Leonia Restoration Project -...

Leonia Restoration Project

Soil Report

Prepared by: Tricia Burgoyne

Soil Scientist

Bonners Ferry Ranger District

Idaho Panhandle National Forests

December 12, 2010

Soil Resource Report

2

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

Leonia

i

Table of Contents

Regulatory Framework .................................................................................................................... 1

Affected Environment ................................................................................................................. 2 Methodology for Analysis ....................................................................................................... 2 Existing Condition ................................................................................................................... 3 Soil Resources ......................................................................................................................... 4

Environmental Consequences ....................................................................................................... 10 Methodology ......................................................................................................................... 10 Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis .............................................................. 10 Alternative 1 – No Action ..................................................................................................... 10 Alternatives 2 (Proposed Action) and 3 ................................................................................ 10

Regulatory Consistency ................................................................................................................. 19 References ..................................................................................................................................... 20 List of Tables

Table 1. Current Conditions at Leonia ............................................................................................ 5 Table 2. Landtype Characteristics………………………………………………………………….8 Table 3. Potential Detrimental Disturbance Coeeficients…………………………………….…..13 Table 4. Existing Soil Disturbance from System Roads………………………………………….16 Table 5. Summary of Cumulative Effects by Unit……………………………………………….17

Leonia

1

Regulatory Framework The regulatory framework providing direction for protecting a site's inherent capacity to grow vegetation comes from the following principle sources:

• Organic Administration Act of 1897

• Bankhead-Jones Act of 1937

• Multiple Use-Sustained Yield Act of 1960

• National Forest Management Act of 1976 (NFMA)

• FSM 2500 – Chapter 2550 – Soil Management

• Forest Plan and Regional Soil Quality standards (2554.03-R1 Suppl. 2500-99-1)

The Organic Administration Act of 1897 (16 U.S.C. 473-475) authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to establish regulations to govern the occupancy and use of National Forests and “…to improve and protect the forest within the boundaries, or for the purpose of securing favorable conditions of water flows, and to furnish a continuous supply of timber for the use and necessities of citizens of the United States.”

The Bankhead-Jones Act of 1937 authorizes and directs a program of land conservation and land utilization, in order thereby to correct maladjustments in land use, and thus assist in controlling soil erosion, preserving natural resources, mitigating floods, conserving surface and subsurface moisture, protecting the watersheds of navigable streams, and protecting the public lands, health, safety, and welfare.

The Multiple Use-Sustained Yield Act of 1960 directs the Forest Service to achieve and maintain outputs of various renewable resources in perpetuity without permanent impairment of the land's productivity.

The National Forest Management Act of 1976 (NFMA) charges the Secretary of Agriculture with ensuring research and continuous monitoring of each management system to safeguard the land's productivity. To comply with NFMA, the Chief of the Forest Service has charged each Forest Service Region with developing soil quality standards for detecting soil disturbance and indicating a loss in long-term productive potential. These standards are built into Forest Plans.

The FSM 2500 Chapter 2550 Soil Management directive establishes the framework for sustaining soil quality and hydrologic function while providing goods and services outlined in forest and grassland land management plans.

The Forest Plan objective for soils (Forest Plan p. II-8) is to manage the soil resource to maintain long-term productivity. The objective is that management activities on forest lands will not significantly impair the long-term productivity of the soil or produce unacceptable levels of sedimentation resulting from soil erosion. Forest Plan standards for soils are listed below.

Soil disturbing management practices will strive to maintain at least 80 percent of the activity area in a condition of acceptable productivity potential for trees and other managed vegetation. Unacceptable productivity potential exists when soil has been detrimentally compacted, displaced, puddled, or severely burned as determined in the project analysis.

Forest Plan Soil Standard #1


2

Projects should strive to maintain sufficient large woody debris to maintain site productivity. Large woody debris is essential for maintenance of sufficient micro-organism populations.


In the event of whole tree logging, provision for maintenance of sufficient nutrient capital should be made in the project analysis.


The Regional Soil Quality Standards (R-1 Supplement 2500-99-1 - USDA FS 1999) were revised in November 1999. Manual direction recommends maintaining 85% of an activity area’s soil at an acceptable productivity potential with respect to detrimental impacts, including the effects of compaction, displacement, rutting, severe burning, surface erosion, loss of surface organic matter, and soil mass movement.

Affected Environment

Methodology for Analysis During July of 2010, all units were surveyed. For the soil resource, the treatment unit generally serves as the “analysis area,” as we do not expect activities within units to influence soil characteristics outside of unit boundaries. This is true for the Leonia project area as well, however, an existing skid trail connecting Unit 1 to a landing and haul route on road 2612 is also included in the analysis. The existing disturbance from this skid trail is calculated into the detrimental disturbance estimates for Unit 1.

Vegetation management has occurred in the Leonia project area in the past. Some prior harvesting and ecosystem burning has occurred in some of the proposed treatment units and several areas surrounding the proposed treatment units. Although the intensity of current management differs from that which has historically occurred, and modern practices have allowed managers to reduce the impacts of certain activities, it is essential to examine existing soil quality and to ensure that soil productivity is maintained within desired and ecologically sustainable levels. In order to evaluate soil quality, a site-specific assessment of soil quality indicators has been conducted within the analysis area.

In each unit, the following indicators were examined:

• Percent detrimental soil disturbance: defined as a decrease in soil porosity, or increase in soil bulk density, that impairs site productivity;

• Percent Cover by category: Rock, Wood, Vegetation, & Litter;

• Down woody debris (tons per acre);

• Litter and duff depths;

• Percent of rock in the uppermost soil horizon, and;

• Noted slope stability issues, erosion concerns and other soil issues.

Two different accounting methods were used for roads within activity areas:

Leonia

3

(1) The Forest Plan Standard activity areas include proposed new system roads and existing system roads within proposed harvest units.

(2) The Region 1 Soil Quality Standard activity areas include only temporary and non-system roads within proposed harvest units.

For road calculations, an average 35-foot road width that includes a 14-foot wide running surface and cut and fill slopes was used. Already established ATV trails were estimated to have an average 20-foot wide disturbance including cut and fill slopes, which is generally a maximum since the trails are often no more than 6 to 8 feet wide.

Please see the “project file” for unit-specific field notes and specific methods used for sampling. The sampling protocol used was the Soil Disturbance Field Guide (Page-Dumroese et al 2009). This soil effects protocol is designed to conform to Regional standards and the Regional standards are designed to comply with the National Forest Management Act and conform to the SQS in the IPNF National Forest Plan.

The natural soil bio-physical resiliency of each unit was assessed to gain insight that will tie current conditions to proposed treatments and cumulative effects. Understanding the complex web of processes and elements that maintain how and why the soil is resilient to disturbance is key to sustained soil productivity.

Existing Condition Soils and Geology

The vegetation in the project area is very diverse. The north and east facing slopes have a good mixture of Douglas fir, ponderosa pine, larch, and lodgepole pine. The south and west facing slopes are mixed species dry coniferous forests and generally have more open grassy patches especially on ridges with shallow rocky soils. A good understory and forest floor were also present in all of the units and species included grasses and oceanspray. Rock outcrop and glacial erratic were also common in the project area but especially evident in and around units 7 and 8. Elevation ranges in the project area from 2,500 to 4,000 feet above sea level.

