DUCK-TO-DOG TIMBER SALE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Department of Natural Resources and Conservation Stillwater Unit May 2007 P A M Y T I N I C I V T C E J O R P E L A S R E B M I T G O D - O T - K C U D FINDING PROPOSED DUCK-TO-DOG TIMBER SALE PROJECT STILLWATER STATE FOREST An Interdisciplinary Team (ID Team) productivity and favors the has completed the Environmental retention and regeneration of Assessment (EA) for the proposed appropriate species mixes Duck-To-Dog Timber Sale Project. (desired future conditions [ARM 36.11.405]). The project area is located on 11 sections of State land in Flathead − Reduce the potential of County (see VICINITY MAP [inside wildfires in the wildland front cover] for their general urban interface between Fort locations). Specifically, the Steele Road and the project is located in Sections 14, Burlington Northern/Santa Fe 23, 24, 25, and 36, in T33N, R24W, railroad tracks, in areas and Sections 30, 31, and 32, in adjacent to Highway 93, and T33N, R23W. Revenue generated from to other lands and these lands would benefit the Common homesteads. Schools, Public building, and − Harvest 5 to 7 MMbf of Agricultural College trusts. sawtimber to generate revenue After a thorough review of the EA, for the appropriate school project file, public correspondence, trusts. The sale would also Montana statutes, State Forest Land contribute a sufficient Management Plan (SFLMP), and adopted amount of sawlog volume to rules, I have made the following 3 meet the requirements of decisions: sustained yield for the DNRC timber-management program, as 1. ALTERNATIVE SELECTED: mandated by State Statute 77- Two alternatives are presented 5-222, MCA. and were fully analyzed in the − Improve public access to Dog EA: Lake on the east side. • The No-Action Alternative − Maintain options for includes existing activities, sustained revenue to the but does not include a timber school trusts and provide for harvest. additional benefits by • The Action Alternative proposes completing site improvements to: on existing roads to improve drainage, water quality, and − Improve the long-term safety. productivity of the timber stands by increasing vigor, I have selected the Action reducing the incidence of Alternative with the following insect and disease requirements and reasons: infections, and regenerating • Mitigations and specifications portions of the stands where identified in the EA will be growth is decreasing. implemented as prescribed. Actions would be done in a manner that maintains site • The Action Alternative meets the PURPOSE OF PROPOSED ACTION, but are not limited to, the (page I-1) and PROPOSED following: OBJECTIVES (page I-2); the − The project does not harvest specific project objectives are in identified old-growth listed on page I-2 of the EA. stands. (Page I-7) • The lands involved in this − The project is designed to project are held by the State not harvest where sensitive of Montana in trust for the plants exist within wetland support of specific beneficiary complexes. institutions. DNRC is required by law to administer these − An adequate number of snags trust lands to produce the and snag recruits will remain largest measure of reasonable in the area to provide for and legitimate return over the important wildlife habitat long run (Enabling Act of and down woody debris to February 22, 1889; 1972 Montana maintain soil productivity. Constitution, Article X, (Pages III-34 and 44) Section 11; and, 77-1-202, − The estimated total timber- MCA). The SFLMP and associated dollar revenue to the State rules provide the management is $1,584,866. (Page III-37) philosophy and framework to − Haul routes will meet Best evaluate which alternative Management Practices (BMPs); would maximize real income improvement to access and while sustaining the production safety will be made by of long-term income. relocating a highway • On March 13, 2003, the approach. Department adopted − The risk of large, intensive, Administrative Rules for Forest stand-replacement wildfires Management (ARM 36.11.401 will be reduced on State through 450). This project is lands. (Page III-8) designed in accordance with − Water quality and fisheries these Rules. habitat would be protected. • The proposed timber sale (Pages III-11 through 31) project contributes to the Refer to STIPULATIONS AND harvest level mandated by State SPECIFICATIONS for a list of Statute (Montana Codes common mitigations applied to Annotated [MCA] 77-5-222). timber sale projects. • DNRC is required to salvage 2. SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACTS timber damaged by insects, diseases, fires, or wind before For the following reasons, I find it loses value to decay, that implementing the Action provided such harvesting is Alternative will not have economically warranted (MCA 77- significant impacts on the human 5-207). environment: • The analyses of identified • I find that no impacts are issues did not reveal regarded as severe, enduring, information to persuade the geographically widespread, or Department to choose the No- frequent. Further, I find that Action Alternative prior to the quantity and quality of this decision. various resources, including • The Action Alternative includes any that may be considered activities to address concerns unique or fragile, will not be expressed by the public and adversely affected to a local government entities with significant degree. I find no jurisdiction; these include, precedent for future actions that would cause significant 3. SHOULD DNRC PREPARE AN impacts, and I find no conflict ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT with local, State, or Federal (EIS)? laws, requirements, or formal Based on the following plans. In summary, I find that considerations, I find that an the identified adverse impacts EIS does not need to be prepared: will be avoided, controlled, or mitigated by the design of the • The EA adequately addresses the project to the extent that the issues identified during impacts are not significant. project development and displays the information needed • Locally Adopted Environmental to make the decisions. Plans and Goals – In June 1996, DNRC began a phased-in • Evaluation of the potential implementation of the SFLMP. impacts of the proposed Duck- The SFLMP establishes the to-Dog Timber Sale Project Agency’s