pearl project, chapter 1a123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic.download.akamai... ·...

Environmental Assessment United States

Department of Agriculture

Forest Service ShokoShoe Project March 2017

Gunflint Ranger District, Superior National Forest Cook County, Minnesota Township (T) 65 North (N) Range (R) 2 West (W), R1W, R1 East (E); T64N, R2W, R1W, R1E, R2E, R3E, R4E; T63N, R2E. R3E, R4E; T62N, R3E

In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410; (2) fax: (202) 690-7442; or (3) email: [email protected]. USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

Table of Contents

Chapter 1: Purpose and Need Page

1.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………….... 1-1 1.2 Forest Plan Direction for the ShokoShoe Project Area …………….……….... 1-1 1.3 Purpose and Need for Action………………………………………………….. 1-6 1.4 Proposed Action…………….....………………………………………………. 1-10 1.5 Decision to be Made…...………………………………………………………. 1-12 1.6 Public Involvement and Issues with the Proposed Action………...…………... 1-12

Chapter 2: Comparison of Alternatives

2.1 Introduction …..…………………...…………………………………………... 2-1 2.2 Alternatives Analyzed in Detail ………………………………………………. 2-1 2.3 Alternatives Analyzed Briefly………………………………………………… 2-8 2.4 Comparison of Alternatives Considered in Detail ……………….….………... 2-13

Chapter 3: Environmental Consequences

3.1 Introduction …………………………………………………………………… 3-1 3.2 Treaty Rights ………………………………………………………………….. 3-2 3.3 Vegetation ……………………………………………………………………... 3-4 3.4 Fuels hazard……………………………………………………………………. 3-17 3.5 Moose Habitat…………………………………………………………………. 3-25 3.6 Threatened and Endangered Species ………………………………………….. 3-29 3.7 Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species ………………………………………… 3-32 3.8 Soil Productivity and Wetlands ……………………………………………….. 3-34 3.9 Non-Native Invasive Plants……………………………………………………. 3-41 3.10 Water Quality .…...………………………………………………………......... 3-47 3.11 Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness……………………………………. 3-53 3.12 Forest Plan Inventoried Roadless Areas………………………………………. 3-63 3.13 Scenery and Recreation………………………………………………………... 3-72 3.14 Other Determinations………………….....……..……………………………. 3-78

Chapter 4: Lists and References

4.1 Distribution Lists...…………………………………………………………….. 4-1 4.2 References and Literature Cited.……………………………………………… 4-1

Appendices

Appendix A Response to Comments Appendix B List of Proposed Units, Treatments and Mitigation Measures Appendix C Description of Primary Treatments and Regeneration Methods Appendix D Operational Standards and Guidelines and Design Features Appendix E Economics Appendix F Cumulative Actions and Climate Change

ShokoShoe Project Environmental Assessment

March 2017 1-4 Chapter 1



Chapter 1: Purpose and Need

1.1 Introduction The purpose of the ShokoShoe Project is to move the vegetation in the project area from its existing condition toward the desired conditions described in the Superior National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan or FP). The key objectives of the ShokoShoe Project are to: promote ecosystems that are diverse, productive, and resilient; to improve public and firefighter safety by reducing fuel hazards; and to improve moose habitat. Other objectives of the project are described further in this Environmental Assessment (EA).

Activities proposed to accomplish these objectives include harvesting, prescribed burning, hazardous fuel reduction, and reforestation activities (such as planting). Harvesting followed by natural or artificial regeneration would include any needed temporary road construction.

The ShokoShoe Project Area is located in Cook County, Minnesota. The Vicinity Map (Figure 1.1) shows the general location of the ShokoShoe Project Area. Townships included in the project area, from west to east, are Township (T) 65 North (N) Range (R) 2 West (W), R1W, R1 East (E); T64N, R2W, R1W, R1E, R2E, R3E, R4E; T63N, R2E. R3E, R4E; T62N, R3E. The ShokoShoe Project Area encompasses approximately 115,000 acres, of which, about 42,000 acres are National Forest System land. Proposed activities would occur only on National Forest System lands. This environmental assessment was prepared by an interdisciplinary team of resource specialists to provide the decision-maker, the Gunflint District Ranger, and the public with information about the potential effects of proposed vegetation management activities and connected road actions in the ShokoShoe Project Area.

If a decision is made to implement these activities, the proposed actions would be implemented at the beginning of year 2018. Implementation of the primary treatments would be expected to occur over the next ten to fifteen years.