The parent geology in the Leonia project area is mainly Precambrian Belt meta-sediments that have been glaciated in the recent ice age. The landscape morphology is generally low to mid elevation glaciated mountain sideslopes over metasedimentary rocks. The recent glaciation has created benchy topography with steep pitches in many areas of the project. Throughout the landscape, the soil has developed in a mosaic pattern as dictated by topographic relief, vegetation, and aspect. Soils are generally light to dark brown to reddish brown ash-influenced silt loams of variable depth with differing amounts of angular or subangular gravels, cobbles, boulders, and bedrock. The soils are well drained.

Soil depth increases in drainages and on gentler sloping ground were volcanic ash-capped soils have settled to a greater depth. The volcanic material accumulated from several of the Cascade volcanoes eruptions with most of the ash originating from Mt. Mazama (Crater Lake) in Oregon about 6,800 years ago. Volcanic ash is enriched with organic matter and has a high water-holding capacity and provides an excellent germination substrate for many native plant species. Unfortunately, ash is extremely vulnerable to compaction, displacement and (when laid bare by disturbance) erosion. All soils are more sensitive to compaction disturbance when moist, but ash-capped soils are especially sensitive when moist. The subsoils are glacial tills and not as fertile –


4

they generally have a very high unsorted gravel and rock fragment content and are much thinner along ridges and where bedrock protrudes.

Soil Resources Within the Leonia project area, commercial thinning and salvage (sanitation) thinning has occurred in the past. Prescribed fire and wildfire have also occurred within the project area. Ground verification showed disturbance in every unit. Skid trails were found in all units and compaction was found associated with skid trails. Skid trails are the main disturbance in the project area, but there are some old mining areas located in the project area between units 6 and 8 and southeast of unit 4. Under the objectives outlined in the National Forest Management Act, the U.S. Forest Service has assembled the North American Long-Term Soil Productivity Research Program (LTSP). The LTSP has focused its attention on two soil properties that are most influenced by timber harvesting and most related to forest integrity within the constraints of climate and topography: (1) soil organic matter (soil productivity and nutrients), and (2) soil porosity (Powers 1998). These two issues are also the primary soil concerns for the Leonia project area. Soil organic matter is influenced by fire, silvicultural prescriptions, timber harvests, and decomposition and accumulation rates. Soil porosity is most influenced by mechanical compaction and a lack of bio-physical resiliency.

Soil Organic Matter

The importance of soil organic matter cannot be overstated (Okinarian 1996, Jurgensen et al. 1997). This organic component contains a large reserve of nutrients and carbon, and it is dynamically alive with microbial activity. The character of forest soil organic matter influences many critical ecosystem processes, such as the formation of soil structure, which in turn influences soil gas exchange, soil water infiltration rates and soil water-holding capacity. Soil organic matter is also the primary location of nutrient recycling and humus formation, which enhances soil cation exchange capacity and overall fertility. These processes have direct and tremendous effect on site productivity and sustainability. Organic matter is the one component of the soil resource that, if managed correctly, can actually be improved by human activity. Manipulation of the organic constituents of the soil may be the only practical tool available for mitigating effects of harvesting systems that remove standing trees and dead and down trees, or cause extensive soil disturbance. Of the many organic materials incorporated in a forest soil, the woody component is in many ways the most important. To protect the sustainable productivity of the forest soil, a continuous supply of organic materials must be provided, particularly in harsh environments (Harvey et al. 1987). Soil Wood Residue left after advanced brown-rot decay is a brown, crumbly mass composed largely of lignin. In healthy forest ecosystems, especially coniferous forests, the upper-most soil horizon contains a significant portion of brown-rotted wood residues. The sponge-like properties of advanced brown-rotted wood act as a moisture and nutrient sink. Because of the high lignin concentrations, and low carbohydrate rates, it persists in the forest for a long time (Blanchette

Leonia

5

1995). The soil wood in the Leonia project area is good in units 4, 5, 6, and 7 but is lacking in units 1, 2, 3, 8, and 9. Large woody debris will play a large role in recovery in this area. The lignin product of brown rot is tremendously important in the forests of the West. Since brown rot typically affects only heart wood, large trees allowed to die and decompose naturally in the woods serve as an important lignin source. Early logging techniques in many areas including some areas in the Leonia project area that bulldozed forest debris into piles and then burned the organics significantly reduced the occurrence of soil wood in our forests. Soil wood possesses one key characteristic that makes it important: the ability to hold water. This high water-holding capacity provides:

• Plant-available water, especially during the driest months; • Excellent underground habitat for all types of soil biological activity, and; • Appropriate conditions that cause a hub of mycorrhizae fungi activity.

Replacement of the woody soil components from a site that has lost such may take from 100 to 300 years (Harvey et al. 1981). Wood decay fungi in the coniferous forest ecosystem have three major roles:

• breaking down plant residues and recycling carbon to the soil or the atmosphere; • releasing mineral nutrients from plant residues and making the nutrients available to

living organisms, and; • producing the physical character of the soil matrix.

The outcomes of these processes promote soil water infiltration rates, soil water-holding capacity, cation exchange capacity, nutrient availability, nitrogen fixing activity, and habitat for mycorrhizae associations, to name a few.

Soil cover from organic matter (litter, vegetation or wood) averaged about 90 percent across all the units surveyed. The other 10 percent was rock cover and bare soil. Bare soil was greatest in units one and eight on rocky shallow soils. Average observed depth of litter (Table 1) was 1.5cm and duff was two cm for a total organic layer of around 3.5 cm. The average optimum level of fine organic matter is 21 to 30 percent (Graham et al. 1994), which equates to 2 to 6 cm of surface litter and humus. Optimum levels of fine organic matter relate to ectomycorrhizae fungus, which is a good indicator of healthy forest soil (Jain and Graham 2009). A root tight layer is present in all of the units and will help keep organic matter intact and compaction down during harvesting. Canopy covers were generally 60 to 100 %. Shade and vegetative cover are important factors in the recovery of these sites.

Currently, coarse woody debris (CWD) is relatively low throughout the entire project area (Table 1). Units 4, 5, 6, and 7 have adequate amounts of CWD between 7 and 18 tons per acre. Units 1, 2, 3, 8 and 9 are lacking sufficient CWD. Large diameter trees and snags are present in the project area for woody debris recruitment.

Soil Porosity Soil porosity refers to the amount and character of void space within the soil. In a “typical” soil approximately 50% of the soil volume is void space. Pore space is lost primarily through mechanical compaction. Three fundamental processes are negatively impacted by compromised soil pore space:

• Gas exchange;


6

• Soil water infiltration rates; and • Water holding capacity.

