15. Attachment 11 Additional PDCs.pdf

Go Big G to Z IRSC Fremont- Winema National Forest Chiloquin Ranger District

Go Big G to Z IRSC Stewardship

Supplemental Project Design Criteria

Project-specific design criteria (PDCs) and best management practices (BMPs) will be integrated into Mandatory Item 1: Project Area Implementation plan to minimize or prevent adverse effects to forest resources. The contractor shall use the Bluemile Decision Memo and East Hills EIS during development of the Project Area Implementation Plan. In addition to applicable standards and guidelines in the aforementioned NEPA documents, the following PDCs and supplemental information and requirements apply:

Bluemile Decision Memo: No Treat Areas

There are areas on the Supplemental Project Design Criteria map shown as “No Treatment”. These areas are delineated according to the Bluemile Decision Memo and East Hills EIS. In the Bluemile Decision Memo, some of the no treatment areas were identified as not needing treatment during the processing of LiDAR data. However, on the ground conditions will dictate if treatment is needed to meet objectives.

Generally, the no treatment areas that may be considered for treatment are small slivers, generally less than an acre. The Contractor shall document which no treatment areas need treatment to meet project objectives and provide this information in the Project Implementation plan for review by the Forest Service.

30 Acre No Treatment Area for Species Protection

Contractor shall designate a 30 acre no treatment area for each Species Protection point, as shown on the PDC map. The area should provide the best suitable habitat for the Species. The no treatment area should either encompass the Species Protection Point or be adjacent to point, depending on where the best suitable habitat is.

Suitable habitat is defined as:

• Mature and late and old structure ponderosa and mixed conifer forest structural stages for nesting. Various forest structural stages are associated with components of the home range.

• Stands of old growth forest as nesting sites.

• Mid to late successional areas of high canopy closure, understory re-initiation, and stem exclusion with higher basal area than the surrounding landscape on low topographic positions.

• Preferred nest stands have a minimum of 40% canopy closure; and nest sites within these stands have >60% canopy closure.

• A variety of tree species. Ponderosa pine was found to be the most common nest tree species used, even in mixed conifer stands.

• Suitable habitat usually resembles point protection areas, but also includes a variety of forest types and conditions where hiding cover (for young) and prey availability is present.

• Nest cores and use areas are often characterized by a “protective” core of forest vegetation in immediate proximity to the nest tree which graded into more open foraging habitat with increasing distance from the nest.

30 Acre No Treatment Example: The more suitable habitat is just east of the protection point. The 30 acre no treatment area (highlighted) starts close to the protection point and extends into suitable habitat.

Botany

In the Project Implementation plan, the contractor shall identify where proposed treatments overlap with Invasive Species or threatened species. Forest Service Botanist will be notified and agree to treatments in these areas. Treatments around sensitive species may require special protection measures, as outlines in Appendix B, C6.24#.

Sensitive Species

There are 9 sensitive plant sites within the project area. Unless there is significant activity in the Hawks Lake meadow area there should be no Botany concerns related to this project.

Site # Location

17035 – Pinewoods cryptantha (CRSI2)– 3 acre

17028 - Bolander’s spikerush (ELBO) – 0.5 acre 4400-358, meadow

17025 – Nevada rush (JUTI) – 1.0 acre 4538-170, meadow

17026 – Nevada rush (JUTI) – 1.0 acre 4538-170, meadow

17027 – Nevada rush (JUTI) – 0.25 acre 4538-170, meadow

17002 – Nevada rush (JUTI) – 0.25 acre 4538-170, meadow

17003 – Nevada rush (JUTI) – 0.25 acre 4538-170, meadow

17033 – Nevada rush (JUTI) – 0.5 acre 4432-210, meadow

Protection

Point

Invasive Weeds

The weed sites in the table below are located within or adjacent to the project area. These sites are inspected and/or treated annually.

One new weed site was documented during the survey. A small population of a highly invasive grass, Ventenata dubia (VEDU), was mapped at the intersection of 44 and Lone Pine roads. The risk of spreading the species into the project area is HIGH. Ventenata is a winter annual. It germinates in fall, is dormant over winter, resumes growth in spring. Timing of treatment is recommended for fall but can be tricky.

Site # Location

26801 – North Africa grass (VEDU) – 0.1 acre 6500 x 4400 rds NEW FY22

20392 – Med sage (SAAE)– 0.1 acre 4400-358 Active, FY22

20398 – St. John’s wort (HYPE)- .1 acre 6500 Lone Pine rd Inactive FY22

20360 – Dalmatian toadflax (LIDA)– 0.1acre 6500 Lone Pine rd Inactive FY22

21000 – Canada thistle (CIAR4) – 0.1 acre 6500 Lone Pine rd Inactive FY22

20357 – Scotch thistle (ONAC) – 0.1 acre 6500 Lone Pine rd Inactive FY22

21001 - St John’s wort (HYPE) – 0.7 acre 6500 Lone Pine rd Inactive FY22

20274 – Musk thistle (CANU4) – 1.2 acre 4400 rd Inactive FY22

20297 - Musk thistle (CANU4)– 0.5 acre 4400 rd Inactive FY22

20602 – Dalmatian toadflax (LIDA) – 0.1 acre 4400 rd Inactive FY22

20363 – St. John’s wort (HYPE) – 0.1 acre 4400 rd Inactive FY22

20508 – St. John’s wort (HYPE) – 0.1 acre 4400x6500 Inactive FY22

20431 – Musk thistle (CANU4) – 0.5 acre 4400-4430 Inactive FY22

20404 – Musk thistle (CANU4) - 0.1 acre 4400-358-130 Inactive FY22

20359 – Canada thistle (CIAR4) - 0.1 acre 4400-358-130 Inactive FY22

20298 – Musk thistle (CANU4) – 0.1 acre 4433-230 Inactive FY22

PDCs that apply:

Any new sites of TES/Survey and Manage plants found during project activities where habitat disturbance could occur would be assessed for determination of effects, flagged for avoidance and have species-specific mitigations in place prior to resuming implementation activities.

Mark invasive plant sites for avoidance prior to award of the sale. Avoid ground-disturbing activity in and around the active invasive plant sites in the project area by excluding these areas from treatment units, incorporating sites into leave areas or using project-specific mitigation to avoid ground-disturbance. Notify botanist to verify sites are correctly marked prior to project implementation

If noxious weed sites are discovered in the project area, report the sighting to botanist. Site s would be reviewed on the ground and additional invasive plant prevention and treatment protocols would be developed as appropriate.

Follow the Fremont-Winema National Forests Invasive Species Prevention Practices (USDA Forest Service, 2013) pertinent to this project area, as specified in Section B of this Appendix.

Incorporate native, pollinator friendly and cultural plant species into seed mixes used to revegetate areas disturbed by project activities.

FY23 GtoZ Lower Bluemile Project Area_Botany

R6 ISSSSP TESP Current Occurrence Records for Oregon

Invasive Species Inventory Current Measurements Local

GtoZ LowerBlueMileProjectArea