Regional Ecosystem Office

333 SW 1st
P.O. Box 3623
Portland, Oregon 97208-3623
Phone: 503-808-2165 FAX: 503-808-2163

              Memorandum

Date:     November 4, 1998

To:         Ed Hastey, Bureau of Land Management, State Director, CA

From:     Donald R. Knowles, Executive Director

Subject:  Regional Ecosystem Office Review of Arcata Field Office Late-Successional Reserve Assessment (LSRA)

Summary

The Regional Ecosystem Office (REO) and the interagency Late-Successional Reserve (LSR) Work Group have reviewed the Arcata Field Office Late-Successional Reserve Assessment for Lacks Creek (RC-326), Butte Creek/Larabee Buttes (RC-324), and King Range National Conservation Area (RC-322). The REO finds that the document is consistent with the overall LSR objectives of the Northwest Forest Plan (NFP) Record of Decision (ROD) Standards and Guidelines (S&Gs).

Basis for the Review

The REO review focuses on the following:

1. Under the S&Gs for the NFP, a management assessment should be prepared for each large LSR (or group of smaller LSRs) before habitat manipulation activities are designed and implemented. These assessments are subject to REO review. This review considers whether the assessment contains sufficient information and analysis to provide a framework and context for making future decisions on projects and activities. The eight specific subject areas that an assessment should generally include are found in the NFP (S&Gs, page C-11). The REO may find that the assessment contains sufficient information or may identify topics or areas for which additional information, detail, or clarity is needed. The findings of the review are provided to the agency or agencies submitting the assessment.

2. The review also considers treatment criteria and potential treatment areas for silvicultural, risk-reduction, and salvage activities if addressed in the LSRA. When treatment criteria are clearly described and their relationship to achieving desired late-successional conditions are also clear, subsequent projects and activities within the LSR(s) may be exempted from the further REO review, provided they are consistent with the LSRA criteria and S&Gs. The REO authority for developing criteria to exempt these actions is found in the S&Gs (pages C-12, C-13, and C-18). If such activities are not described in the LSRA and exempted from further review in this memo, they remain subject to future REO review.

Both aspects of this review are described separately below.

Scope of the Assessment and Description of the Assessment Area

The REO reviewed the LSRA in light of the eight subject areas identified in the NFP S&Gs (page C-11) and sought additional information regarding some of these subject areas. Additional information was provided by telephone conversations with LSR team members and a May 1998 field trip by members of the Work Group for an on-the-ground visit and discussions with the LSRA team.

The LSRA addresses an overview of the LSR system in the Resource Area and provides specific detailed information pertaining to the Lacks Creek (4,126 acres), Butte Creek/Larabee Buttes (2,768 acres), and King Range National Conservation Area (55,943 acres) totaling about 63,000 acres. The LSRs are in the California Coast Province.

Review of the Assessment

The Arcata Field Office has a particular challenge in implementing the NFP because of the fragmented landownership in the area. Overall Federal ownerships accounts for only some 9 percent of the lands in the area. The LSRA authors discuss these aspects, among others, in their introduction of management conditions to set the stage for their approach to late-successional/old-growth (LSOG) management. The six conditions which frame the management for the LSRs are:

1. High degree of natural LSOG habitat fragmentation.
2. Habitat isolation due to forest practices on adjacent private lands.
3. Areas of naturally poor site quality and conditions.
4. Small BLM parcel size (in comparison to average LSRs) which limits ability to create large blocks of late-successional habitat.
5. Acquired lands where previous stand entries "high graded" conifers out of the species mix.
6. Tanoak/madrone successional climax, which is a vegetation condition not normally accepted as the desirable condition for LSRs.

The LSRA appropriately describes an array of management actions which will best address these conditions, and best meet the objectives of the NFP in this area.

The LSRA document describes a broad area context for the LSR network in this vicinity, then addresses each LSR individually (Lacks Creek, Butte Creek/Larabee Buttes, and King Range). The LSR-specific discussions include maps and data of the forest stands which can be considered for particular vegetation treatments and the rationale for applying those treatments. They also include information on species use (reptiles and amphibians, spotted owl, marbled murrelet, and Survey and Manage) and human uses in the area.

The assessment describes ongoing and expected non-silvicultural activities and uses of these LSRs to allow the decision-maker to understand the potential effects of these activities on the LSR objectives.

Review of Projects and Activities

The silvicultural treatments for the LSRs are wholly intended to speed the development of late-successional forest conditions and improve forest species composition. No removal of biomass from the LSRs is proposed, except for possible experimentation with removal of tanoak from around conifers. There was no quantification of the amount of Coarse Woody Debris or snags which would be left with particular treatments, since all material cut will be left on site (except for tanoak in a few specific locations).

Assumptions

Based on conversations with members of the LSRA team, it is assumed that:

• No material will be removed after pre-commercial or commercial thinning activities. Because of the goal to bring all stands to a late-successional conditions as soon as possible, and manage those stands for LSOG characteristics, it was decided that all CWD and snags will be left on site, except for minor amounts of tanoak that may be removed on an experimental basis. If it appears that continued removal of that material is warranted, the LSRA will be modified and the projects subject to further REO review.
• No salvage activities are planned within the LSRs. Any future salvage project will be subject to REO review. The reference in the assessment to "Fire salvage/Plantation thinning" in the Five Year Forest Treatment Schedule refers to thinning in stands that were salvaged in the past and were subsequently converted to plantations.

Conclusion

Based on review of the LSRA, a field visit, and discussions with the Field Office, the REO finds the LSRA and the identified proposed silvicultural treatments to be consistent with the LSR objectives of the ROD. The document provides adequate context for future decision-making. The silvicultural treatments are described in the individual LSR chapters (Criteria for Silvicultural Treatments and Specific Treatment Areas) in sufficient detail to exempt them from further REO review. Any future salvage projects would require REO review.

There are two items are worth special note:

• First, this LSRA is among the best-written, well-organized, and well-founded that we have seen. The authors have done an excellent job and should be commended.
• Second, the approach taken towards Survey and Manage species was excellent.

We understand that the Arcata Field Office intends to prepare additional LSR-specific documents which would be tiered from the document we reviewed at this time. We look forward to reviewing those documents when they are ready, and any projects which were not described in this document.

cc:
Larry Larsen, Paul Roush, BLM
REO Reps, RIEC
Lisa Freedman, NR

1234/ly