Gas Exchange Soil oxygen is fundamental to all soil biologic activity. Roots, soil fauna, and fungi all respire, using oxygen while releasing carbon dioxide. When gas exchange is compromised, biologic activity is also compromised. Maintaining appropriate soil biologic activity is paramount when considering long-term forest vitality. Soil Water Infiltration Rates Severely compacted soils do not allow appropriate water infiltration, leading to overland flow and associated erosion, sediment delivery, spring flooding, and low summer flows. Some recent advances in logging technology and mechanization have exacerbated the problem, as feller bunchers must travel to each tree and slash is often piled with excavator type, tracked grapple equipment. Skid trails are the longest lasting detrimental disturbance, where many machines travel over the same route. Activities on moist soils are especially damaging. Work on dry or frozen soils maintains much more of a soil’s natural ability to quickly restore pore spaces. In the Leonia project area, compaction (Table 1) was found on existing skid trails and old benched roads in all the units. The skid trails found are healing and organic matter covers the skid trails. The center of the skid trails have shrubs growing on them. The percent of coarse fragments (Table 1) is a measure of rock content in the surface six inches of mineral soil. Rock content is an indicator of the susceptibility of compaction on a specific soil type. Rock content over 35% will greatly reduce the effect of mechanical compaction. Generally coarse fragments in the Leonia project area are less than 35 percent because of the low coarse fragments in ash capped soils, but there are small pockets where coarse fragments are above 35 percent. Areas with coarse fragments less than 35 percent with more ash content are more susceptible to compaction. Almost all the soils within the proposed units are ash capped and more susceptible to compaction. Moisture is also an important factor in determining susceptibility to compaction, especially on finer textured soils. Dry soils are less likely to compact and have lower risk of compaction than moist soils (Welke and Fryles 2005). Even under moist conditions, coarse textured soils can compact. Observed detrimental disturbance due to compaction was associated with old primary skid trails, landings, and a few user created trails. Average areal extent of detrimental compaction observed within ground-based treatment units was about 3% (within a general range of 2-7%).

Leonia

7

Table 1: Current Conditions at Leonia

Unit #

Current Down Woody Debris

(T/Ac.)

Coarse Fragments

Total Organics

(cm)

Current Detrimental Disturbance

Slope Aspect Texture Parent Material Root tight

1 4 10-20% 3.8 1% 20-50% (short

pitches) W silt loam ash capped Belt

sediments Y/N

2 5 10-15% 2.6 5% 10-30% S/SE silt loam ash capped Belt sediments Y

3 3 25-45% 2.8 3% 50-80% S/E silt loam ash capped Belt sediments N/Y

4 12 5-15% 4.2 7% 10-30% E silt loam ash capped Belt sediments Y

5 17 5% 3.7 6% 10-35% silt loam ash capped Belt sediments Y

6 18 5% 3.2 7% 10-40% E/S silt loam ash capped Belt sediments Y

7 7 5-15% 5.0 3% 0-25% E/S silt loam ash capped Belt sediments Y

8 4 5-65% 3.2 2% 0-20% varied silt loam ash capped Belt sediments Y

9 1 10% 2.8 7% 10-25% SE silt loam ash capped Belt sediments Y

Nutrients The Intermountain Forest Tree Nutrition Cooperative (IFTNC) has concerns that potassium might be limited on some types of parent material, specifically the Belt meta-sediments. Under most natural circumstances, potassium returns to the soil when the tree dies. Unlike many other soil nutrients, potassium is derived primarily from the underlying geology, which, within the Leonia proposed units, is derived from glaciated metasedimentary parent materials in the majority of the units with igneous intrusions located in all of unit 5 and the eastern portion of unit 4. The IFTNC continues to research potassium contents within tree species and different rock types in order to establish specific minimum thresholds for retention and effects of potassium on tree growth and resistance to root diseases (Mika 2005; Shaw 2005; Garrison-Johnston et al. 2007). Until these minimum thresholds are developed through research, the Idaho Panhandle National Forests are using management recommendations from the IFTNC as a guideline for maintaining sufficient potassium on a site. These measures have been incorporated into the project design features. Whole-tree yarding and removal of treetops can lead to the direct loss of potassium (Morris and Miller 1994). On some sites, 45 percent of the available potassium is detained in trees, with the remainder being held in subordinate vegetation, forest floor, and soil pools. Within the trees, about 85 percent of the potassium is held in the branches, twigs, and foliage (Garrison and Moore 1998; Moore et al. 2004). It is therefore vital to recycle as many nutrients as possible before


8

removal, which can be accomplished by overwintering small-scale debris to leach out potassium and other nutrients (Baker et al. 1989; Barber and Van Lear 1984; Edmonds 1987; Garrison and Moore 1998; Laskowski et al. 1995; and Palviainen et al. 2004). In addition to leaving branches in the forest for a time, promoting a healthy soil organic component is perhaps the best way to maintain and enhance plant-available nutrients. Landtypes and Hazard Ratings Eleven landtypes have been identified in activity units for the proposed action. Detailed descriptions and characteristics of each are located in the soils section of the project file. Hazard ratings have also been compiled and are broken into subcategories of mass failure, soil productivity, surface erosion, subsurface erosion, and landtype sensitivity (Table 2); each is rated as low or moderate (none of the landtypes have any high ratings) for a particular landtype as displayed in the following table. Table 2: Landtype characteristics associated with activity areas

Mass Failure Potential

Erosion Hazard Sensitive Landtypes Soil Productivity

Potential

Low High Low Mod Low Mod High Low Mod

Alt 2 Acres 596 19 596 19 527 69 19 362 253

% of area 97 3 97 3 86 11 3 59 41

Alt 3 Acres 222 0 222 0 186 36 0 87 135

% of area 100 0 100 0 84 16 0 39 61

Mass Failure Removal of forest canopy and cover from either clearcutting or wildland fire increases landslide occurrence (Gray and Megahan 1981; Megahan et al. 1978). This is primarily due to root decay, soil disturbance, increased snow accumulation and altered melting rates, and soil water increases from reduced interception and transpiration. Mass failures detrimentally disturb soils because organic matter, the productive ash layer, and even subsurface layers of the soil can be carried down slope during a failure. Ninety seven percent of landtypes in the activity area have low mass failure potential and three percent have high mass failure potential for alternative 2. All soils in alternative 3 have low mass failure potential. Landtypes that exhibit high mass failure potential are located primarily in unit 7 above the draw and start of a small stream. No evidence of slumping or pistol butt trees was found in this area, the slope is stable at this time. Little research has been conducted to determine if partial cutting affects landslide rates. Megahan et al. (1978) found that landslide occurrence increased only slightly when overstory canopy was reduced from 100% to 11%, but increased dramatically when canopy closure went below 11%. They also found that crown cover from shrubs affected landslide occurrence after 80 percent crown removal and indicated that landslide occurrence is more sensitive to shrub than tree crown removal. It will be very important to keep cover percentages high in areas with high mass failure potential.

