1, 3, and 7. It found relatively few differences among the effects of
the alternatives because the timber harvest levels in Alternatives 1 through 10
are far below recent averages. Impacts associated with Alternative 9 would
likely fall between those presented for Alternatives 3 and 7.
Communities with combinations of low capacity to cope with change and
negative consequences from the alternatives are "most at risk"; those with high
capacity to cope and positive consequences are "least at risk" Using these
definitions, Alternatives 1, 3, and 7 would result in about one-third of the 167
surveyed communities falling in the "most at risk" category. In all three
alternatives, however, the changes are great compared to those for the 1985-87
harvest level scenario in which only 3 percent of the communities were so
ranked. The majority of the communities "most at risk" in Alternatives 1, 3, and
7 are those highly dependent on the timber industry and on Federal forest
lands as the source for much of their timber supply. Alternatives 1, 3, and 7
would likely lead to additional mill closures and reduced forest related
employment, and to real damage to the economic and social infrastructure.
The "most at risk" communities differ from others in significant ways. These
communities are smaller (average population 3,000), and they are located in
counties with low population density. Isolated communities are more likely to
experience negative consequences with Alternatives 1, 3, and to a lesser degree
7, because they have few options available locally or in nearby communities,
and because of limited access to capital, transportation links, and other
resources. Communities that are small, isolated, and lacking economic
diversity are more likely to be "at risk" than others. These communities may
find it difficult to mobilize and respond to changing conditions which may
affect a variety of groups. These communities are likely to experience
unemployment, increased poverty, and social disruption in the absence of
assistance.
People Coping With Change
Changes in the management of the federal forests in the spotted owl region,
administered by the Forest Service and BLM, have effects (impacts) on people
and the families, groups, and communities to which they belong. The social,
community, and cultural changes resulting from implementation of any of
these alternatives will be disproportionately intense in rural and timber-
dependent areas. The social effects of the alternatives stem fairly directly from
changes in the timber harvest levels of the alternatives. This is not meant to
indicate that timber harvest is the only meaningful link between the Forest
Service/BLM and people, but it is the most crucial variable among these
alternatives.
S-24
Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
P.29/32
FEB 18 '94 04:46PM
Summary
The changes in timber harvest from Alternatives 1-6, 9 and 10 will last longer
than any firm or worker's ability to "wait it out." The changes in timber harvest
under Alternative 8 would have less impact than under Alternatives 1-6, 9 and
10, but still result in a downturn from Alternative 7. All alternatives will force
timber harvest levels lower than experienced in Washington, Oregon, and
California in the last two decades, with Alternatives 1-4 and 6 reducing the
timber harvest levels most, while Alternatives 5 and 9-10 have the smaller
reductions, and Alternatives 7 and 8 which continue high timber harvests.
However, this high level is lower than the historical averages in the 1980's and
early 1990's.
American Indian People and Cultures
Given both traditional and contemporary links between American Indians and
forests, it is clear that tribal members depend on public lands and resources for
employment, subsistence, and cultural identity. It is recognized that Indians
tribes have an interest in Forest Service and BLM administered forest resources
and it is emphasized that the Indian rights and interests are not set aside by
this SEIS nor does it impose any extra conservation burden on the tribes or
Indian reservations. Timber harvest and management on tribal and Indian
owned lands are not controlled or modified by this SEIS. The SEIS has
examined the potential to impair or restrict the rights of various tribes and
finds that none fall into that category.
Every alternative has some amount of logging and road construction activities
on the federal forest lands which are potentially disturbing to the land,
fisheries, and cultural sites. Yet the amounts of disturbance are well below
historic levels. There appears to be little difference in consequences associated
with the low levels of land disturbance in Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 4. The degree
of disturbance to vegetation, land, and cultural sites under Alternatives 5, 6, 8,
9, and 10 is slightly higher, but lower than Alternative 7, which would have the
highest ground disturbance. On the other hand, since a large number of
archaeological and historic places are discovered while conducting ground
searches prior to ground disturbing activity, there may be fewer total
archaeological and culturally important sites discovered under the alternatives
that have reduced timber harvest and road construction activities. All
alternatives except Alternatives 7 and 8 would reverse the trend of aquatic and
riparian habitat degradation and begin recovery of these habitats. Application
of the Aquatic Conservation Strategy within the range of the northern spotted
owl would improve habitat conditions for stocks of fish important to American
Indians.
Summary
S-25