1.2 Forest Plan Direction for the ShokoShoe Project Area

Management Areas The Forest Plan divides the Superior National Forest outside the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness (BWCAW) into ten management areas. Chapter 3 of the Forest Plan (FP) includes the desired conditions, objectives, standards, and guidelines for each management area. The ShokoShoe Project Area overlaps four Forest Plan Management Areas (MA). The Management Areas, in order of prominence in the ShokoShoe Project Area are: General Forest – Longer Rotation (FP, pp. 3-9 to 3-12), Recreation Use in a Scenic Landscape (FP, pp.3-13 to 3-15), Semi-Primitive Non-motorized Recreation (FP, pp 3-21 to 3-23), and Eligible Wild, Scenic, and Recreational Rivers (FP, pp 3-16 to 3-20). The ShokoShoe Project Area Vicinity Map (Figure 1) displays these management areas.



Figure 1.1: ShokoShoe Project Area Vicinity Map



The interdisciplinary team used Forest Plan Management Area direction to guide development of the purpose and need and of the proposed action. The following is a brief summary of the desired vegetation for three management areas in the ShokoShoe Project Area where actions are proposed.

General Forest-Longer Rotation Management Area In the General Forest-Longer Rotation Management Area, the desired condition for the forest is a variety of stand sizes, shapes, crown closures, and age structures. In the General Forest-Longer Rotation Management Area, vegetation will be managed to represent young to old (0 to 250 years old) vegetative growth stages. Some larger patch sizes would occur within this area, although those associated with young, even-aged vegetative conditions would be less frequent than in the General Forest Management Area. Generally practices mimic less severe stand maintenance disturbance, along with some management practices that mimic stand replacement disturbance. In most scenically valued areas, larger-scale openings have a natural appearance. Other less scenic areas will be managed for timber production with a lower emphasis on scenery compared to other resource concerns.

Recreation Use in a Scenic Landscape Management Area In the Recreation Use in a Scenic Landscape Management Area, ecosystems are managed to provide a predominantly natural-appearing landscape that may be slightly modified by forest management activities. This management area emphasizes a large tree and old forest character and viewsheds are managed for scenic beauty and big-tree character. Vegetation management activities enhance wildlife habitat including management activities that promote wildlife habitat for public observation. Recreation and scenic integrity objectives guide the appearance of timber harvest, management-ignited fire, tree planting, and other management techniques. Visitors to the Forest may occasionally see management activities such as timber harvest, management-ignited fire, tree planting, and other resource management techniques.

Semi-primitive Non-motorized Recreation Management Area In the Semi-primitive Non-motorized Recreation Management Area, the desired condition would be a natural appearing landscape that emphasizes large trees and an older forest with a continuous canopy. Vegetation management activities generally maintains or enhances older vegetative growth stages, and are guided by scenic integrity and recreation objectives.

Eligible Wild, Scenic and Recreational River MA One quarter mile of either side of the Brule River is in the Eligible Wild, Scenic and Recreational River MA. The segment of the river through the ShokoShoe Project Area is classified as recreational. Vegetation management practices will promote the retention of long-lived trees species, leading toward the development of a big tree character throughout the river corridor. A wide range of silvicultural practices are allowed, provided that the methods used would have no substantial adverse effect to the river’s free flow, water quality and outstanding values.

Landscape Ecosystems Landscape Ecosystems (LE) are ecological areas characterized by their dominant vegetation communities and patterns that are a product of local climate, glacial topography, dominant soils,



and natural processes, such as succession, fire, wind, insects, and disease (FP, p. 2-55). The Forest Plan uses landscape ecosystems to outline management objectives for forest vegetation composition, age class, tree species diversity, and Management Indicator Habitats (MIH). Management in each landscape ecosystem would maintain or restore the forest to conditions more representative of native plant communities and landscape scale patterns.

Management Indicator Habitats represent the habitats used by a wide variety of native plants and animals, including management indicator species and sensitive species. MIH provide a means of monitoring and evaluating the effects of actions on biotic resources including specific species, communities, habitats, and interrelationships among organisms. Managing for MIH objectives is a key component of providing for the full diversity of desired wildlife habitats.