Leonia

9

Surface Erosion Surface erosion potential is a rating of the relative susceptibility of exposed soils to sheet and rill erosion. Within the proposed activity areas, 97 percent of soils have low surface erosion potential and three percent have moderate erosion potential in alternative 2 and all soils have low surface erosion risk in alternative 3. The potential for soil erosion concerns is not so much associated with harvest treatments as with existing roads (Cacek 1998). The dominant processes in roaded areas are surface erosion from bare soil areas of roads, including the cutslope, fillslope, and travelway. Revegetation of cut slopes and fill slopes is often difficult due to lack of soil moisture, organic material, low productivity potential, and desiccation of seeds and seedlings, especially on south-facing slopes. On moist slopes, revegetation efforts are more successful since erosion of road cut slopes and fill slopes is generally lower. Road erosion and sediment yield usually decline after construction (Jones 2000; Switalski et al. 2004) but can provide a chronic, long-term source of sediment to streams. Periodic large pulses of erosion may occur during intense water yield and overland flow events in interaction with road drainage systems. Roads and their associated impacts are analyzed in detail in the Specialist’s Report on Hydrology. Landtype Sensitivity Landtype sensitivity is the relative probability of eroded soil reaching a stream channel and becoming sediment. Within the proposed activity areas (alternative 2), 86 percent of soils have low landtype sensitivity, 11 percent have moderate landtype sensitivity and three percent have high landtype sensitivity. In alternative 3, 84 percent of the soils have low sensitivity and 16 percent have moderate sensitivity. The moderate sensitivity is associated with moderately incised draws at high elevations on steep dry aspects located in portions of units 3, 4 and 5. The high sensitivity landtype is associated with shallowly incised moist draws located in portions of unit 7. Roads are considered a potential source for sediment delivery and are analyzed in detail in the Specialist’s Report for Hydrology. Soil Productivity Soil productivity is the annual ability of the soil to produce plant mass. Soil productivity is low on 59 percent of the treatment area and moderate in 41 percent of the treatment units in alternative 2. In alternative 3, 39 percent of the soils have low productivity and 61 percent moderate. Reduced productivity is mainly due to drier south- or southwest aspects and shallow, steep, and rocky soils at higher elevations and along ridge lines. Soil productivity can be tied to an important duff and litter layer that protects soil, provides nutrients, reduces erosion potential, and maintains soil moisture. Litter prevents the breakdown of soil aggregates and reduces the velocity of any overland flow, thereby reducing the erosion potential (Beschta et al. 2004). When an area is burned, however, some drier sites may be consumed at a severity level that removes all of the protective duff and litter layers, even under managed fire conditions. Low soil productivity potential is associated with units 1, the east half of unit 2, 3, the west half of unit 4, a small portion of unit 5, 6, 7 and 8. These areas have very shallow soils where bedrock is near the surface. Extra caution should be employed in making sure organic matter is not disturbed within these units to ensure maximum soil productivity following treatments.


10

Environmental Consequences Methodology Soil resources on the project area have been reviewed using soil survey data, data in GIS, and field reconnaissance. Most of the units have been field reviewed by the soil scientist to verify mapping, identify areas where soil productivity may be affected by proposed actions, and examine current disturbance on site. Best Management Practices (BMPs) and resource protection measures for soil protection in harvest units and along road segments are based on field data. Effects analyses were based on the proposed silvicultural prescriptions and fuel treatments.

In determining a detrimental change in productivity, a 15% reduction in inherent soil productivity potential will be used as a basis for setting threshold values. This 15% reduction is generally considered a reduction of productivity over 15% of an area. Threshold values would apply to measurable or observable soil properties or conditions that are sensitive to change. The threshold values, along with aerial extent limits, would serve as an early warning signal of reduced soil productive capacity, where changes to management practices or rehabilitation measures may be warranted.

Management activities have potential to cause various types and degrees of disturbance. Soil disturbance is categorized into compaction, displacement, puddling, severe burning, and erosion. Direction was established that properties, measures, and thresholds relative to these disturbance types would be developed at the Regional and Forest levels, known as Soil Quality Standards.

Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis The analysis area or bounding area, for direct, indirect, and cumulative effects for the soil resource includes the proposed harvest units. This is the area that is expected to be directly impacted by any silvicultural or fuel reduction activities. The Leonia project area is used to qualitatively discuss the past activities outside of proposed treatment units. Please see the hydrology resource report for cumulative watershed effects. The timeframe used for analysis was the past 100 years, and all activities visible in proposed treatment units were considered.

Alternative 1 – No Action No adverse impacts to soils would occur. Recovery of existing impacted soils would continue through natural means (freeze/thaw cycles, root penetration into compacted soils, etc). Litter and duff accumulations would continue to increase, unless removed by wildfire. Overall, trends towards increased soil productivity on those units with existing levels of detrimental soil disturbance would occur, but gradually. No cumulative effects are anticipated.

Alternatives 2 (Proposed Action) and 3

Features Designed to Protect Soil and Site Productivity 1. Ground-based equipment for harvest and site prep activities:

a. Ground-based operations would be limited to slopes equal to or less than 35%.

Leonia

11

b. Only approved skid trail locations would be allowed and would not exceed 15 percent of the unit area.

c. Where terrain is conducive, trails would be spaced at maximum distance, except where converging at intersections.

d. Equipment would not be operated under saturated conditions and in moist or wet depression areas.

e. Work only when soil is dry, frozen, or snow-packed. Some simplified guidelines for these conditions include:

a. Stop work when trenching is detected. If a fairly strong clod can be formed with the soil in the topmost 6 inches, then the site is too moist for work.

b. Winter harvest on Snow or Frozen Soil: 0 inches of frozen soil Need 10 inches of machine-packed snow

2 inches of frozen soil Need 6 inches of machine-packed snow

4 inches of frozen soil No snow cover necessary

f. Only areas that are reasonably accessed by ground-based equipment would be treated, and excavation to facilitate access would be preapproved and obliterated following use. Excavation may be necessary for short distances on main skid trails in Unit 1 and 6.

g. To minimize disturbance (soil compaction or displacement), practices such as skidding and mechanical harvesting would occur on existing skid trails and over slash when available. Units would be designed to utilize directional falling.

h. The leading end of logs would be suspended during skidding.

2. Skyline Yarding: The leading end of logs would be suspended during yarding.

3. The Intermountain Forest Tree Nutrition Cooperative assembled data suggesting that nutrient levels may be conserved in treatment units by allowing logging slash to stay on site through a wet season of 4 to 6 months not including June through September. By leaving sufficient levels of wood on site, long-term soil productivity would be protected.

4. Nutrient sources such as needles and limbs would be maintained on site by allowing slash to remain for one wet season prior to all slash disposal treatments (Intermountain Forest Tree Nutrition Cooperative, Garrison and Moore 1998) except where tops would be yarded.

5. Recommendations in Managing Coarse Woody Debris in Forests of the Rocky Mountains (Graham et al. 1994) would be used to retain sufficient levels of coarse woody debris on site after slash disposal. Special attention to meet coarse woody debris levels would be given to Units 1, 8, and 9 which are currently low. The following recommendations would be used in prescriptions:

Recommended Coarse Woody Debris Retention*

Site Conditions Coarse Woody Debris Drier to dry end of moist sites 7-14 tons/acre Moist sites 17-33 tons/acre

*(Graham et al. 1994)


12

7. Prescribed burning would be done when soil moisture in the upper surface inch of mineral soil has a moisture content of 25% or more by weight or 60 to 100 percent duff moisture (IPNF Updated Soil Guidelines 1998).

