Planning
Land and Resource Management Plan and Final Environmental Impact Statement Documents
The Shasta-Trinity National Forest’s guiding strategy is laid out in our Land and Resource Management Plan for the forest. Each national forest is required by law to develop a Forest Plan to integrate a mix of management activities that allow use and protection of forest resources, meet the needs of guiding legislation, and address local, regional, and national issues. In addition to the plan itself, each Forest is required to assess the environmental impacts of the plan. This assessment of environmental impacts is contained in an accompanying document, the Final Environmental Impact Statement.
Modernizing Forest Plans in the Northwest
The Northwest Forest Plan covers 24.5 million acres of federally managed lands in California, Oregon, and Washington. It was established in 1994 to address threats to threatened and endangered species while also contributing to social and economic sustainability in the region. After nearly 30 years, the Northwest Forest Plan needs to be updated to accommodate changed ecological and social conditions.
The purpose of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) is to adopt a coordinated management direction for the lands administered by both the USDA Forest Service and the USDI Bureau of Land Management, within the range of the northern spotted owl, a bird listed as Threatened under the Endangered Species Act. The northern spotted owl inhabits Oregon, Washington, and northern California; all national forests and BLM units within this range are managed to meet the Northwest Forest Plan direction. The management of these public lands must meet dual needs: the need for forest habitat and the need for forest products. The NWFP also dictated the adoption of complementary approaches by other Federal agencies, such as the National Park Service, within the owl’s range. Access the Interagency Monitoring Program site for more information.
Apart from the conservation direction for the northern spotted owl, the NWFP also created other important conservation guidelines for aquatic systems and old-growth-associated species. These are called:
The Record of Decision on Management of Habitat for Late-Successional and Old-growth Forest Related Species Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl (ROD) established a network of Late Successional Reserves (LSRs), accompanied this by a set of management standards and guidelines. The network of reserves are intended to provide old-growth forest habitat, provide for populations of species that are associated with late-successional forests, and to help ensure that late-successional species diversity will be conserved. The management objective within LSRs is to protect and enhance conditions of late-successional forest ecosystems, which serve as habitat for late-successional and old-growth related species including the northern spotted owl (USDA, USDI 1994b). Protection includes reducing the risk of large-scale disturbance, including stand-replacing fire, insect and disease epidemic, and major human caused impacts. The purpose of this Forest-wide assessment is to develop management strategies for the LSRs, determine their sustainability, and provide information to decision makers for managing LSRs to meets Forest Plan goals and objectives.
- Volume 1: LSR Assessment
- Volume 2: Map Packet
- Regional Ecosystem Office Acceptance Letter - August 26, 1999
- Forest Supervisor Sharon Heywood Letter announcing completion of LSR Assessment - September 9, 1999
- Regional Ecosystem Office Clarification Letter - October 18, 2009
Hayfork Adaptive Management Area Guide - 10-12-2004
Shasta-Trinity National Forest managers make many resource management decisions, which may be subject to appeal (request to a higher authority for administrative review of a decision).
This report provides decision makers on the Shasta-Trinity National Forest with a report of management indicator assemblage habitat status and trends at the National Forest scale. This report fulfills the Shasta-Trinity Land and Resource Management Plan monitoring requirements for management indicator assemblages, and contributes to fulfilling the National Forest Management Act requirement to provide for a diversity of plant and animal communities on National Forest land (National Forest Management Act of 1976, 16 U.S.C. 1600). This report will be updated every 3 to 5 years.
- 01-31-2012
- Climate Trend Summary - 01-07-11 (referred to in above report)
- Climate Trend Summary - July 2022
The Forest-level roads analysis (RAP) focused on the major roads or the "backbone" of the Forest transportation system. The roads analysis report documents the existing road system, risks and benefits evaluation of major Forest roads, and recommendations for future actions on these roads that will reduce risks of unacceptable environmental disturbance and increase the benefits provided by these roads.
Four major findings came from the Forest-level roads analysis. They are:
- Existing major roads do not pose an unacceptable risk to the sustainability of ecosystems.
- The highest risk ratings from existing major roads relate to water quality, hydrologic process, and the aquatic or riparian ecosystems.
- The highest need is to replace and, in some cases, increase the size of culverts and other road-related drainage structures.
- The highest potential economic benefit to local communities is gained from use of major roads for commodity production from public and private lands within the Forest boundary.
This Forest Scale Roads Analysis Report, completed in 2002, provides an analysis of the major network forest roads, a risk/ benefit analysis, and priorities for future road management activities.
- South Fork Trinity River Wild & Scenic River Management Plan (1992)
- Eltapom Creek and Corral Creek (April 2017)
- Willow-Parks (January 2014)
- Travel Analysis Process (March 2014)
- Travel Analysis Process Appendix A: Road Rankings and Recommendations [will need Excel version 2007 or above to open]
- Mt. Shasta (May 2012)
- Lower McCloud Update (December 2011)
- Lower McCloud River (March 1998)
- Sulanharas Creek (September 2011)
- Hyampom Watershed (April 2011)
- Edson (March 2011)
- Pit Arm Shasta Lake (November 2010)
- Upper Sacramento River (June 2010)
- French Creek (February 2010)
- Burnt Ranch and Soldier Creek (April 2009)
- Big Creek (July 2008)
- Upper Trinity River (March 2005)
- Weaverville (March 2004)
- Middle Fork Cottonwood Creek (September 2003)
- Porcupine (June 2003)
- North Fork Trinity River, East Fork North Fork Trinity River and Canyon Creek (March 2003)
- Cottonwood Creek Watershed Assessment (2002)
- Cottonwood Creek Strategic Watershed Plan (December 2005)
- Cow Creek (November 2001)
- Hidden Valley, Plummer Creek and Rattlesnake Creek (September 2001)
- Headwaters Sacramento River Ecosystem Analysis (January 2001)
- Shasta Lake West (October 2000)
- Clikapudi (September 2000)
- Middle Hayfork and Salt Creek (April 2000)
- New River (April 2000)
- Horse Linto, Mill and Tish Tang Creeks (March 2000)
- Medicine Lake Highlands (September 1999)
- Sulanharas Creek (April 1999)
- Upper South Fork Trinity River - Happy Camp Creek (March 1999)
- Upper Clear Creek (November 1998)
- Upper Hayfork Creek (July 1998)
- McCloud Arm (May 1998)
- East Fork/Smoky Creek (March 1998)
- Beegum (March 1997)
- Bartle (January 1997)
- Chalk Mountain and Rock Creek (November 1996)
- Shotgun-Slate (September 1996)
- Lower Hayfork (March 1996)
- Iron Canyon (March 1996)
- Lower Clear Creek (January 1996)
- McCloud Flats Ecosystem Analysis (September 1995)
- Mainstem Trinity River (December 1995)
- Butter Creek (December 1994)