The dominant upland landscape ecosystems in the ShokoShoe Project Area are the Mesic Birch/Aspen/Spruce/Fir and Mesic Red and White Pine Landscape Ecosystems (Table 1.1). Tables 1.2 through 1.5 display the age class and composition of these landscape ecosystems in the ShokoShoe Project Area and forest-wide. Forest Plan objectives for age class and composition are applicable to an entire landscape ecosystem; therefore, they are not directly applicable to smaller project areas. However, management actions in project areas, such as the ShokoShoe Project, contribute to meeting Forest-wide landscape ecosystem objectives based on opportunities in the project area.Table 1.1: ShokoShoe Project Area Summarized by Landscape Ecosystem.

Landscape Ecosystem Acres1 % of Area Mesic Birch/Aspen/Spruce/Fir 20,231 54 Mesic Red and White Pine 10,620 28

Jack Pine – Black Spruce 3,857 10

Lowland Conifer B 1,635 4 Sugar Maple 523 1

Lowland Conifer A 324 <1 Lowland Conifer C 104 <1

TOTAL: 37,294 100 1Data from ShokoShoe analysis product SS_201612; these acres include only National Forest System lands; total may be slightly off due to rounding.

Table 1.2: Mesic Birch/Aspen/Spruce/Fir LE Age Class Distribution in the ShokoShoe Project Area, Forest-wide and in Forest Plan Objectives (Decade 2).

Age Class ShokoShoe Project Area (2017)

Forest-wide (2017)

Forest Plan Objectives

Decade 2 (2024) Acres % % %

0-9 0 0 4 11 10-49 6,824 37 38 48 50-79 3,980 21 15 10 80-99 5,138 28 28 17 100+ 2,709 15 16 14

TOTAL: 18,651 100 100 100 1Data from ShokoShoe analysis product SS_201612; these acres include only National Forest System lands; total may be slightly off due to rounding.



Table 1.3: Mesic Birch/Aspen/Spruce/Fir LE Vegetation Composition in the ShokoShoe Project Area, Forest-wide, and in Forest Plan Objectives.

Forest Type ShokoShoe Project Area (2017)

Forest-wide (2017)



Jack Pine 267 1 3 4 Red Pine 463 2 5 5

White Pine 226 1 3 4 Spruce-Fir 3,289 18 30 26

N. Hardwoods 122 1 5 4 Aspen 13,109 70 41 42

Paper Birch 1,148 7 12 14 TOTAL: 18,624 100 100 100

1Data from ShokoShoe analysis product SS_201612; these acres include only National Forest System lands; total may be slightly off due to rounding.

Table 1.4: Mesic Red and White Pine LE Age Class Distribution in the ShokoShoe Project Area, Forest-wide and in Forest Plan Objectives.

Age Class ShokoShoe Project Area (2017)

Forest-wide (2017)



0-9 19 0 3 10 10-49 3,983 39 40 49 50-79 986 10 15 10 80-99 1,973 19 27 16

100-119 2,255 22 10 11 120+ 914 9 5 3

TOTAL: 10,130 100 100 100 1Data from ShokoShoe analysis product SS_201612; these acres include only National Forest system lands; total may be slightly off due to rounding.

Table 1.5: Mesic Red and White Pine LE Vegetation Composition in the ShokoShoe Project Area, Forest-wide, and in Forest Plan Objectives.

Forest Type ShokoShoe Project Area (2017)

Forest-wide (2017)



Jack Pine 277 3 5 6 Red Pine 205 2 7 8

White Pine 783 8 4 7 Spruce-Fir 1,405 14 18 19

N. Hardwoods 0 0 4 2 Aspen 6,268 62 48 43

Paper Birch 1,163 12 14 15 TOTAL: 10,101 100 100 100

1Data from ShokoShoe analysis product SS_201612; these acres include only National Forest System lands; total may be slightly off due to rounding.



1.3 Need for Proposal The need for management actions were identified by comparing the existing condition of the ShokoShoe Project Area with desired conditions described in the Forest Plan through an assessment conducted by an interdisciplinary team of natural resource specialists. In the ShokoShoe Mid-level Assessment, the interdisciplinary team considered all resources (vegetation, wildlife, watershed, transportation, recreation, heritage resources, etc.) and recommended possible activities to move the project area toward desired conditions. Using the needs and opportunities identified by the interdisciplinary team and incorporating tribal collaboration and public engagement feedback, the District Ranger chose which needs would be addressed through this project.

Below is a brief description of the difference between existing conditions and Forest Plan desired conditions for each need being addressed in the ShokoShoe Project.