8. Grapple-piling would occur on existing skid trails and over slash when available. See additional design criteria for ground-based equipment above.

9. Silvicultural and burning prescriptions would retain sufficient levels of coarse woody debris on site after slash disposal (Graham and others 1994).

Direct and Indirect Effects Proposed activities could have long- and short-term direct negative effects on forest soils. However, by implementing the mitigations prescribed here and shown in Chapter 2 of the EA the project would meet the Region 1 Soil Quality Standards as shown below, and would therefore not irreversibly damage the soil resource. Effects include:

• Compaction; • Rutting & displacement; • Severely burned soils; • Degradation of the litter layer and soil organic matter caused by increased decomposition

rates and lack of appropriate annual litter contributions; • Lack of coarse woody debris; • Possible weed incursions.

Timber Harvest Effects from past logging operations are detectable up to 80 or more years. Newer logging systems create less soil disturbance. Proposed activities use techniques that maintain or promote natural soil bio-physical resiliency. The effect of proposed activities should be relatively short compared to techniques used in the past. If all natural elements and processes remain intact, we can expect soil impacts to be nearly undetectable within 20 to 40 years based on professional judgment and experience on these soil types. Freeze-thaw cycles, soil organisms, and root growth will help alleviate compaction and rutting. Soil displacement may last longer, but design features minimize soil displacement. Proposed treatment effects on the soil would be minimized by using techniques and restoration strategies outlined in the mitigation and monitoring section of this report as well as by following the design criteria. The amount of expected detrimental disturbance would vary greatly with proposed treatments. Ground based tractor harvest activities are proposed on 476 acres (222 acres in alternative 3) in all units except unit 3. Ground based equipment would be restricted to operate only during dry or frozen soil conditions. Skyline systems would be used on units with slopes greater than 35 percent and these include unit 3 which is 138 acres (No acres in alternative 3). Detrimental disturbance levels were estimated using Niehoff (2002) as well as ground truthing, and take into account best management practices described in Niehoff (2002).

Leonia

13

Harvest operations remove biomass and site organic matter and thus affect nutrient cycling. Generally, nutrient losses are proportional to the volume of biomass removed from a site. Nutrients are lost during harvesting by removing the stored nutrients in trees, and additional nutrients are lost if the litter layer and woody debris are removed. Table 3 illustrates expected effects based on a variety of proposed treatments. The level of soil disturbance increase depends primarily on the amount or lack of existing skid trails. Activity units that have had little prior disturbance would show a greater incremental increase in potential detrimental disturbance than those units that contain a network of already existing skid trails. Proposed skyline units that were previously yarded with the same logging system have little to no additional impacts because existing corridors are generally reused. Table 3: Potential detrimental disturbance coefficients used for various logging and prescribed fire scenarios.

Treatment Detrimental Disturbance Coefficients

Tractor with grapple pile or underburning 13% Skyline with underburning 2%

Fuel Treatments

Activity-fuel treatments that may affect soils include approximately 19 acres of grapple piling in alternatives 2 and 3 and 596 acres of underburning (203 acres in alternative 3). See Table 5 for a list of fuel treatments by unit. Severely burned soils can become water repellent and lead to increased erosion, runoff, and/or reduced productivity. Prescribed burning would be done when soil moisture in the upper surface inch of mineral soil has a moisture content of 25% or more by weight; or 60 to 100 percent duff moisture; or when post-burn conditions would result in no more than 25 to 30 percent bare soils (excluding natural conditions) within an activity area (Design Criteria – EA Chapter 2). Past monitoring has shown that burning under these conditions has minimal to no impacts on soil productivity (Niehoff 1985; Niehoff 2002; USDA Forest Service 2001b, 2002, 2003, 2005, and 2006; S-13).

Design features also require piling machinery to utilize existing trails and stay on slopes less than 40 percent to prevent soil disturbance in excess of guidelines. Design features for grapple piling require operation of equipment over slash mats, preferentially re-using existing skid trails if present. Forest Plan monitoring and research (Eliasson and Wästerlund 2007; Han 2006; Niehoff 2002; USDA Forest Service 2001b, 2002-2004) indicates reduced soil disturbance if equipment is operated on a slash mat.

Only areas that could be reasonably accessed would be treated and no excavation would occur to facilitate entry for grapple piling. The residual logging debris that would not be grapple piled and burned would increase potential fire intensity and severity for a few years until snow could compress the material and the fine organics would decompose.

Prescribed fire can increase available nitrogen for one to two years following (Choromanska and DeLuca 2002). Burning slash piles could create extremely high temperatures in concentrated areas and would lead to volatilization of nitrogen, loss of phosphorus and potassium (DeBano


14

1981). If litter layers and organic matter is kept intact throughout the rest of the stand, nutrient losses would be minimal from burning slash and would be localized. Nitrogen-fixing plants can colonize sites following fire and help restore N in the ecosystem (Newland and DeLuca 2000, Jurgensen et. al. 1997). Following fire, soil erosion can increase, which could also reduce the nutrient pool (Megahan 1990). Generally, if plants colonize sites following fire, nutrient levels can reach pre-fire levels quickly (Certini 2005). Charcoal deposited following fire also adds carbon to the soil (DeLuca and Aplet 2007).

Biomass Removal

Retrieving biomass from the forest is a slash management technique associated with either ground-based logging or skyline systems. Pre-commercial hand or mechanized thinning may also include a component of biomass removal.

Removing biomass has three direct effects on forest soils:

• Removing organic matter;

• Removing nutrient capital; and

• Physical soil disturbance (compaction, rutting etc).

Little long-term detrimental disturbance will result if the appropriate amount of woody debris remains on site, and the litter and duff layers are protected. Nutrients can also be lost with biomass removal. However, many of the most important nutrients may leach out of green foliage if slash is left on site through the wet season. Managers plan to leave slash on the ground for at least one wet season. Physical soil disturbance associated with biomass removal should be moderate. For ground-based thinning and skidding, trails developed by logging would be reused for biomass removal.

Temporary Roads

Approximately 2 miles of temporary road is proposed for this project to access units 1, 3, 7 and 8. The temporary road will cross through soils that are mapped as sensitive, but ground verification showed that this area is stable and temporary road placement will not affect these soils negatively. The temporary road crosses through unit 1 and could add approximately 0.7 acres of soil disturbance. Rehabilitation will be used to recover this area as soon as harvest operations finish. Recovery will likely be slower than other harvest related disturbance given the high traffic. Current temporary road construction practices address the potential negative impacts with stringent rehabilitation efforts where temporary road templates are restored to contour. Topsoil is conserved and replaced where possible to further recovery. Road fill is covered in slash for biological and site amelioration. A portion of the temporary road may not be fully recontoured because of rock blasting. Hydrological recovery is expected within the first 10 years with soil infiltration rates lower than natural forest rates (Luce 1997; Foltz and Maillard 2003). For the long term, infiltration rates improve over time as freeze/thaw and plant roots improve soil porosity though rates would remain lower than adjacent natural forest soil (Switalski et al. 2004). Soil biological function restores as forest floor and native plant communities returns. .