philosophy for the indicates that no significant management of forested trust impacts would occur. land. In May 2003, DNRC adopted rules concerning the • The ID Team provided adequate opportunities for public review SFLMP. The SFLMP philosophy and comment. Public concerns and associated rules are were incorporated into the incorporated in the design of project design and analysis of the proposed project. impacts. • Recreational Activities – Brian Manning Recreational opportunities will continue and will not be negatively affected by the Unit Manager proposed project. Stillwater State Forest • Precedent Setting and May 14, 2007 Cumulative Impacts – The project area is located on State-owned lands that are “principally valuable for the timber that is on them or for growing timber or for watershed protection” (MCA 77-1-402). • Taken individually and cumulatively, the proposed activities are common practices and no project activities are being conducted on important fragile or unique sites. • The proposed project conforms to the management philosophies of DNRC and is in compliance with existing laws, rules, policies, and standards applicable to this type of proposed action. W h1 i8 t em fi il se hs W h1 i8 t em fi il se hs P A M T I N U T S E V R A A H s e l i m 3 2 a k e r u E TABLE OF CONTENTS VICINITY MAP (back of front cover) FINDING HARVEST UNIT MAP CHAPTER I—PURPOSE AND NEED Introduction to Proposed Action....................................I-1 Purpose of Proposed Action.........................................I-1 Objectives of Proposal.............................................I-2 Environmental Assessment Process...................................I-2 Other Agencies with Jurisdiction/Permit Requirements...............I-3 Issues and Concerns................................................I-3 Summarization and Tracking of Issues and Concerns..................I-4 Issues Outside the Scope of the Project............................I-7 Issues Dropped from Further Consideration..........................I-7 CHAPTER II - ALTERNATIVES Introduction.......................................................II-1 Development of Alternatives........................................II-1 Alternative Descriptions...........................................II-2 Proposed Silvicultural Treatments..................................II-5 Summary of Environmental Effects (table)...........................II-9 CHAPTER III - EXISTING ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS Introduction.......................................................III-1 Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects...........................III-1 Vegetation Analysis................................................III-2 Fisheries Analysis.................................................III-11 Watershed and Hydrology Analysis...................................III-24 Soils Analysis.....................................................III-32 Economic Analysis..................................................III-37 Wildlife Analysis..................................................III-39 PREPARERS AND CONTRIBUTORS REFERENCES STIPULATIONS AND SPECIFICATIIONS GLOSSARY ACRONYMS (front of back cover) Chapter I - Purpose and Need CHAPTER I PURPOSE AND NEED INTRODUCTION TO PROPOSED ACTION segments of road graveled, and needed culverts installed to improve The Department of Natural Resources existing roads in the project area. and Conservation (DNRC), Stillwater All stream crossings on access roads Unit, is proposing the Duck-to-Dog would be examined to ensure Timber Sale Project. The 11 compliance with BMPs; needed sections of State land in this improvements would be made. timber sale project are managed to provide revenue over time to the PURPOSE OF PROPOSED ACTION Common School, Public Buildings, and The lands involved in the proposed Montana State University Second project are held in trust by the Grant beneficiaries (see VICINITY State of Montana for the support of MAP [inside front cover] for general specific beneficiary institutions, locations). Specifically, the such as public schools, State project is located in Sections 14, colleges and universities, and other 23, 24, 25, and 36, in T33N, R24W, specific State institutions, such as and Sections 30, 31, and 32, in the School for the Deaf and Blind T33N, R23W. (Enabling Act of February 22, 1889; Two alternatives, an action and a 1972 Montana Constitution, Article no-action alternative, are proposed. X, Section 11). The Board of Land If the action alternative to harvest Commissioners (Land Board) and DNRC timber were selected, an estimated 5 are legally required to administer to 7 million board feet (MMbf) of these trust lands to produce the timber would be harvested from largest measure of reasonable and approximately 650 acres. Harvesting legitimate long-term return for would be accomplished using a these beneficiary institutions variety of silvicultural treatments. (Section 77—1-202, Montana Codes The type of treatment selected for Annotated [MCA]). each stand would depend on the On May 30, 1996, DNRC released the existing condition and the desired Record of Decision on the State future condition for that particular Forest Land Management Plan (SFLMP). stand. Existing roads, along with The Land Board approved the short spur roads built for temporary implementation of the SFLMP on June use, would access the proposed 17, 1996. On March 13, 2003, DNRC harvest units. These spur roads adopted the Forest Management Rules would be built to minimum standards (Administrative Rules of Montana and would be reclaimed after [ARM] 36.11.401 through 450). The harvesting activities are completed. SFLMP outlines the management Two segments of road would be philosophy, and the proposal will be relocated to meet Best Management implemented according to the Forest Practices (BMPs) and facilitate Management Rules. The philosophy timber harvesting; the relocations is: would also improve highway-access safety and better facilitate future “Our premise is that the best recreational access to Dog Lake. way to produce long-term Additionally, the action alternative income for the trust is to would gain permanent access on USFS manage intensively for healthy Road 10355 for the State. Ditches and biologically diverse and surface drainage would be added, forests. Our understanding is