Need to Promote Diverse, Productive and Healthy Wildlife Habitats and Ecosystems Lack of disturbance in the ecosystem has reduced the resiliency, productivity and health of the forest. Without fire playing its historical role as a disturbance agent, young, vigorous forest has decreased across the project area. Disturbance is needed to regenerate species, such as aspen, birch or jack pine, and to create young forest habitat for wildlife species. Additionally, there is a need to increase the amount of fire adapted species, such as red and white pine where historically they were present.

Before European settlement, fire played a large role in the ecosystems within the ShokoShoe Project area. In the Mesic Birch/Aspen/Spruce/Fir Landscape Ecosystem, stand replacement fires were common (in general occurring every 50-100 years). Stand replacement fires tended to be large and resulted in more early successional species, such as aspen, birch and jack pine. Pine was a smaller component in this ecosystem as scattered individuals or in groves. In the Mesic Red and White Pine Landscape Ecosystem surface fires were more commonly occurring, at an average of 40 years. In this ecosystem surface fires acted to reduce ladder fuels and accumulations of fuel that would lead to more severe crown fires. Stand replacement fires occurred every 150-300 years; only the more severe crown fires likely killed red pine and white pine in an area. The larger older pine trees had thick enough bark to survive the fire and produce seed on the newly burned forest floor to regenerate young pine.

Since European settlement, fires have been actively suppressed, reducing the amount of fire on the landscape. Timber harvest replaced fire as the major disturbance agent that created young forest in northern Minnesota after European settlement. In the ShokoShoe Project Area there has been little disturbance (fire, harvest or windstorms) in the past decade. Currently, across the ShokoShoe Project Area there is about 68 acres of young forest (less than one percent of the project area), and all these acres will grow out of the young age class within ten years. The last large disturbance in the area was the 1999 blowdown, and now after 17 years these areas no longer provide young forest habitat. This small amount of young forest contributes little to meeting Forest Plan landscape ecosystem objectives.

Young forest provides habitat needs for wildlife species including moose and deer (young aspen/birch), snowshoe hare (young conifer), and some songbirds (such as mourning warbler – young aspen/birch or chipping sparrow – young conifer). Continuing to provide a component of



young forest is desired according to Landscape Ecosystem objectives and Management Indicator Habitat, these objectives are described in the Forest Plan (O-VG-1, FP p. 2-23). The young forest age class (0-9 years) objective is eleven percent for the Mesic Birch/Aspen/Spruce/Fir Landscape Ecosystem and ten percent for the Mesic Red and White Pine Landscape Ecosystem

Figure 1.2: An Example of Young Aspen-Birch Forest.

The lack of fire or disturbance on the landscape has also had effects in terms of vegetation composition. Some species are adapted to certain fire regimes and reproduce and maintain themselves under those conditions. The primary effect of the lack of fire on vegetation composition has been:

Increased occurrence of balsam fir on the landscape. Currently, many areas have a high presence of balsam fir in the understory or the canopy. Fire would have traditionally burned the balsam fir seed source, keeping it limited on the landscape.

Increase in brush species. Fire would have historically reduced brush species, especially in upland areas.

Regeneration of fire adapted species has decreased. Species such as pine, spruce and birch have adapted to fire with their regeneration characteristics. Without fire, these species have not regenerated to the same degree they would have with fire.

In summary, there is a need to create young forest that would provide wildlife habitat and a diverse functioning ecosystem, and management actions are needed to maintain a component of early successional species, such as jack pine, aspen or birch in the ecosystem. There is also a need to ensure the long-term persistence of all components of the ecosystem and the functioning relationship among the components, which may increase the resiliency of the forest, making the forest better poised to adapt to climate change and climate variability.



Need to Improve Public and Firefighter Safety by Fuels Reduction The hazardous fuels in the ShokoShoe Project Area threaten public and firefighter safety. The dying aspen and birch coupled with an increase in balsam fir in the forest has increased the fuel loads and fire hazard. There is a high probability there will be a large wildfire in this area in the future because fire is a natural part of this ecosystem. Given the large number of residents, visitors and businesses in the area and probability of a wildfire in this area in the future, there is a need to improve public and firefighter safety by reducing hazardous fuels.