Leonia

15

To summarize, by maintaining organic matter and native ground cover on at least 85 percent of the site by limiting disturbance to 15% or less of the unit area, nutrient cycling and availability should not be altered and soil productivity would be maintained. Leaving slash on site will be extremely important in meeting the standards, although slash should be left for CWD at the low end of the CWD recommendations in order to reduce fuels in the project area. The project design features prescribed here will meet the Region 1 Soil Quality Standards, the established standard for protecting soil resources, and will not result in irreversible damage to soils.

Cumulative Effects Cumulative effects include a discussion of the combined, incremental effects of human activities. For activities to be considered cumulative their effects need to overlap in both time and space with those of the proposed actions. For the soil resource, the area for consideration is the unit because affects on soils are site specific.

Region 1 soil quality standards would be met when combining the existing and predicted impacts of activities so that long-term cumulative soil impacts may not affect more than 15% of the activity areas (Table 5). All proposed units would meet this standard and result in potential soil impacts that could affect up to 69 acres of the 615 acres proposed for treatment in the proposed action.

Forest Plan standards would be met when existing and predicted impacts plus system roads within the proposed activity areas do not exceed 20% (see project file). All units in the proposed action would meet this standard. Units 2 and 3 have portions of FS Road 2111 through them and road 314UH is located in units 4 and 5. Road 314UH will be decommissioned following treatment in these units. Potential soil impacts including system roads could affect up to 80 acres of the 615 acres proposed for treatment in the proposed action (Table 4).

Table 4. Existing Detrimental Soil Disturbance from System Roads

Unit Acres of Existing

Road % Disturbance

2 0.9 1.5%

3 1.3 1.0%

4 1.3 2.5%

5 0.8 4.0%

Cumulative effects (Table 5) of timber harvesting and underburning on units with little or no signs of previous disturbance would experience the least if any cumulative effects from harvesting. This represents 64 percent of the harvest units. The other 36 percent of the harvest units have some signs of disturbance between three and seven percent total. Approximately 69 acres would have detrimental soil disturbance following treatment (11 percent). Units where ground-based logging and thinning are proposed would likely experience short term soil productivity losses. Employing all appropriate Project Design Features and strategies would maintain natural biophysical resiliency and allow soils to meet Regional soil standards. Where


16

existing skid trails exist, they would be reused. This would not create new disturbance; therefore, potential disturbance is not directly added to existing disturbance. New disturbance overlaps existing disturbance, so if the potential disturbance from ground based harvesting and underburning is 13%, but for example in a unit with 5% existing disturbance, only 8% new disturbance would occur.

Leonia

17

Table 5. Summary of effects by unit

Unit Activity

Area Acres

Proposed Treatment

Proposed Logging System

Proposed Fuels

Treatment

Existing Detrimental Disturbance

Potential Disturbance from Proposed Activities (Alt 2) Potential Disturbance (Alt 3)

Additional Disturbance

from proposed activities

Estimated Total

DSD %

Estimated Acres

Additional Disturbance

from Proposed Activities

Estimated Total

DSD %

Estimated Acres

1+ 125 GS/CT Tractor UB 1% 13% 14% 18 - - 2 60 GS/CT Tractor UB 5% 8% 13% 8 8% 13% 8

3 138 GS/CT Skyline UB 3% 2% 5% 18 - - 4 52 GS/CT Tractor UB 7% 6% 13% 7 6% 13% 7 5 19 Shelterwood Tractor GP 6% 7% 13% 2 7% 13% 2

6 47 GS/CT Tractor UB 7% 6% 13% 6 6% 13% 6 7 81 GS/CT Tractor UB 3% 10% 13% 10 - -

8 48 GS/CT Tractor UB 2% 11% 13% 6 - - 9 45 GS/CT Tractor UB 7% 6% 13% 6 6% 13% 6

Total Acres 615 80 24

*GS = group selection CT = commercial thin UB = underburn, ^ Results include existing conditions. Refer to Table 3 for coefficients used to predict potential detrimental disturbance for proposed logging and slash treatment scenarios including burning and piling. The level of disturbance increase also depends on the amount or lack of existing skid trails. Activity units that have had little prior disturbance will show a greater incremental increase in potential detrimental disturbance than those units that already contain a network of existing skid trails. Little to no increase in disturbance is expected there because equipment would re-use existing skid trails and move on slash mats whenever possible. + unit one includes 0.7 acres of temporary road which is included in the projected additional disturbance and approximately 0.5 acres of additional disturbance included for an existing skid trail to skid logs from Unit 1 to a landing on FSR 2612.

Resource Name

18

Road Maintenance and Decommissioning All developed roads built in the past have a lasting effect on soil productivity due to compaction and displacement. Their maintenance for residence access, recreation, and vegetation management calls for ongoing use, which results in compaction and displacement through the project area. Road maintenance includes culvert installation, blading, and brushing, and typically improves drainage and decreases erosion from water channeling down the road surface in the long run. For a detailed analysis and information on roads and related issues, please see Specialist’s Report on Hydrology. Road 314UH is proposed for decommissioning (road will be blocked but not decompacted). Portions of unit 4 and 5 will be affected by this closure. For the long term, infiltration rates may improve somewhat over time as freeze/thaw and plant roots improve soil porosity, though rates would likely remain lower than adjacent natural forest soil. The overall decommissioning of roads is a very strong benefit for soil productivity from a larger watershed perspective. Recreation

Disturbance from general motorized use and recreational access has been occurring and will continue throughout the project area indefinitely. We anticipate no changes in the existing recreation profile. Other recreational activities that occur off the developed roads, such as the gathering of miscellaneous forest products and hunting, are occurring in the project area. Closing skid trails in this area following treatment should prevent this occurrence and should not have additional effects on soils in the project area.

Four-wheel and two-wheel motor cycle use is rapidly increasing throughout many Forest Service lands. A portion of this use is off-road and illegal, sometimes causing detrimental soil disturbance. Forest thinning can increase illegal off-road activity, as sight distances increase; the temptation to illegally travel cross-country becomes great. Leaving an appropriate amount of woody debris on the ground greatly discourages cross-country motorized use. Cumulative effects to soils from recreational vehicle use are not expected.

Noxious Weeds

Noxious weed monitoring and treatment would occur as needed and would follow guidelines established in the Bonners Ferry Weeds ROD (USDA, 1995). Effects to soil resources were analyzed in the document and its adaptive strategy. No additional effects to soils beyond what was analyzed for and disclosed in the EIS are expected to occur.

Grazing

Grazing - No past, present, or foreseeable cattle grazing occurs on Forest Service land within the activity areas (and project area).

Cumulative effects of Ongoing and Reasonably Foreseeable Activities: The North Zone Roadside Salvage Timber Sale directly affects units 2, 4, 5, 9, and 6. No logging equipment would be leaving the already existing road surface so that no additional disturbances to soils besides the falling and winching of trees are anticipated. The other known ongoing and

Leonia

19

foreseeable activities in the area would not overlap in space with the current proposed activities and therefore would not have cumulative soil impacts.