A fuel hazard and risk assessment of the ShokoShoe Project Area documented an accumulation of hazardous fuels, with about 10,000 acres rated as high or moderate fire risk. The fuel hazard primarily occurs in old forests of aspen and birch with a high percentage of dead and downed trees and thick, regenerating balsam fir, a highly flammable species. Left untreated, the combination of understory and overstory fuel loading creates a continuous fuel path for fire to spread from the ground into the canopy, creating the potential for fires to burn as high intensity crown fires and consume more acres. High intensity fires decrease firefighter effectiveness in managing fires, increase the chance of losing desired ecosystem components, and increase the potential for firefighters and the public to be exposed to safety hazards associated with wildland fire.

Fuel accumulation is of highest concern in the Wildland Urban Interface areas (areas where flammable wildland fuels are adjacent to homes and communities). Within the ShokoShoe Project Area the areas of highest concern are in the Mid-Gunflint Trail, Greenwood Lake and McFarland Lake areas.

Figure 1.3: Balsam Fir Creates Fuel Hazard in the Understory of a Decadent Birch Stand and Along an Access Road.

There is a need to reduce and break up the continuity and concentrations of hazardous fuels within the Wildland Urban Interface areas in the project area to reduce the potential for high intensity fires. There is also a need to reduce fuels along roads and near improvements to provide safer escape routes for fire fighters, recreational users, and land owners and to create more defensible space around values at risk in the event of a wildfire occurring in the area.



Need to Improve Moose Habitat Moose populations have substantially deceased across Northern Minnesota and given the multiple stressors moose face, high quality habitat is needed to support moose populations. The ShokoShoe Project Area is a prime moose area, supporting a higher moose population than many other areas on the forest. Habitat features, such as young forest for foraging and conifers for thermal cover, are needed in the area to support healthy moose populations.

The moose population in Northeastern Minnesota has been declining for the past 10 years. Causes for the decline have been attributed to disease, parasites, warming temperatures, higher deer densities, and changes in habitat; however, causes are still being investigated. The Minnesota Moose Research and Management Plan, developed to address concerns about the declining population, makes habitat management recommendations including: increasing stand complexity, following natural disturbance patterns, encouraging browse species, and protecting and enhancing summer thermal cover (MNDNR 2011).

The ShokoShoe Project Area is located within Minnesota’s primary moose range. Aerial surveys and historical observations have identified the ShokoShoe Project Area as having high moose density numbers, although the density is moderate in much of the eastern portion of the project area. However, because of the lack of disturbance in the area, there is little young forest for browse; only 68 acres in the area are young forest (0-9 years) where there is plentiful browse available.

Additional Needs of the ShokoShoe Project

Provide sustainable timber products: The desired condition is “the amount of commercial timber sales available for purchase is at a level that is sustainable over time. Mills operating in northern Minnesota can depend on a consistent level of timber harvest on the National Forest (D-TM-1, FP p. 2-20).” Many acres of forest within the ShokoShoe Project Area have been identified as needing some type of treatment in order to balance age class distribution or species composition, improve stand health and enhance growth, improve wildlife habitat, and reduce fuels in wildland urban interface areas. Treatments to meet the other project objectives could be accomplished through the sale of marketable wood products, including tops of trees for biomass. Timber harvesting on the suitable forestland within the project area would meet the needs of sustaining a healthy forest and providing an economic opportunity to local communities. Vegetation management has the opportunity to provide wood products (including biomass) for businesses and mills in northern Minnesota.

Figure 5: Moose foraging in young aspen stand.



Improve health and productivity in red pine and white spruce plantations: Some red pine and white spruce plantations in the ShokoShoe Project Area are densely stocked and overcrowded. There is little structural or species diversity in some plantations as a result of techniques used during establishment of the plantation. As the trees have grown, they have become more tightly spaced with little growing room for the planted trees or light for any other forbs, shrubs, and trees species. Forest Plan direction is to increase the amount of forest restored to or maintained in a healthy condition to reduce risk of and damage from fires, insects, and diseases (FP O-ID-1). There is a need to reduce stand density; thereby increasing growing space for the residual trees and maintaining a high rate of growth. A high level of stand vigor decreases susceptibility to insect and disease outbreaks. Increased growing space is also needed to hasten the development of a more natural mix of species type and structure in these red pine and white spruce communities.

Maintain or increase longer lived species in riparian areas: Forest Plan direction encourages maintaining or increasing long-lived tree species, such as white pine, red pine and white spruce, in riparian areas to benefit both lake and stream riparian and aquatic habitat conditions (O-WS-3, 4, 5, FP p. 2-12). Natural regeneration of these long-lived species in riparian areas is often hindered by a thick understory of brush or balsam fir regeneration. Riparian habitat surveys indicate there are opportunities to increase long-lived species in riparian areas.

Manage for the minimum road system: The Forest Plan direction is to maintain the minimum National Forest road system needed to provide adequate access to both National Forest System and non-National Forest System land (D-TS-1, FP, p. 2-47). There are opportunities to decommission roads in the ShokoShoe Project Area that are no longer needed for projected forest management.

1.4 Proposed Action The interdisciplinary team identified potential actions to accomplish the purpose and need for the ShokoShoe Project. The team used vegetation, soils, and other resource data as well as field reconnaissance by foresters, biologists, fuels technicians, engineering technicians and other resource specialists to develop the Proposed Action. The team strived to develop actions that would meet multiple objectives and best meet the purpose and need.

While developing the Proposed Action the interdisciplinary team collaborated with tribal representatives from 1854 Authority and Grand Portage, Fond du Lac, and Bois Forte Bands of the Lake Superior Chippewa. Given the relatively high moose density in the project area, discussions focused on how to incorporate recent moose research into existing best practices for moose habitat management. The greatest need in the project area was identified as the creation of young forest for foraging, while retaining a balance of mature thermal cover (summer and winter) and foraging habitat on the landscape. Existing thermal cover could be enhanced by treatments that improve species and structural diversity, while high quality browse could be maintained through shearing brushy sites. Additionally, there was discussion about road management and access for treaty rights.

The interdisciplinary team also collaborated with and reviewed data from Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MN DNR) personnel. Personnel shared data and expertise on management of moose habitat, Native Plant Communities, and biodiversity areas.



A scoping report that described the Proposed Action was distributed to the public in October 2016 and the public was invited to submit comments. The interdisciplinary team modified the Proposed Action based on public comments and further evaluation of site condition.

Public scoping comments expressed concerns about the proposed prescribed burn south of Poplar Lake. The interdisciplinary team considered ways to mitigate those concerns, such as buffers along the lake and trail as suggested by commenters during scoping. However, in the end, the additional mitigation increased the complexity of the burn and decreased the chance of a successful burn.

The interdisciplinary team considered other treatment options other than a prescribed burn to reduce hazardous fuels. It was determined a timber sale would not be viable given the sparse, decadent hardwoods and small, non-merchantable balsam fir. Various other mechanical treatment methods were considered and additional field work was completed. As a result of engagement with the public and partners, and based on additional analysis, the Proposed Action has been changed to use mechanical means to reduce hazardous fuels in the area south of Poplar Lake.

The proposed action was modified with this change and another alternative was not developed for two reasons. First, with mitigation necessary to minimize impacts to scenery and the ski trail, a prescribed burn did not seem feasible. Second, this change of treatment method for about 200 acres is small in scope compared to the overall 8,000 acres of proposed treatment in the ShokoShoe Project; therefore, the difference in effects would be small.

Since scoping, the interdisciplinary team also incorporated updated data on specific units into the proposed action. Unit boundaries were updated from field reconnaissance and aerial photo delineation, resulting in changes in unit acres, forest type, and proposed treatments. Prescription details for harvesting and reforestation were changed to more accurately reflect site conditions to ensure reforestation objectives would be met. A listing of all changes in the Proposed Action is in the ShokoShoe Project Record (ShokoShoeChangesScopetoEA). The Proposed Action, with modifications since the scoping comment period, is summarized below.

Vegetation Treatments A summary of acres proposed by treatment is shown in Table 1.6. Unit acres are based on stand acres in our database. Treatment acres are an estimate of what would be treated in a unit and are less than unit acres due to legacy patches, sensitive soils, inoperable areas, and other limiting factors.

Table 1:6 Summary of Proposed Action by Primary Treatment.