Regulatory Consistency

Soil disturbing management practices will strive to maintain at least 80 percent of the activity area in a condition of acceptable productivity potential for trees and other managed vegetation. Unacceptable productivity potential exists when soil has been detrimentally compacted, displaced, puddled, or severely burned as determined in the project analysis.


All alternatives would comply with this standard in all proposed activity areas. This is including system roads within harvest units.

Projects should strive to maintain sufficient large woody debris to maintain site productivity. Large woody debris is essential for maintenance of sufficient micro-organism populations.


The proposed action would comply with this standard because existing CWD levels in units 4, 5, 6, and 7 are already elevated. Large woody debris retention would follow the research guidelines of Graham et al. (1994) to ensure the maintenance of site productivity. Coarse woody debris levels in Units 1, 2, 3, 8 and 9 that currently contain reduced amounts in the activity area would be increased by retaining logging residue to meet appropriate levels after harvest activities are completed.

In the event of whole tree logging, provision for maintenance of sufficient nutrient capital should be made in the project analysis.


The proposed action would comply with this standard. In commercially thinned units, a canopy cover of 50 to 60 percent would be retained and allow for a continuous input of nutrients through needle-cast and coarse woody debris, maintaining soil productivity. In addition, breakage of fines and foliage from trees as they are moved to the landing are also available. Time restrictions for leaving material before grapple piling and underburning are also in place to promote leaching of nutrients, especially potassium.

Design new activities that do not create detrimental soil conditions on more than 15 percent of an activity area. In areas where less than 15 percent detrimental soil conditions exist from prior activities, the cumulative detrimental effect of the current activity following project implementation and restoration must not exceed 15 percent. In areas where more than 15 percent detrimental soil conditions exist from prior activities, the cumulative detrimental effects from project implementation and restoration should not exceed the conditions prior to the planned activity and should move toward a net improvement in soil quality.

Region 1 Soil Quality Standards

Resource Name

20

The proposed activities would comply with Regional Soil Quality Standards (USDA 1999c) related to detrimentally disturbed soils because none of the proposed units are expected to surpass disturbance limits of 15%.

Organic matter layer thickness would be retained as appropriate for local conditions.

All alternatives would comply with this standard because the currently satisfactory levels of local organic matter would be maintained. Existing organic matter would not be diminished by harvest activities but organic matter recruitment would likely be less in those units identified for regeneration.

Large woody debris would be maintained at recommended volumes (Graham et al. 1994) in each proposed activity area.

All alternatives would comply with this standard because the coarse woody debris in units with satisfactory levels would be maintained. Coarse woody debris levels in Units 1, 2, 3, 8 and 9 would be increased by logging residue to meet appropriate levels after management activities are completed.

References Adams, M.B. 1999. Acidic deposition and sustainable forest management in the central Appalachians, USA. Forest Ecology and Management 122: 17-28.

Baker, T.G., G.M. Will and G.R. Oliver. 1989. Nutrient Release from Silvicultural Slash: Leaching and Decomposition of Pinus radiata Needles. Forest Ecology and Management 27: 53- 60. Barber, B.L., and D.H. Van Lear. 1984. Weight loss and nutrient dynamics in decomposing woody Loblolly pine logging slash. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 48:906-910.

Blanchette, R.A. 1995. Degradation of the lignocellulose complex in wood. Can. J. Bot. 73 (Suppl. 1): S999-S1010.

Beschta, R.L., J.J. Rhodes, J.B. Kaufman, and others. 2004. Post-fire management on forested public lands of the western United States. Cons. Biol. 18(4):957-967. Brown, J.K., E.D. Reinhardt, and K.A. Kramer. 2003. Coarse woody debris: managing benefits and fire hazard in the recovering forest. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-105, July, 16 pp. Cacek, C.C. 1989. The relationship of mass wasting to timber harvest activities in the Lightning Creek basin. Master Thesis, Eastern Washington University. pp. ii-iv.

Certini, G. 2005. Effects of fire on properties of forest soils: a review. Oecologia 143:1-10.

Choromanska, U. and T.H. DeLuca. 2002. Microbial activity and nitrogen mineralization in forest mineral soils following heating: evaluation of post-fire effects. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 34: 263-271.

Leonia

21

DeBano, L.F. 1981. Water repellant soils: a state-of-the-art. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-46, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Exp. Stn., USDA Forest Service, Berkeley, CA. 21 pp.

de Dios Benavides-Soloria, J., and L.H. MacDonald. 2005. Measurement and prediction of post-fire erosion at the hillslope scale, Colorado Front Range. Int. J. of Wildland Fire 14:457-474. DeLuca, T.H., and G.H. Aplet. 2008. Charcoal and carbon storage in forest soils of the Rocky Mountain West. Front. Ecol. Environ. 6(1): 18-24

Edmonds, R.L. 1987. Decomposition rates and nutrient dynamics in small-diameter woody litter in four forest ecosystems in Washington, USA. Can. J. For. Res. 17: p. 499-509.

Eliasson, L., and I. Wästerlund. 2007. Effects of slash reinforcement of strip roads on rutting and soil compaction on a moist fine-grained soil. For. Ecol. and Mgmt. 252:118-123.

Foltz, R.B, and E. Maillard. 2003. Infiltration rates on abandoned road-stream crossings. Paper Number 035009. ASAE Annual International Meeting. Las Vegas, Nevada. 11p.

Garrison, M. T. and J. A. Moore. 1998. Nutrient management: a summary and review. In: Intermountain Forest Tree Nutrition Garrison-Johnston, M. T., J. A. Moore and G. J. Niehoff. 2001. Cooperative Supplemental Report 98: 5.

Garrison-Johnston, M. 2003. Geologic controls on tree nutrition and forest health in the Inland Northwest. Presented at GSA Ann. Mtng, Seattle, WA. 9 pp.

Garrison-Johnston, M., T.M. Shaw, L.R. Johnson, and P.G. Mika. 2004. Intermountain Forest Tree Nutrition Cooperative, Presentation at the Potassium Meeting, IPNF, Coeur d’Alene, ID, April 23.

Garrison-Johnston, M.T., R. Lewis, and L.R. Johnson. 2007. Northern Idaho and Western Montana nutrition guidelines by rock type. IFTNC, Univ. of ID, Moscow, ID. 109 p. Graham, R.T., A.E. Harvey, M.F. Jurgenson, T.B. Jain, J.R. Tonn, and D.S. Page-Dumroese. 1994. Managing coarse woody debris in forests of the Rocky Mountains. Res. Pap. INT-RP-477. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 13p. Gray, D.H., and W.F. Megahan. 1981. Forest vegetation removal and slope stability in the Idaho batholith. Res. Paper INT-271. May. 23 pp.

Grier, C.C., K.M. Lee, N.M. Nadkarni, G.O. Klock, and P.J. Edgerton. 1989. Productivity of forest of the United States and its relation to soil and site factors and management practices: A review. PNW-GTR-222. United Stated Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, Oregon.