Treatment Description Unit Acres

Treatment Acres

Treatments that create young forest Mosaic Burn 429 343 Burn Inclusion 34 34 Clearcut with Reserves Harvest 3,602 1,408 Shelterwood Harvest 136 57

Treatments that improve stand conditions through intermediate harvest Thinning 192 105



Treatment Description Unit Acres

Treatment Acres

Treatments that restore stands through a variety of non-harvest activities Mechanical Site Preparation 107 86 Underplant 441 353 Understory Fuels Reduction 2,936 1,986 Release and Weed 20 17 Plant 8 6 Underburn 149 119

Total of all Treatment Types 8,054 4,650

Road Management Actions Change Forest Road 146C to a ski trail: Currently, Forest Road (FR) 146C is open to public vehicle use from April 1 to November 30. The proposal is to convert the road to a ski trail; motorized vehicle and motorized recreational use would not be allowed. Closure of the road to motorized vehicles would reduce road maintenance costs and protect the trail surface.

Temporary Roads: Approximately 23.8 miles of temporary roads would be constructed to access some of the proposed treatment units. All temporary roads would be effectively closed to motorized traffic as soon as the treatments are complete and access is no longer needed.

1.5 Decision to be Made Based on the purpose and need for action for the ShokoShoe Project, the scope of the project includes decisions concerning vegetation management activities and related transportation system activities. The Gunflint District Ranger will decide whether or not to implement any of the proposed management activities. If the District Ranger decides to conduct management activities, he/she will decide on the following:

The amount and type of vegetation treatment activities, including reforestation.

The amount and type of related transportation system activities.

Relevant mitigation measures and monitoring actions.

The District Ranger will also decide if the proposed management activities would have a significant impact that would trigger the need to prepare an environmental impact statement.

1. 6 Public Involvement and Issues with the Proposed Action Public, community and agency involvement has been an integral component of the ShokoShoe Project and has occurred throughout the development of the purpose and need, proposed action, issues, and alternatives.

During the summer of 2016, the ShokoShoe interdisciplinary team (IDT) and District Ranger held three public engagement meetings. At these meetings the interdisciplinary team and public discussed the Purpose and Need for Action, treatment options, the draft proposed action, and other information sharing topics. These public engagement sessions provided an opportunity to



share local knowledge and experience and the latest science or research to develop land management activities proposed in the project area to met the greatest needs in the area.

The scoping comment period for the ShokoShoe Project occurred in October 2016 and several methods were utilized to inform the public about the comment period. A scoping report was mailed to over 900 individuals, groups, and agencies who either own land within the project area or who have expressed an interest in these types of projects. The scoping report was also available online at http://www.fs.usda.gov/projects/superior/landmanagement/projects. The ShokoShoe Project was listed in the Superior Quarterly (a Schedule of Proposed Actions for the Superior National Forest) starting in July 1, 2016. On October 25, 2016, the IDT and ranger held an Open House to discuss the Proposed Action with the public. To date, more than 40 written and verbal responses were received from individuals, groups, and agencies. Responses ranged from simply wishing to remain on the project mailing list to detailed pages of comments about different aspects of the project.

Issues The purpose of scoping is to identify key environmental issues deserving of further study and to de-emphasize other issues in the environmental effects analysis (40 CFR 1500.4g). Issues are defined as points of disagreement, debate, or dispute about potential effects of a proposed activity, based on some anticipated outcome.

Through the analysis of public comments, the interdisciplinary team identified issues that need to be analyzed in the Environmental Assessment. Issues identified include: effects to moose thermal and browse habitat; effects to wilderness character; effects to various resources from creating large amount of young forest through logging and temporary roads. These issues are analyzed in the Environmental Assessment but were not used to develop an alternative because: 1) the issues have been addressed by Forest Plan standards and guidelines or project mitigation measures, or 2) the issues are small within the scope of the proposed action or would result in minimal impacts with little difference between alternatives.

Public comments also mentioned possible changes to the Proposed Action, mitigation measures, and alternatives. The suggestions were considered and how they were incorporated or addressed is described in EA section 2.3 or Appendix A: Response to Comments.

All comments received during scoping were considered by the interdisciplinary team and District Ranger and can be found in Appendix A. The appendix also includes responses to questions or comments that were not issues or alternatives.

Administrative Objections The ShokoShoe Project decision is subject to objections following Forest Service regulations at 36 CFR 218, Subparts A and B. Only individuals or organizations who submit timely and specific written comments (as defined at 36 CFR 218.2) about this project during the scoping period or the comment period on the Environmental Assessment are eligible to file an objection to the ShokoShoe Project. The opportunity to object will be provided when a draft decision on the project is published, after public comment on this Environmental Assessment is considered.

http://www.fs.usda.gov/projects/superior/landmanagement/projects

pearl project, chapter 1a123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic.download.akamai... ·...

Documents