Han, S.K. 2006. Impacts on soil from cut-to-length and whole tree harvesting. M.S. Thesis, Univ. of ID., Moscow, 43 p.

Resource Name

22

Han, H.S., D. Page-Dumroese, S.K. Han, and J. Tirocke. 2006. Effect of slash, machine passes, and soil wetness on soil strength in a cut-to-length harvest. USDA FS Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-194. 10 pp. Harvey, A.E., M.F. Jurgensen, M.J. Larsen, and R.T. Graham. 1987. Decaying organic materials and soil quality in the inland northwest: a management opportunity. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, General Technical Report INT-225. Ogden, UT. 20p Harvey, A.E., M.J. Larsen, and M.F. Jurgensen 1981. Rate of woody residue incorporation into Northern Rocky Mountain forest soils. USDA, USFS, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Research Paper INT-282.

Jain, T.B., and R.T. Graham. 2009. Biomass removal within the context of silvicultural applications. USDA RMRS PPT presentation.

Jones, J.A. 2000. Hydrologic processes and peak discharge response to forest removal, regrowth, and roads in 19 small experimental basins, western Cascades, Oregon. Wat. Resources Res. 36:2621-2642.

Jurgensen, M.F., A.E. Harvey, R.T. Graham, D.S. Page-Dumrose, J.R. Tonn, M.J. Larson, and T.B. Jain. 1997. Impacts of timber harvests on soil organic matter, nitrogen, productivity and health of inland northwest forests. Forest Science 43: 234-251.

Laskowski, R., B. Berg, M, Johansson, and C. McClaugherty. 1995. Release pattern for potassium from decomposing forest needle and leaf litter. Long-term decomposition in a Scots pine forest. Ca. J. Bot. 73:2019-2027.

Luce, C.H. 1997. Effectiveness of road ripping in restoring infiltration capacity of forest roads. Restoration Ecology 5 (3):265-270.

Mann, L.K., D.W. Johnson, D.C. West, D.W. Cole, J.W. Hornbeck, C.W. Martin, H. Riekerk, C.T. Smith, W.T. Swank, L.M. Tritton, and D.H. Van Lear. 1988. Effects of whole-tree and stem-only clearcutting on postharvest hydrologic losses, nutrient capital, and regrowth. Forest Science 34: 412-428.

Megahan, W.F. 1990. Erosion and site productivity in western-Montana forest ecosystems. In: Proceedings, Management and Productivity of Western-Montana Forest Soils. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-280. USDA, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. pp. 146-150. Megahan, W.F., N.F. Day, and T.M. Bliss. 1978. Landslide occurrence in the western and central northern Rocky Mountain physiographic province in Idaho. In: Forest soils and land use, Proc. 5th North Am. For. Soils Conf., Ft, Collins, CO, Aug. p. 116-139. C.T. Youngberg, ed., CO St. Univ., Ft. Collins. Mika, P. 2005. The Forest Health/Nutrition Experiment: Eight-year Growth and Mortality Results, Univ. of Idaho. Preliminary study, Annual meeting, Intermountain Forest Tree Nutrition Coop., Moscow, ID.

Leonia

23

Moore, J.A., P.G. Mika, T.M. Shaw, and M.I. Garrison-Johnston. 2004. Foliar Nutrient Characteristics of Four Conifer Species in the Interior Northwest United States. West. J. Appl. For. 19(1):13-24. Morris, L. A. and R. E. Miller. 1994. Evidence for long-term productivity change as provided by field trials. In: Dyck, W. J., Cole, D. W., Comerford, N. B., comps., eds. Impacts of Forest Harvesting on Long-Term site productivity. London; Chapman and Hall: pp. 41-80. Neary, D.G., K.C. Ryan, and L.F. DeBano, eds. 2005. Wildland fire in ecosystems: effects of fire on soils and water. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-42-vol.4. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 250 p

Newland, J.A., and T.H. DeLuca. 2000. Influence of fire on native nitrogen-fixing plants and soil nitrogen status in ponderosa pine-Douglas fir forests in western Montana. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 30:274-282.

Niehoff, J., 2002, Soil NEPA Analysis Process and Source of Soil Disturbance Model Coefficients, Idaho Panhandle National Forests, unpublished report. Coeur d’Alene, Idaho. Niehoff, G. 1985. Technical guide to determine potential soil damage by prescribed burning and wildfire. Unpublished paper available from Soil Scientist (retired), Idaho Panhandle National Forests, Coeur d’Alene, Idaho. pgs. 6. Okinarian, M. 1996. Biological soil amelioration as the basis for sustainable agriculture and forestry. Biol. Fertil. Soils. 22: 342-344.

Palviainen, M., L. Finer, A. Kurka, H. Mannerkoski, S. Piirainen, and M. Starr. 2004. Release of potassium, calcium, iron and aluminum from Norway spruce, Scots pine and silver birch logging residues. Plant and Soil 259:123-136.

Shaw, T. 2005. Final Results from the Forest Health Experiment Armillaria ostoyae Root Disease Inoculation Project, Univ. of Idaho. Intermountain Forest Tree Nutrition Coop., Moscow, ID.

Stark, 1979. Nutrient losses from timber harvesting in a larch/Douglas fir forest. USDA Forest Service Research Paper. INT-231.

Switalski, T.A., J.A. Bissonette, T.H. DeLuca, C.H. Luce, and M.A. Madej. 2004. Benefits and impacts of road removal. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2(1): 21-28 USDA FS. 2007. The 2007 Northern Region Soil Quality Monitoring Protocol. Draft. R1, Missoula. 21 p. USDA Forest Service. 2004. Idaho Panhandle National Forests Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report. Coeur d'Alene, ID. USDA Forest Service. 2003. Idaho Panhandle National Forests Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report. Coeur d'Alene, ID. USDA Forest Service. 2002. Idaho Panhandle National Forests Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report. Coeur d'Alene, ID.

Resource Name

24

USDA Forest Service. 2001. Idaho Panhandle National Forests Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report. Coeur d'Alene, ID. USDA Forest Service. 2000. Idaho Panhandle National Forests Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report. Coeur d'Alene, ID. USDA Forest Service. 1999a. Idaho Panhandle National Forests Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report. Coeur d'Alene, ID. USDA Forest Service. 1999b. Forest Service Manual, R-1 Supplement 2500-99-1. Soil Management, Soil Quality Monitoring. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Region, Missoula, MT. 6p. USDA Forest Service. 1998. Idaho Panhandle National Forests Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report. Coeur d'Alene, ID. USDA Forest Service. 1997. Idaho Panhandle National Forests, Forest Plan and Monitoring and Evaluation Report. Coeur d’Alene, ID. pp. 32-34. Vinton, M. A. and I. C. Burke. 1995. Interactions between individual plant species and soil nutrient status in shortgrass-steppe. Ecology 76: 1116.

Welke, Sylvia and James Fyles.2005. When texture matters: compaction in boreal forest soils. FSMN research note series http://www.sfmnetwork.ca/docs/e/RN_en_Compaction%20and%20Texture.pdf

Leonia Restoration Project -...

Documents

Transcript of Leonia Restoration Project -...